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: Yousef who wrote (162587)	3/20/2002 2:01:11 PM
From: burn2learn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

This is due to the FACT that the defect mechanisms on 300mm seem to be the same as encountered at 200mm AND the amount of edge/center ratio continues to decrease Yousef, My point is that I did not see facts in the article, just statements like what you just provided. And such I would not make conclusions based on what someone said...not knowing better details.....data....information. Can you help and provide data / information to back your statements? Can you give the article credibility?

To: Yousef who wrote (162587)	3/20/2002 5:05:41 PM
From: Ali Chen	Respond to of 186894

"The edge of the wafer will almost always yield more poorly than due to film/polish/litho non-uniformities at the edge." You Yousef, that part of article was explicitly talking about _particles_ falling to the surface. Particles in a big chamber do not know where the edge nor center is. And if the tool is the same, the _density_ must be the same. Actually, the guy said that "mechanisms are the same", so if the 300mm chambers are much bigger, then it could be true that the density of particles is smaller for the 300mm tools. But again, the processing time is longer due to longer stabilization periods, and the litho scan must take 2x longer, so the wafers must accumulate more dust. Longer traveling distances on photo tools are not helping either. BTW, best 300mm vs. worst 200mm wafer samples from your Intel's technology paper are not very convincing too. - Ali