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 (75448)	3/24/2002 8:58:18 AM
From: TGPTNDR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

FYO, As long as we're going down this route 13 weeks was, for a long time, the standard # cited for going from wafer start to finished product ON A PRODUCTION BASIS. And when last I checked we aren't 13 weeks past 4Q'02 yet. It has been said that the Hammer production processes will add substantially to that(13 weeks), though I've no opinion on the reason(s) for or factuality of the statement and would appreciate discussion from knowledgeable individuals. tgptndr

To: fyodor_ who wrote (75448)	3/24/2002 9:48:25 AM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

And, of course, you know for a fact that they started processing the wafers on day 1 of the quarter, right? ;-) Btw, do the 8 weeks cover assembly and testing as well? Add another 3-4 weeks for assembly & test. The real point I've been making is not that Fab30 was really running all that .13u material in Q4. The point is that it wasn't running .13u material in Q4 despite the desperate claims made buy some Droids here and on the Intel thread. They were trying to explain the low output of Fab30 compared to it's capacity and assuming .13u material was far more palatable than facing the alternatives. Those alternatives were either yield problems or lack of customer demand, or both. That's the joke fyodor. EP