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: hmaly who wrote (75529)	3/25/2002 1:58:29 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

What did I misunderstand. AMD is producing at half capacity, at world class yields, and we know this because Jerry or Hector never lies. If you know Jerry never lies, why are you assuming he is? It's called sarcasm. >>>>As for the rest, you obviously can't run the numbers on Intel's fabs because you don't know how they are loaded or what the die sizes are.<<<<< Why can't we? There are 2 fabs putting out P4,rated at a specific wafer capacity, at a definite die size. You stated that "there was more demand than Intel could supply in Q4" which implies Intel was running at capacity; otherwise Intel could have supplied more. If you're so sure you can estimate Intel's yields and capacity then go ahead. That's what I asked you for in the first place. Which 2 fabs, what is their capacity, what is the die size and what is the defect density? Tell us the yields. That certainly hasn't stopped you from making those exact same prognostications about AMD's yields, given you yourself have less of an idea of AMD's loading and die sizes, than you would have of Intel's. Here's the difference, we know the capacity of Fab30, 5K WSPW. We know the product, Athlon. We know the die size, 129mm2. For Intel, you don't know the fabs, you don't know the products, you don't know their die sizes. But you insist you can do it so please show us how you arrive at your conclusion that Intel has bad yields. EP