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: Petz who wrote (80702)	5/25/2002 3:24:14 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

John, P858 was the process code for Intels .18u process .13u (Gate length) that was used on Celerons up to about 850 Mhz and P3s up to about 1 ghz. Aluminum interconnects. P860 is the current Intel process code for .13u (gate length .07u). Copper interconnects and low-capacitance dielectrics. P12/8x derivatives...I suspect he is talking about Intels next generation process codes...P1262 and P1264, .10u (.09u) and .07u with .05u and .03 gate lengths. P1262 will be used on the "Prescott" P4. 300mm wafers of course. I appears that one secret to Intels process is that their research is always 2 generations ahead of current production. Burn2learn said this however and it's seems condradictory unless he meant P86x to mean P85X...and I quote "I think P12X is on the same path as P86X. Consider human instinct and history, what comes next. I predict a repeat of P858 on the P12/8x derivatives." Unless P12X is different than P12/8X. Other than that, I can't say more without letting too much out of the bag... (small <G>)

To: Petz who wrote (80702)	5/30/2002 1:03:19 AM
From: burn2learn	Respond to of 275872

John, And you said, "P858 was not the excellence of execution. " Did you mean "P858 did not have good execution." When I talk about P858 I mean the process transfer and initial high volume movement, not current status. Imagine processor performance as a baton race. You have a design, a process developed, a transfer / implementation of the process at production facilities, and finally process / design improvement. It takes all working perfectly to get great results. With a weak link in any you will stumble. Imagine you have a roadmap that outlines specific process or design improvements to get you to higher performance levels but you stumble on the process transfer, what happens? Oh course you can't go to step B until A is finished. One fault is a delay / failure. You should consider the above in AMD investments. To gamble on SOI, and also to need to transfer the process to another fab that is outside the company is a two out bottom of the ninth homerun. Sometimes it happens, but when relied upon you will eventually fail. Re-reading my post some might have read that I'm telling the status of future processes in terms of yield. What I was trying to say was it's human instinct to let success go to your head and take for granted the work that it took to achieve certain results. My prediction was based on human behavior and not specific yield or operation knowledge. I just think that .13 is doing well based on reports and in the future Intel will forget the recipe for success do to cockiness.