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: jspeed who wrote (220120)	12/12/2006 7:41:24 AM
From: DRBES	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

it is not that i think that intel is shooting with blanks; but this home.businesswire.com makes me think that we may find AMD well ahead of intel at the 45nm node...even if it arrives there after intel does

To: jspeed who wrote (220120)	12/12/2006 12:55:51 PM
From: dougSF30	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Comparison between Intel & AMD 45nm specs: investorshub.com INTC 45nm data/comparison I don't think INTC has published any 45nm data, but has a summary on their web site here: intel.com If we combine this data with what we know of AMD/IBM 45nm we get the following table: INTC PMOS 65nm/45nm 710/852 AMD PMOS 65nm/45nm 735/840 INTC NMOS 65nm/45nm 1210/1452 AMD NMOS 65nm/45nm 1260/1240 45nm SRAM cell size: INTC= .346, IBM/AMD=.37 Note that the 65nm INTC numbers I have are from the original 2004 IEDM paper. I heard INTC updated these numbers by a few percent at the 2005 IEDM, but that should be a small enough error as to be ignored for now... --Alan And note that not much improved from 65nm to 45nm for AMD: On a related note, the IEDM paper notes that the 45nm NMOS drive current is 1240uA/uM and PMOS is 840uA/uM... versus 1260 NMOS and 735 PMOS for the 65nm technology. It looks like they may hit schedule, but the performance is not going to be that great... and manufacturability is questionable with the conversion to immersion. On another related note (while we are at it), they presented a paper last year on some advanced strain techniques that improved PMOS drive currents to be near that of the NMOS device. Based on this early look at 45nm, that technique is not going to work out. investorshub.com So, Intel appears to have better numbers, and more improvement from 65nm, more certain ability to manufacture (no immersion), and is also a year ahead in schedule.