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: porn_start878 who wrote (53497)	8/31/2001 7:35:29 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Max, Re: "I feel that my example was actually far from as bad as yours (P4 demo)." Here's another example. Consider Intel's .25u to .18u transition. They launched at 600MHz, and later released a 733MHz chip that had lower than expected yields. And this is on the same process that has reached 1.1GHz today. How? New steppings just don't improve bin splits. They also optimize speed paths to allow for higher speeds. Since the 733MHz release, Intel increased their frequency 50% on the Coppermine. If Tualatin received a 50% increase from its current low volume 1.2GHz release, it would reach 1.8GHz. I think this is possible with Tualatin and new steppings, though I don't know if Intel is willing to invest the time and headcount for this, when they would rather advance the Pentium 4. As for chosing the demo as an example, I don't see why that breaks the rules. You are using overclocked results to prove the headroom for the Athlon, and Intel's demo was similarly overclocked (though many people are saying it was through extreme cooling methods. I saw no mention of this in any of the IDF keynotes, but I'll assume it was, anyways). Just remember that Intel demoed the 1.5GHz Pentium 4 in Spring of 2000, and despite the doubt that it would launch that high, it did 9 months later. In the fall, they demoed 2.0GHz, and despite doubt that Intel could get it to run stably at that speed, they did one year later. Now, they've demoed a 3.0GHz Pentium 4 that runs heavily CPU intensive tasks without failure, and a 3.5GHz Pentium 4 that was able to reach its speed, even if only briefly. I think that shows the headroom of the manufacturing process, since this should be considered early on in the development of the core. Newer steppings of Northwood could probably ensure a high yield, air cooled 3.0GHz processor running stably within a year. wanna_bmw