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: Shane Geary who wrote (53942)	4/2/1999 12:48:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571143

Gary - Very well said. I would make the case that Intel's overall process technology and process control efforts are world beating, but I am extremely biased, since that's my gig ;-)). I'm sure that AMD is not choc full of incompetents though. Generally what you are saying is exactly my point. Gary said: "That's really the point. This thread is so polarised now that people won't believe it, but AMD are quite well respected for process technology (and, yes, process control) by those who actually work in the fabrication side of the industry." "For example, in my area of expertise AMD have (well, up to very recently) two of the very top-tier process guys: Harry Levinson and Bill Arnold. Both are extremely well published (unlike equivalents in Intel, but that's another issue) and respected in the industry. Bill Arnold was the chair of the lithography section of the National Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors (1997 edition) although has recently left to become Chief Scientist at ASML. Harry Levinson is manager of next generation litho at AMD and has written seminal papers on the subject over many years." "Yes, AMD have had process difficulties. No fab in the world avoids that. Availability of new high-end Intel processors have often been extremely limited at their introduction. AMD's problems are magnified by the fact that they have no die stock - their manufacturing resources (wafer starts/week) are so limited that manufacturing difficulties translate immediately into customer delays." "The posters who refer to others on this thread as 'idiots' and 'losers' will have you believe that AMD's process is pathetic - that is far from the truth." "With respect to continuously upgrading Fab25 - it never will be as good as a brand new fab with the same equipment.In any case, in a couple of years AMD will have to invest in a 300mm fab to remain competetive. That will cost far more than Dresden up front, and they certainly will not upgrade fab25 to 300mm." Shane

To: Shane Geary who wrote (53942)	4/2/1999 4:34:00 PM
From: Yougang Xiao	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571143

Shane G and PB: The following is directly taken from the recent AMD 10-K: 5.7. Foundry Support. a) In the event that Motorola has the HIP5L or HIP6L process in production earlier than AMD, providing AMD is in good faith attempting to qualify such process in its Dresden Fab 30 facility, at AMD's request, Motorola will manufacture utilizing HIP5L or HIP6L, up to ***, or such greater amount as the parties may agree to, until AMD's Dresden Fab 30 facility is prepared to provide production volume using those processes. The parties will negotiate and execute a separate foundry services agreement which shall include commercially reasonable terms and conditions, including pricing, in connection with the sale of such wafers. (b) AMD represents and warrants that it has "have made" rights from any necessary third parties for products to be manufactured under Section 5.7(a) to enable Motorola to undertake such manufacturing. In the event a claim is asserted against Motorola relating to AMD's "have made" rights, AMD will indemnify and defend Motorola from and against any such * Certain information on this page has been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to the omitted portions. Page 23 AMD/Motorola Technology Development and License Agreement December 3, 1998 - Execution Document ********************************************************* Could you two please shed lights as to what are the significances of the HIP5L or HIP6L process** in relation to copper thing at Fab 30? TIA

To: Shane Geary who wrote (53942)	4/2/1999 8:39:00 PM
From: Yousef	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571143

Shane, Re: "The posters who refer to others on this thread as 'idiots' and 'losers' will have you believe that AMD's process is pathetic - that is far from the truth." Shane, please provide eveidence that AMD has a competitive IC process. Intel has significantly better yields and thus lower part cost AND Intel has better process control coupled with a better FET architecture that gives Intel a speed advantage for their CPU's. Both of these advantages translate into lower part costs and higher ASP's ... These are what you need to make a profit. Make It So, Yousef