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: dale_laroy who wrote (140299)	7/27/2001 7:46:48 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: With SOI the situation is the opposite, since SOI will both increase cost per wafer and decrease yield There is an article in the current issue of (I think it was) eetimes (that I can't find on line right now) that quotes a supplier of oxygen implantation equipment as saying that SOI can replace two mask stages otherwise needed after intermediate etching with the net result that SOI wafers are only 10% more expensive to process than plain wafers. The additional speed and reduction in power dissipation makes that well worth while. I'll try to find it online somewhere - the hardcopy is at work.

To: dale_laroy who wrote (140299)	7/30/2001 4:17:12 PM
From: fingolfen	Respond to of 186894

Potentially, isotopically pure Si could add so little to the wafer cost that increased cost could be made up for by increased yield. With SOI the situation is the opposite, since SOI will both increase cost per wafer and decrease yield. My best estimate is that Clawhammer and Northwood will be roughly the same cost per processor to produce using 200mm wafers, but Northwood will initially cost more on 300mm wafers, then less on 300mm wafers by Q2 2003. Not sure I agree there on a few counts. Methods for isotopic purification are fairly well understood, and all are relatively expensive. I agree completely on SOI... I disagree about the cost structure. If Claw and NW cost the same on 200mm wafers, then NW is going to be less expensive on 300mm. Intel has already indicated that the only reason to go to 300mm wafers is cost reduction, to the tune of 30%.