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: Charles Gryba who wrote (158929)	2/16/2002 10:49:21 AM
From: semiconeng	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

wbmw, seriously don't you think that having a usefull lifespan of 12 or so months for a given process size is kind of short? Isn't that minimizing the profits from any given process? C Excuse the butting in, and I May Be Mistaken, but if I'm understanding your question correctly, I don't believe that the Beemer was suggesting an end to previous processes, just because a new process is starting up. Intel is currently running several different processes in different fabs, and several of them have been happily cranking out low cost, high yielding parts for quite some time. There is also a timetable for conversion of processes, so even if a Fab is designated to receive the "new process", that transition may not happen for several years. Nothing is preventing intel from moving forward in process technology in 1 Fab, while continuing to run the "Old" (cough) Process in the current Fabs. THAT'S the advantage of having multiple Fabs! :-) Semi

To: Charles Gryba who wrote (158929)	2/17/2002 12:30:31 AM
From: wanna_bmw	Respond to of 186894

Constantine, Re: "seriously don't you think that having a usefull lifespan of 12 or so months for a given process size is kind of short? Isn't that minimizing the profits from any given process?" Intel's .13u process began in May, 2001, when they manufactured the Tualatin core for servers, mobile, and desktop PCs. This was only 2 years after they created their .18u process, featuring the Coppermine core in 1999. Two years later, in 2003, I expect them to start ramping their .09u process. Ramping up new processes every two years has been an Intel achievement for the past decade, but unlike what you seem to suggest, the return on investment on any of these processes doesn't stop as soon as the next process comes out. In fact, I still think Intel is making money on embedded 386 chips, using a process that's 8-10 years old, which has more than paid for itself by the millions of parts that have shipped on that process for the past however many years. Do you seriously think that Intel would stop profiting from their .13u process once they move to .09u? wbmw