29.10.2018., 22:48
|
#2434
|
|
McG
Datum registracije: Feb 2014
Lokacija: Varaždin
Postovi: 8,553
|
Intel Q3 2018 Jibber Jabber
Citiraj:
This is what happens when you have a CFO acting as a semiconductor CEO, and Robert Holmes is a career CFO with zero semiconductor experience or education. Granted, no way did he write the opening statement, but it was full of jibber jabber anyway. Why Intel thought they could jibber jabber their way out of 10nm questions I do not know. It started with Bob’s opening statement which in no way did he write:
Citiraj:
|
While our current product lineup is compelling, our roadmap is even more exciting. We continue to make good progress on 10-nanometer.
|
Bob, your current product lineup is compelling for one single reason, you have no real competition at 14nm. Intel 14nm is by far superior to TSMC 16nm and Samsung/GF 14nm in both performance and density.
Unfortunately, that lead ends now with TSMC and Samsung 7nm which makes your current product lineup an offense to Moore’s Law and the industry leading Intel Tick-Tock model that we all knew and loved.
Citiraj:
|
While we can't give any specific numbers, I do believe that the yields as we speak now are tracking roughly in line with what we experienced in 14-nanometer.
|
Sure you can but you just won’t. Are they that embarrassing? How about a little transparency? So where exactly are 10nm yields in relation to 14nm? Now that TSMC is in HVM with 7nm, which is comparable in performance and density to the much delayed Intel 10nm, not only can you disclose specific yield or defect density numbers, investors should be demanding it! It was embarrassing how the analysts on the call did not push for more information.
|
Izvor: SemiWiki
|
|
|