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 (163946)	7/5/2005 6:47:58 PM
From: dougSF30	Respond to of 275872

ORNAND was to begin at 90nm, and the TSMC contract was stated to be for 110nm, so that would make sense.

To: Rink who wrote (163946)	7/5/2005 8:05:06 PM
From: cruzbay	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

ixse: Your guess that the reason behind Spansion outsourcing is to offload floating gate products makes sense. I didn't understand some of your other replies to my questions. "Will the Spansion /Saifun NROM approach change the competitive landscape relative to Intel in high-density parts"? "Theoretically yes. Even 2-bit/cell would make a change in this respect. But currently nobody has 2-bit/cell NROM manufacturable. Not even for older geometry nodes. Let alone for leading edge nodes. So, practically, no". Perhaps I erred in saying NROM. Isn't Mirrorbit the Saifun technology, as well as 2 bit/cell? I thought that 512 Mbit Mirrorbit parts had recently been shipping for mobile phones. When the Saifun CEO says that 4 bit/cell parts are now being qualified, whose parts are these? Does Spansion have any IP/unique position with respect to ORNAND, and if so, is it valuable or who-cares? Do you see the Spansion / Intel competition as a closely matched pair, or is Spansion's very different approach likely to let them pull ahead soon (or later)? Thanks!