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: Elmer who wrote (41404)	11/13/1998 1:34:00 AM
From: Yousef	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571967

Elmer, Re: "Doesn't it really depend on volume?" Exactly Elmer .... Defect density improvements directly depends on the volume which drives the learning rate. The process with the highest volume will "automatically" drive the yield faster than a low volume Fab. Here again the "Copy Exactly" methodology allows learning at one site to be applied equally at all sites. The defect density between Intel Fab's is closely matched ... and ... It is a very small number. <ggg> Make It So, Yousef

To: Elmer who wrote (41404)	11/13/1998 9:40:00 AM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571967

Elmer, many parallel fabs give volume but there is no inherent difference between fine tuning one fab and many. In one way if they are identical you can perform more parametric 'wiggles' in the same time and this can be applied universally. However few of the Intel fabs are identical, even though they are on a similar path they have assorted machines that were optimal at install time. The easy gains are all achiever by both. Now the fights for small percentage gains occur. Bill