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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Time Traveler who wrote (35191)	7/29/1998 11:39:00 AM
From: Pravin Kamdar	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 1572924

TT, And this is why most of the industry think lower K is more important than copper stuff. I guess IBM's limited process experience leads them to the faulty conclusion that copper is worth pursuing at this time. Let's face it, both copper and low K are important, but switching to copper is a larger technical challenge. Some companies are confident with taking on this challenge, and some are not. Pravin. Also, the benefit of using copper at 0.18u is due to a reduction in capacitance between parallel interconnect traces on the same level. As minimum drawn interconnect widths decrease, the height increases in order to maintain a cross section adequate to carry the required current. If you stick to the same interconnect design rules while switching to copper, the height of the interconnect can be lowered (30%)...decreasing the area of the capacitor between parallel lines on the same level.