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: Elmer Phud who wrote (219454)	12/7/2006 2:23:08 PM
From: FJB	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Don't you think they would be going to Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. before they hit the open market - I do.

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (219454)	12/7/2006 3:26:50 PM
From: inex	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Ephud, There is a definite difference between Intel and AMD when bringing forth a new process. Because Intel has excess capacity, Intel is able to announce a new process as soon as they are capable of getting a single good die from the wafer... (In reality, I'm sure that they don't do this, but, my point is that they have the flexibility to if they choose.) AMD, who is capacity constrained, must hold back on their process until the yields are mature enough such that they yield as many or more 65nm chips as they did on the 90nm process. In order to truly compare the respective processes, it would be necessary to know exactly when Intel's yields were good enough to yield the same number of good chips/wafer as the 90nm process. Only then would we know anything tangible about AMD's process as it compares to Intel's... Does anybody have such info??? If not, then, any statements comparing Intel's and AMD's 65nm process or making statements about AMD's process assuming that Intel's yields have been mature from the beginning are a little weak... JMHO... Scott Scott