SI
SI
discoversearch

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: J_F_Shepard who wrote (139811)7/20/2001 2:19:47 PM
From: Elmer  Respond to of 186894
 
I doubt you have seen their yields of their production chips.

You doubt I was dealing with production material?

OK, doubt to your hearts content.

I suspect you are working with them to build something of your companies design and they are having problems delivering because of who knows what.....could be they are having a general problem in the line or a problem with your chip only. You might ask them. But I assure you the problem will be solved and the yields and reliability will be high.... btw, which location are you dealing with?

Allow me to correct a wrong impression I gave when I started this topic. IBM does not have bad yields by industry standards. They are quite comparable to other Fabs however they do not compare to Intel's yields(and I've had a good look at both). My real point was that over the years some AMD zealots have continouslly looked to IBM process technology as AMD's manufacturing savior in their attempt to compete with Intel's manufacturing capability. IBM has some top notch technology but how manufacturable is it? I just don't see any high volume products with extraordinary frequencies comparable to the 1.8GHz P4 et al. IBM does not have to compete on manufacturing capability so they can publish some pretty impressive papers but lets not confuse that with state of the art yields. AMD will not solve their problems by licensing technology from IBM.

EP