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: MikeyB who wrote (35197)	7/29/1998 2:31:00 PM
From: Yousef	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572549

MikeyB, Re: " Using Yousef's process flow (which is the correct one), I suspect that his 20% reduction of process steps would result in approximately a 40% decrease in cycle time." I don't think you can jump to that conclusion ... unless ... you can justify it with cycle times of the two different processes. BTW, I have always said that Cu Damascene offers cost/cycle time savings ... just NOT 40%, Maxwell is WRONG ... Again and again. <ggg> Re: "PS: To all the experts out there, what are the benefits of indium implants?" The advantage of Indium (In) implants is that this acceptor atom is much larger than Boron and thus doesn't diffuse as readily with temperature cycling. A very difficult problem with Boron is something called Thermally Enhanced Diffusion (TED). Once Boron is implanted (either deep channel or extension), high temperatures will cause this impurity to move in the silicon and thus change the doping profile. These doping profiles are very important to control as they affect Short Channel Effects (SCE) and threshold voltages thereby reducing drive currents (Idsat PFET). Make It So, Yousef