SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : 3DFX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Hal Rubel who wrote (5374)7/15/1998 4:11:00 PM
From: Obewon  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 16960
 
Hal, nice try but your numbers don't take into account that it is not the profit lost that matters on bad chips but the entire cost of the chip. Therefore you should divide the $200,000 by approx $37.50 and get around 5,300 chips.

More to the point the $45 cost you mentioned is for post production large volume orders. Individual chips and run costs far exceed this. I would guess that put a design to into silicon initally cost over $10,000 per design. Just look at the company's R&D spending to get a better idea of how important the $200,000 investment will be.

OB



To: Hal Rubel who wrote (5374)7/15/1998 8:09:00 PM
From: Mark Carson  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16960
 
PS: On the other hand, if written off over the next million chips, at $200,000, this Quickterm adds $0.20 to the cost of each and every chip. How long can this spendthrift madness go on before we end up in the poorhouse like our competitors? HR
>>>>

Saving money on masks, etc etc is the real issue. When you have a 'virtual chip' your R&D just enters a whole new world of 'what-if'. Since new technology and innovation is the name of the game, this could be the biggest competitive advantage TDFX has to date.

Mark

PS: How many engineering workstations do you think they have? At $15K plus (including software), maybe we should move them back to pencils and an abacus. THAT would save money . . .