Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer who wrote (133950)	5/1/2001 11:07:19 PM
From: fyodor_	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

EP: UMC doesn't have as good a process as AMD. At these levels you don't tune your design for the process, you tune the process for your design. IMHO, you are completely correct. UMC is a foundry and, as such, needs very high yields on an extremely wide variety of chips. Their process just isn't going to be optimized for clock speed. I seem to recall that UMC's (or maybe it was TSMC's) .13&#181 process would feature a gate length of 100nm. That's where Intel and AMD are on their .18&#181 processes. Sure, gate lengths aren't everything - and I'm not claiming that Intel/AMD are a full generation ahead - but I just don't see how UMC (or any other non-IBM foundry) is going to pull off production volumes of a modern x86 chip operating at ~ 1GHz. -fyo