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 Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tony Viola who wrote (27251)	12/17/1998 5:50:00 PM
From: Katherine Derbyshire	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

>>Katherine, >>>Sure, bad processing is bad processing, and yield and reliability are related on individual wafers. But that's not the same as implying, as you did, that an entire fab's output of wafers that passed final test is unreliable.<<< It's not my implication, it's IBM's words (hate to make statements based on another company's words, but that is what they said at a recent conference). Doesn't it make sense that a particular wafer, which could have had poor registration WRT masks or reticles, or some other anomaly, would have marginal, some "good", some bad, die all over the wafer? << I believe I said pretty much the same thing in my note. My problem arises when you try to generalize from individual maverick wafers to an entire fab, with no information about what caused the yield problems or how AMD handles the maverick wafers. Do you recall at which conference IBM made this presentation? There's a good chance I have the proceedings and can look up exactly what they said. Katherine