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: combjelly who wrote (159441)	2/20/2002 12:55:56 PM
From: Ramon V. Frias	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Do you guys ever post about the stock not the technologies? The stock is currently breaking down on technical basis and nobody is commenting on it. Ray

To: combjelly who wrote (159441)	2/20/2002 1:20:36 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Combjelly, Re: "The .13u Madison will probably turn out to be about 300mm^2." >> Are you sure of this? After all, it is going to double the amount of L2 cache and the caches pretty much dominate the die..." Paul DeMone wrote in his article here: realworldtech.com That the McKinley die size would be 421mm^2, and that the L3 cache would be 175mm^2 of that size. Intel has said that their .13u process can fit 3x as much cache into the same amount of area. That would also mean 2x as much cache into an area that is 2/3 the size. If we conservatively assume that Intel can shrink the logic portion by 35%, then we'd have a logic size of 160mm^2 and a cache size of 117mm^2, or a total die size of about 277mm^2. If we account for a 10% error in my calculation, you'd still get a die size of 305mm^2. wbmw