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: combjelly who wrote (219011)12/5/2006 2:38:28 PM
From: dougSF30Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 275872
 
Why would they focus on lower power at a time when what they really need is more performance? I think the answer is probably: Because that was all they could manage with this process.



To: combjelly who wrote (219011)12/5/2006 2:50:26 PM
From: Elmer PhudRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872
 
CJ

We also don't know if the process can or cannot bin high clocking parts. Just because it isn't being done that way doesn't mean it can't.

No it doesn't prove anything but it's a pretty good indication nevertheless. AMD is getting killed on the high end so you'd think they'd do their best to show some top bin parts, if they could.



To: combjelly who wrote (219011)12/5/2006 4:15:59 PM
From: TGPTNDRRespond to of 275872
 
CJ, Re: Assuming the Inq has it right, then at a minimum they are getting more die per wafer than they are getting at 90nm. >

No, that is incorrect, IMO. They are also getting practice at 65Nm. Practice is worth a lot.

IMO INTC Practices a lot more than AMD does on production parts.

-tgp