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: Dan3 who wrote (64403)	11/27/2001 1:26:11 AM
From: Pravin Kamdar	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Dan, It's kind of interesting that, after all the crowing from Intel that AMD had already seen the gains from .13 because their gates were shorter than Intel's, the reality is that (according to impartial 3rd party analysis) both companies were using the same gate lengths at .18, but Intel had already gone to thinner oxides - "using up" what otherwise would have been an expected gain from moving to .13. Interesting. This could be the root of Intel's leakage problems at 0.13u. If they couldn't reduce their gate oxide thickness by much (and still haven't gone to a high-k dielectric), their lowered operating voltage would have a hard time strongly inverting the channel unless it were leaky to start with (as I described in an earlier post). Cox must be increased, either by making the oxide thinner, or by forcing a higher electric field by going with a higher permittivity dielectric. Pravin.