Replies to post #1107 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[Tenchu]

spokeshave, keep in mind that speed bins are also important when figuring out how well AMD's is producing parts. Even though that doesn't technically fit into the definition of yields, it's just as important when it comes to determining AMD's ASP, and hence their revenues.

Also, unless AMD had some massive market share gains in a shrinking market, there is no way they could be selling 8M CPUs per quarter these days, much less from one fab.

Tenchu

[Elmer Phud]

Spokesshave, this has been explored ad nausium.

You claim to have no industry knowledge but you didn't get those numbers from out of thin air.

Hammer isn't in production so the engineering capacity consumed is insignificant. Same for Barton. With "The Best Yields in the World" TB should yield upwards of 270 GDPW. AMD sold about 8 million per quarter but until recently many of those were Durons. Nevertheless F30 should be able to produce > 16 million TBs. With actual output <50% of capacity why does AMD claim "normal yield constraints"? How can they be constrained with half their fab free? With 50% of their capacity unutilized surely they could provide a trickling of Bartons or Hammers if they were anywhere's near manufacturable. The elevated ASPs would be a desperately needed to stem the flow of blood yet they are non existent. The only samples of hammer seen run at 800MHz. How many wafers did they need to burn to get those crippled samples? Half their fab? Has anyone seen samples of Barton? Why not if they have so much free space? The easiest explanation is there aren't any Bartons because there aren't any Bartons and the same goes for Hammer.

EP