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: RDM who wrote (55459)	4/14/1999 12:29:00 PM
From: Shane Geary	Respond to of 1574005

Re: 0.18um/Cu, 0.18um/Al etc So, is this what is supposed to happen????? Volume Production Starts: Q2 1999: 0.25um K7 (Fab 30), 0.25um K6-III, K6-2 (Fab 25) Q3/Q4 1999: 0.18um K7 (Al Fab 30), 0.18um K7/K6-III (Al Fab 25) Q1 2000: 0.18um K7 (Cu Fab 30), 0.18um K7 (Al Fab 25) Q2 2000: 0.15um K7 (Cu Fab 30) Sure is confusing!!!!!

To: RDM who wrote (55459)	4/14/1999 8:20:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574005

RDM - <AMD's Fab 25 in Austin, which is now moving to 0.18-micron design rules, will continue to use aluminum> RDM, thanks for the article. There are certainly a lot of .18 strategies out there. AMD developing two distinct .18 programs for Al and Cu is interesting to say the least. I will be curious to see indication on how the implementation of this strategy plays out. My own inclination would be to do one or the other for a variety of reasons. But I'm obviously not running AMD :-)). PB