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: Gary Ng who wrote (57126)	5/3/1999 11:41:00 PM
From: Cirruslvr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572942

Good read here aceshardware.com Again, it is a good read and it provides a little dose of reality for us AMDers (in a good and bad way).

To: Gary Ng who wrote (57126)	5/4/1999 4:37:00 AM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572942

Gary - <Anyone read this, again from The Register> I read it. I like this part: Because AMD decided to play the raw MHz game, Sanders admitted that yields were affected. "To support our customers, we pushed both our process technology and our AMD-K6-2 processor design to achieve maximum clock speed...Tuning the process and the design to achieve maximum clock speed while maintaining acceptable yields is an ongoing challenge that ideally involves a series of engineering iterations to achieve optimum results. "Pushed by Intel to match an ever-faster pace of new product introductions, and pulled by the demands of our largest customers for competitive higher-clock-speed devices, we encountered yield problems last December that carried over into the first eight weeks of 1999 with a devastating impact on our aggregate production in the first quarter," he said. The premise that AMD's production problems ar at least in part due to how hard they have to push to keep up with Intel is something I have been saying. Sanders admits this right here. How is this situation going to get any better for AMD? MOT helping them is a plus, I guess. I don't know if will be enough though. I still believe they are a fab or two short, and this running Al in one and Cu in another at the same process generation geometries absolutely boggles my mind, although I now agree AMD has no other choice under their current business plan of keeping up with Intel clock for clock. PB