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: eracer who wrote (226521)	2/21/2007 10:30:00 AM
From: BUGGI-WO	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

@Eracer - R600 lines " And every day that goes by without the R600 is one more day where the improvements become less "worth it". " You assume that AMD is standing still and Nvidia goes further ahead - mmhhh, fair assumption ... no. " In the meantime NVIDIA builds up a sizeable warchest and will lower prices appropriately on the 8800 series to remain competitive when the R600 finally arrives. " I think you way overestimate Nvidia. What do they do? Buy memory from someone else, buy the GPUs which will be produced by UMC/TSMC, let all package again from someone else ... in the end Nvidia is the designer, the same could be said for AMD at this point (GPUs). The major cost driver for the product, where different cost aspects could occur is the GPU die. How big is this and how high is the (needed) binning. Up to this point I'm seeing a smaller ATI DIE. I'm really wondering, why you always assume a better cost structure for Nvidia? The opposite is true. " Sorry, but yields are more the just a function of die size " This is correct, but you don't know exact SPECs for Nvidia and the same is correct for AMD. So why could you claim that Nvidia has a advantage here? " The company that can't deliver any GPUs should be the one under scrutiny for yields, not the one delivering for months. " The one aspect is completly different to the other. When AMD isn't ready or want to respin something, what could UMC/TSMC do? Correct, nothing. So the later announcement is more a design "function" and has nothing to do with the foundry, the same, which are producing a larger DIE for Nvidia. " Strange that you are unfamiliar with the concept that yields tend drop when moving to a new, smaller process as AMD is doing by starting off on 80-nm instead of 90-nm. " Lol. You exactly descriped what Nvidia is doing too. It seems that you are the one, which should learn a lesson. Go ahead Eracer, you could always bash AMD for any point, but here you have no facts on hand or you descripe things, which are also true or common practice at Nvidia. BUGGI

To: eracer who wrote (226521)	2/21/2007 10:54:54 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

"Sorry, but yields are more the just a function of die size." The conventional definition of "yield" is based on defect density. Given the same process in the same fab, yields definitely are just a function of die size. Now, maybe you mean bin splits. That is a different issue.