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: Rink who wrote (138233)	10/30/2004 11:11:55 AM
From: Elmer Phud	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Rink Also note that Intel's fabs typically have a bit higher WSPW capacity than AMD's, and are often larger too, and are often the first in the world to use pioneer new technology, all of which account for higher cost than AMD's fab 36, won't you agree? Yes, I would agree. However a search of Intel's press releases shows no mention of a $4 Billion Fab, which was the posters claim. As you point out, one is an "expansion", another is a "conversion" and a third was delayed and subsequently resumed. All mention $2 Billion as the cost. Missing is D1C in Oregon, the oldest of the 4 for which I could find no cost. An additional 5th 300mm facility is planned in Ireland with the cost also .... you guessed it.. $2 Billion. semiconductor-technology.com