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: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (220235)	12/13/2006 8:34:14 AM
From: Rink	Respond to of 275872

Sarmad, Doug suggested many times that something would be wrong with AMD's 65nm process related to the shrinking factor. He mentioned it in relation with Barcelona. But that doesn't make much difference. If Brisbane (DC) shrink is ok, then Barcelona (QC) should be too. From what Hans said the DC shrink (Brisbane) is ok at 125mm^2. Just one example. There were many. Message 23077234 BTW I too thought 285mm^2 that I saw mentioned relatively often, or even 300^mm that Doug mentioned, were kind of big too. Hans though mentioned that some parts related to the integrated northbridge won't shrink at all. Also there's quite a bit of added stuff so 285mm^2 might actually represent a pretty much ok shrink. We (you, Doug, me) are actually no experts, so I'm listening very closely to what guys like Hans are saying. Last post for me on this subject unless I hear a new argument. Rink

To: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (220235)	12/13/2006 8:34:26 AM
From: niceguy767	Respond to of 275872

Looks like AMD's 65nm products offer the value of more performance per watt. Additionally, 65nm product process is less expensive. Therefore the consumer gets value and AMD saves on process. If process savings for AMD is in the 30% to 50% range, INTC could well be in for yet another bout of difficult times on the CPU margin front in attempting to compete with AMD's 65nm offerings (I mean INTC has had the advantage of 65nm vs. AMD's 90nm for over a year now and has lost ground)and also on the Revshare front, where AMD gained 10% over the past 5 quarters while offering 90nm product vs INTC's 65nm.