Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[Ixse]

Elmer -

I agree that you need to pick one or the other. Picking one will have a negative effect on the other and visa versa. I'm just saying AMD might have shifted the emphasis of one over the other a bit, not radically. Like resulting in a bit higher bin split in exchange for a bit lower yield. (Not like what you sound to me it resulted in a much higher bin split in exchange for a much lower yield). I have not implied anywhere in the discussion that AMD got the benefits of both, if you think that you misunderstood me.

Maybe this helps: I'm talking about e.g. 3% narrower channels (resulting in a bit higher bin splits and a bit lower yield), while you sound to me like you talk about a 20% narrower channels (resulting in much higher bin splits, and much lower yields).

Re: You don't target a wider spread, that's like having poorer quality equipment with worse control.

You're probably right. I know btw that's what it's like, but thought that despite that being a controversial idea, it might have resulted in better revenue for AMD (e.g. at the moment they temporarily introduced the Thoroughbred Athlon 2800+ which was later replaced by Bartons). As stated I'm far from sure this happened.

Kind regards,

Ixse