SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Yousef who wrote (58288)5/16/1999 10:30:00 AM
From: Scumbria  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1574054
 
Yousef,

Intel has reduced the physical gate length. AMD on the other hand has also raised the operating voltage.

AMD has gone from 300 to 500 MHz by raising the voltage?

Scumbria



To: Yousef who wrote (58288)5/16/1999 10:01:00 PM
From: Kevin K. Spurway  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1574054
 
Re: 'AMD on the other hand has also raised the operating voltage. Intel's approach utilized "superior process engineering" (tm Yousef) while AMD's approach required "wire cutters" and a "screwdriver". <ggg>"

I find it hard to believe you post garbage like this and then try to bill yourself out as a "process expert." What a joke. I really hope for Intel's sake it's got better experts than you on the job. I'd imagine from their success that they probably do.

Kevin



To: Yousef who wrote (58288)5/17/1999 3:36:00 AM
From: Kenith Lee  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1574054
 
Intel has reduced the physical gate length.

So why don't you tell us how small this "physical" gate length is on .25um? and 0.18um? You have been evading this very question for months. If I remember correctly, you were claiming .22 +/- 0.02um on .25um process. Show us how you Make it so, Process Expert/Idiot.

-KL