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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maxwell who wrote (52051)	4/4/1998 9:17:00 AM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

INTC: BLACK & CO. decreased estimate for fiscal year ending 12/98 from $4.17 to $3.47 on 04/01/98 INTC: BLACK & CO. decreased estimate for fiscal year ending 12/99 from $4.88 to $4.21 on 04/01/98

To: Maxwell who wrote (52051)	4/4/1998 9:48:00 AM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Thanks for the clarification, Maxwell. What does "your numbers" translate to in "defects per sq cm"? Quick calculations of 5 defects per layer times 20 layers with maybe half doubling up gives me 5x20x0.5=50 defects. [1-50defective dice / 115 die/wafer](x100%) = 57% which is close to your numbers, thus reasonable. It seems to fit a model for the industry norm if I go out and look for a foundry to build a chip we design at my day job. My understanding was that Intel was much better than the industry norm at making good clean rooms and keeping their machinery from causing defects and thus they have lowered this number from 5 defects per layer to something much to the envy of AMD (and others). I guess you are saying Intel isn't that much better than the industry norm? regards Kirk out suite101.com

To: Maxwell who wrote (52051)	4/4/1998 10:44:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Maxwell - Re: " If he say that Intel achieves 90%+ consistently on their PII then he is full of shit." You have obviously entered a panic mode. Please change your underwear. I have never claimed that Intel's Pentium II yields are "consistently 90%". You, however, seem quite fearful that perhaps Intel's yields are that high. For Intel's 0.35 µ process, yields are well above 70%. For Intel's 0.25 µ process, yields are also above 70%. You, however, are free not to believe these numbers. I would expect nothing less of you. Paul