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: dougSF30 who wrote (228568)	3/20/2007 5:58:33 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

If they said that the Earth was the center of the universe would you believe them? This isn't something too complex to understand yourself. If it was deferring to experts might make some sense, but it isn't. I'd accept Intel's statement about how the oxide layer is a worse thermal conductor than the same thickness of bulk silicon, but the layer is to thin to hold in heat. If you don't believe pgerassi's statement about the thickness of the oxide layer then look it up for yourself you can find multiple sources. Or do you think that a layer than thin can really be such a spectacular thermal insulator? Look at Bohr's statement and its obviously silly - "A more troubling issue is that SOI has higher “thermal resistance” than bulk CMOS. As a result, SOI transistors are forced to run at temperatures higher than necessary. Higher operating temperatures could cause long-term reliability problems." Not only is the oxide layer to thin to make such a difference, but its simple observable fact that SOI chips don't typically run at higher temperatures than bulk CMOS devices. They may be capable of running at higher temperatures, but that's a benefit not a loss it means they are more resistant to the type of long-term reliability problems that he mentions. I can't be sure, but it seems to me that Bohr is deliberately spreading FUD, about the technologies that AMD uses. People might hear about how AMD chips can operate at higher temperatures then Intel chips (this isn't always the case but more often than not in recent years it has been), and then read Bohr's comment or hear about it and think that the higher temperature ratings of AMD chips mean that they run hot. Clever FUD, but no specific data, or useful logical argument.