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: Elmer who wrote (151593)	12/7/2001 10:53:33 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Elmer, I'm afraid I can't make any sense whatsoever of what you just wrote. Try this, assume normal yields of about 145 DPW and explain to us how Intel only produced 27 million (or fewer) processors per quarter from 7 fabs with 60,000 WSPW capacity. It works out to about 14,000 WSPW to produce 27 million units. This isn't even 2 fabs worth. Intel says they have good yields and they were capacity constrained. What happened to 75% of their wafer starts?

To: Elmer who wrote (151593)	12/7/2001 11:30:50 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

"Try this, assume normal yields of about 145 DPW and explain to us how AMD only produced 7.7 million processors per quarter from 2 fabs with 10,000 WSPW capacity." Remember, there are two products, Athlons and Durons. In addition, they are pretty much segregated in their fabs. So let's look at Fab30. It likely produced all of the Athlons sold in Q3, and that was 3.8 million units. Now those chips were started in Q2. Q2 started with a maximum number of WSW of 3125 and ended the quarter with 3750 for an average of 3438, always assuming a straight linear ramp. So 3438*13 weeks gives 44,694 maximum wafer starts during that period. Oops, looks like I made a math error earlier. Still, using you figure of 145 DPW, gives 6.4 million units or so. But that is a maximum. As others have pointed out when Dan3 does his "AMD will have the capacity to make 50% of the processors in the market next year" schtick, there will be machines down for maintenance and AMD was making the transition to the AthlonXP. So 3.8 million actual units instead of a theoretical maximum of 6.4 million is the number we see. I dunno what the typical downtime of the scanners and other equipment, nor the downtime it takes to change over to a new generation of chips. Regardless, the yield cannot be as low as Paul is claiming. As far as Fab25, that fab is heavily under-utilized. It produced only 3.9 million or so units with a smaller die and much greater capacity (roughly 5.5k WSW). Hmm, maybe this is why they want to convert it to flash...