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: combjelly who wrote (76327)	4/3/2002 10:15:21 AM
From: TGPTNDR	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 275872

CJ, Re: <No doubt there will be all the posts about how it won't do AMD much good because they are already using a hybrid 130/90nm process already...> Doubtful. In intel.com ( the release for the 2.4MHz P4 ) We have This processor contains the fastest and smallest (60 nanometers) CMOS transistors in mass production. It should be clear to all that the P4 is pushing production limits -- at least for now. They do, however, continue to say they hope to make 3G by year end. I had thought they gave up on that back in February. tgptndr

To: combjelly who wrote (76327)	4/3/2002 10:34:49 AM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear Combjelly: There is no justification for calling AMD's 0.18u process a hybrid process. Do you call Intel's 0.18u process a hybrid process as it uses features smaller than any of AMD for the same things? And do you call Intel's 0.13u a hybrid process as it has features by the same logic of 0.09u? No, both AMD's and Intel's processes are 0.18u are not hybrid ones, but normal for high speed MPU dies. The Palomino relayout decreased power consumption by optimizing the transistor channels and sizes. This actually increased the die size, but allowed faster operation (IMHO the added features did not significantly add to the die size). The process did not change beyond what normally happens as it is refined. Since 0.25u to 0.18u allowed for 73% to 80% speed increase and Intel has at least 40% gain from 0.18u to 0.13u, AMD should get at least 20 to 30% from 0.18u to bulk 0.13u (1.8GHz up to between 2.13GHZ (2600+) to 2.33GHz (2900+)). IMHO, if they would stay with bulk, they would get ultimately about 50 to 60% (2.67GHz (3500+) to 2.8GHz (3700+)). If SOI gets 20% above these, 0.13u SOI would top out at 3.2GHz to 3.33GHz (4300+ to 4500+). That will be by about the end of 2003. By then, 0.09u transition will start and by that time it will be all Hammer (q4-2003: CH@5000+ (3GHz), CHD@6000+ (3GHz single core dual channel) and SH@9000+ (3GHz dual core and channel)). If any of the latter are correct, P4 Prescott is toast even at its estimated top out speed of 4.5GHz q4-2004. McKinley and its descendents (if any by that time) won't even get to the table. Pete