Replies to post #43184 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[wbmw]

Re: my point of diminishing returns from migrating to smaller geometries by far.

You're right, Klaus. There are diminishing returns at smaller geometries. I don't expect industry 45nm shrinks to quite offer the same boost in performance and reduction in power as process transitions in the past.

Now, if only someone could discover a way to change things dramatically... perhaps using a different material for the gate dielectric. Do you know of any semis developing enhancements like this...?

[Elmer Phud]

Klaus

my understanding is that AMDs issues at 65nm are rather in design than in process.

That's rather hard to believe considering the 65nm process was expected to be ready in mid 2005. AMD had nearly 1.5 years to resolve the "design issues" you mention. Unless you don't believe AMD was telling the truth when they told analysts their 300mm fab would be ready for 65nm in mid 2005?

AMD’s manufacturing leadership is further demonstrated by its technology collaboration with IBM, and AMD Fab 36, which is expected to be ready with 65nm manufacturing capability in mid-2005.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543~86455,00.html

[Sarmad]

>> Just for the record, your portrayal is overinterpreting my point of diminishing returns from migrating to smaller geometries by far.

The strongest attribute of your statements is they contain sufficient ambiguity to make them useless for anything other than for you to point out later that you were not wrong about something.