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: niceguy767 who wrote (201971)	6/13/2006 11:18:10 PM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear NG767: Its worse than you think. Conroe uses 150mm2 to provide for two cores and 4MB of L2 caches. K8L at the same process level will have 4 cores and 4MB of L2 and L3 caches in 140mm2. Allowing for the L2(3) caches to use the same die area, 70mm2, the K8L cores are only 17.5mm2 each while the Conroe cores are 40mm2 each. The Conroe cores are 114% larger than those used by K8L. Thus the DC K8L with 2x1MB L2s and a 2MB L3 will be 105mm2 compared to Conroe's 150mm2. That's 70% of Conroe's size. AMD will be able to have 50% more DC K8L KGDs (Known Good Die) than Conroe per wafer. Using DC K8Gs the number will be higher since they don't have an L3 or only a 80bit FPU instead of the 128bit FPU (144 keeping one side with 80bit x87). That likely be 40-60% more over DC K8L in KGD per wafer. Either way Intel will be needing 3-5 12" fabs just to make as many as AMD with 1 8", 1 12" fabs and part of another 12" fab. That will hurt in many ways. Pete