Intel Corp (INTC)

[fingolfen]

However, having said that, I go back to a point I made in an earlier post. Again, assuming AMD can in fact bring Hammer along on 0.13u and SOI, then later next year, when the shrink to 0.09u takes place, AMD will already have the kinks worked out of low-k and SOI. Intel, on the other hand, will be trying to go to 0.09u, low-k and strained silicon, all in one fell swoop. Assuming the "experts" are correct, and there are dire difficulties with this type of change, I maintain that Intel will have some rough sailing ahead and at least has the potential to stumble.

In theory this looks like an extremely reasonable argument. Unfortunately, I've seen this same argument before, and it didn't pan out then.

When AMD moved to copper for 0.18 micron, many individuals made the case that 1) they would enjoy a massive speed advantage due to copper and 2) their move to 0.13 micron would be easier than Intel's because "they already learned the lessons of copper." Analysis of the evolution of the AMD 0.18 micron process shows that the only reason they maintained performance parity with Intel was through shortening the channel lengths, not because of any intrinsic speed benefit from copper. Copper, it appears, is truly there primarily for electromigration issues, just like Intel said way back when. Second, lets look at 0.13 micron. Intel beat the entire world to 0.13 micron, and is sitting back producing in volume while the rest of the world struggles. So much for the "lessons of copper" helping AMD.

So why are things going better for Intel as compared to the rest of the world? I think it could simply be economies of scale. Intel can afford to spend enough on R&D to take on the big challenges and execute in a timely fashion. Intel also seems to have a very strong process design and development group.