SI
SI
discoversearch

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: jlh682 who wrote (118324)4/4/2004 10:26:39 PM
From: Elmer PhudRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872
 
jih682 -

Even if it is, the ratio of die sizes will be much, much better than the current 192 to 102.

Actually I think it's 193 to 112, but I quibble.

It's not just the die size so much as the yield, possibly as a function of defect density. Maybe something else? I won't comment on Intel's yields but I think AMD's are rather poor by most standards. I base that on the fact that AMD's hasn't shipped nearly what their fab is capable of for a few years now. It could also be simply poor demand but it has to be one or the other. That fab is capable of much more than what AMD ships, assume world class yields. Process development could account for some of the capacity loss but not nearly enough to explain the shortfall.



To: jlh682 who wrote (118324)4/5/2004 7:40:32 AM
From: TGPTNDRRead Replies (3) | Respond to of 275872
 
jh682, Re: <...that Prescott would not be significantly smaller than a 90nm A64.>

You are missing the point that now Prescott is not 64 bit competition for AMD64 and never will be.

They are not equivalent and never will be. You are responding to and perpetuating FUD.

That's the P in elmerp. Short for Phud, pronounced FUD.

It is well ignored.

-tgp