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: mas_ who wrote (254852)	7/27/2008 12:26:22 PM
From: Elmer Phud	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Can you fix that first link? It doesn't work.

To: mas_ who wrote (254852)	7/28/2008 2:42:44 AM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear _mas: Prove your claim that a mature process never drops below 0.10 with links! THere is always someone who says "It can't be done." It seems that a XT1250i got 0.02 on slide 21 for Q2/05 of the first link and the second says "Defect levels ... an eventual target of 0.03" on EUV scanning. ASML has shipped XT1950i scanners to AMD that have higher throughput and better resolutions. Thus your links don't say the same thing you are. Here is one that shows mature processes below 0.01: ece.cmu.edu itrs.net Of course defect density isn't a good shot at predicting yield (unless, of course, its backwards calculated from yield) as it used to be: "Around 35 per cent of the yield is influenced by the design, including issues such as leakage current with only 10 per cent from the defects in the process and 10 per cent from the lithography." engineerlive.com Pete