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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (47895)	7/16/2001 6:48:36 PM
From: Charles R	Respond to of 275872

TWY, <Well, I don't remember the exact comment.> What hector said was pretty dramatic. I heard something to the effect that BOTH 0.13 bulk and 0.13 SOI would be in production by the end of the year. Could you take a few minutes to listen to the comments and then post your thoughts. TIA, Chuck

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (47895)	7/16/2001 9:44:35 PM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 275872

" I still think this is this Barton chip which is the.13um IBM SOI process analog of .18um Palomino." I am inclined to agree with you here. I hope your timeline accurate, it would explain some of the inconsistencies in the CC with respect to when things get introduced...

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (47895)	7/16/2001 11:12:15 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 275872

TWY, I continue to have little or no faith in Moto's SOI contribution. Perhaps, the IBM deal is a backup if the Moto process falls thru. It's either that AMD has a lot more faith in the collaboration with Moto, or Jerry is pulling another Clinton. Jerry said that AMD would be at .13u SOI 100%, but than he added 2002/2003, which for all I know cold mean that there will be non-SOI wavers started after 12/31/2003, meaning that by the middle of 2004 (3 years from now), all shipping parts will be SOI. It would still be consistent with the statement during the CC, but a lot less dramatic that the answer in CC. Joe