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: fyodor_ who wrote (69204)	1/27/2002 9:40:58 PM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 275872

"Whenever Hammer does sample, it will almost certainly be on .13µm bulk. There have been numerous reports of two Hammers, one on the bulk process, one on SOI." Numerous reports of a bulk Hammer? I must have missed them...

To: fyodor_ who wrote (69204)	1/27/2002 10:19:41 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Whenever Hammer does sample, it will almost certainly be on .13µm bulk. There have been numerous reports of two Hammers, one on the bulk process, one on SOI. The main problem would seem to be that a layout optimized for SOI is very different from one optimized for bulk Si… Yes! It would make most sense to put the first version on bulk process to debug the logic and then move it to SOI. But without any process data how do they know what to expect in the way of process performance? How do you design for a process you know next to nothing about? This is a double wammy. Sure they'll run some SRAMs but that's not enough. The standard procedure is to use a non critical product to debug the process first. I don't see AMD doing this in time to meet current schedules. The main problem would seem to be that a layout optimized for SOI is very different from one optimized for bulk Si… I see the same problem. EP