Slashdot Mirror


Behind the Closed Doors of AMD's Chip Production

rokali writes "Tom's Hardware is running an article on AMD's chipmaking procedure, plants, and future. Check out the pictures of Fab 36, their new plant slated to open in 2006, which will put of the next generation of 65nm chips. From the article: 'Currently, AMD's devices in Dresden are still produced on 200 mm wafers; the new APM 3.0 using 300 mm wafers won't be ramped up until Fab 36 opens. Production startup at the new facility is slated for the beginning of 2006, at which point the company will have invested an additional $2.5 billion.'"

151 comments

  1. So many shiny toys! by Blapto · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's all so shiny. In true geek fashion I got to the first glittery photo and can no longer scroll down.

  2. Question by elid · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Incentives from the German government and the EU have lured a number of high-tech firms to the Saxony region of Germany, many of which have formed alliances. AMD, Infineon and ZMD work particularly closely together.

    Anyone know anything about this? What makes Dresden so interesting to AMD?

    1. Re:Question by Blapto · · Score: 3, Informative

      The EU will give funding and tax breaks to large inward investment. Computer chip designing is a huge added value system (cheapish raw materials/chip) so it produces a large benefit for the EU. You'll find the same going on in most countries.

    2. Re:Question by BlacBaron · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not sure how related one could consider this, but it might explain why they chose Dresden and not some other german city.

      History

      As a result I believe it was rebuilt to be a rather industrial place.

      --
      Update Watch - Automatic software update notification
    3. Re:Question by homerj79 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If I recall correctly from the PR fluff AMD put out a few years ago when they announced Fab 30, its due to the highly skilled workforce because of the Technische Universität Dresden (Dresden University of Technology).

      --
      SYSOP ('sih-sop) n.: the guy laughing at your typing.
    4. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      What makes Dresden so interesting to AMD?

      They both have problems coping with heat.

    5. Re:Question by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Informative
      Simple logistics; just as many tech companies congregated in Silicon Valley, a similar situation exists in Dresden. Going from chip design to the actual fabrication requires a considerable amount of support infrastructure much of which is done by external companies. For more complex devices it will typically take a few months at least from finalising the design to the first chips actually rolling out of the fab.

      I know for a fact that not even Intel does everything in house, so it's highly unlikely that AMD does. Essentially there are just far too many different types of highly complex technologies and processes involved for one company to do it all. Having as much of that infrastructure located in the same general vicinity can save a lot of time, money and aggravation. Which is why we have manufacturing sites in both Silicon Valley and Dresden, amongst others...

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    6. Re:Question by darth_MALL · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Oh, for modpoints. That is the funniest thing I've rad all year.
      Poor taste? Sure.
      Funny? Definitely.

    7. Re:Question by Trailwalker · · Score: 1

      Dresden is in the former East Germany, an economically backward part of reunited Germany. Companies that locate in this area have been given incentives by the German Government to expedite development and job creation.

    8. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modded as "Flamebait" - at least the mods have a sense of humour too!

    9. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The German government gave AMD large grants.

      "AMD said it has secured $700 million from a consortium of banks, and a series of lucrative guarantees and grants from the governments of Germany and Saxony."

      http://news.earthweb.com/bus-news/article.php/31 11 941

      I think that number has grown to over $1 billion now.

    10. Re:Question by rookworm · · Score: 1

      Ironically, someone modded this "flamebait".

      --
      The toad can't burp - and for some reason can't fart either, so it swells up and eventually explodes. --Anonymous Coward
    11. Re:Question by pipingguy · · Score: 3, Funny


      And now, Germany is quite popelicious, too.

      Surely I am going to hell for that statement.

    12. Re:Question by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      When I worked for AMD (1993-94), masks were made by DuPont, not in-house. I never fully understood the process, but there was a $100K-per-license application called CATS that did "fracturing" on final chip designs to represent them in a way that the mask-making machines could grok.

    13. Re:Question by Bender_ · · Score: 4, Informative

      What makes Dresden so interesting to AMD?

      Dresden was one of the centers of GDR microelectronics. The GDR was the technolocial leader in microelectronics of the entire east block and the gourvernment poured billions into it. However, COCOM succeeded in keeping them technologically way behing the western countries. Nevertheless, Dresden was the birthplace of Honeckers infamous 1 mbit (scroll down) chip.

      After the reunificiation there was a huge skilled workforce in microelectronics readily available in Dresden. This was, and is, aside from gouvernment incentives a major reason to build fabs there. Siemens (and now Infineon) were the first to take advantage of this. AMD came later.

      The fabs have been extremely successful so far. Infineons fab was the first to have mass production on 300mm wafers world wide. AMDs fab managed to ramp the copper/low-k metallization process in record time.

      Btw. some of the GDR semiconductor companies still live on in form of ZMD (Dresden), X-FAB (in Erfurt) and the IHP (Frankfurt/Oder). However they mostly specialize in niche products now.

      From the Article:
      Check out the pictures of Fab 36, their new plant slated to open.

      You wish. There is no photo showing the actual production at an AMD site. One photo shows some support level, another photo does actually show the production of an entirely different company.

    14. Re:Question by Florian · · Score: 1
      > What makes Dresden so interesting to AMD?

      Dresden used to be the area where East German computers and chips (more or less illegimate clones of the IBM PC and the Intel 8080/8086 running a Russian clone of DOS) were produced before 1989. Afterwards, the state government invested into maintaining computer and chip production there and bring it to Western level, and AMD was attracted also by the fact that there was a skilled workforce available in the Dresden area which needed no fundamental retraining for modern chip manufacturing.

      --
      gopher://cramer.plaintext.cc http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70
    15. Re:Question by sir_lichtkind · · Score: 0

      it was during eastern times beside soemmerda in thueringen the center of east german chip industry so know how is there and simply the average income is in east germany significant lower.

  3. They're made from PEOPLE! by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oops. Sorry.

    I was reading from the FUD PR put out by Intel about AMD.

    A chip is a chip, except when you put salsa on it.

    Or have it with some Java.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  4. Motherboards by superpulpsicle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How about manufacturing AMD motherboards. The Intel chip + Intel board is a ridiculously stable combination. AMD should have a combo of their own to counter.

    1. Re:Motherboards by ad0gg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They used to have their own chipset and it sucked(speedwise and feature wise) compared to the VIA chipset that was out at the same time. AMD doesn't need its own chipset now since Nvidia makes a really great chipset.

      --

      Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

    2. Re:Motherboards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Maybe VIA chipsets are only so fast because they take shortcuts implementing the spec. Besides, a "fast" motherboard is really only 1-3% faster than a "slow" one. Who would care except overclocking shitheads and cheap walmart bastards? (Except, come to think of it, that's most of AMD's customer base.)

      Although AMD never got the USB working right on their 751(?) chipset, major reason nobody used it.

    3. Re:Motherboards by evilviper · · Score: 1, Informative
      The Intel chip + Intel board is a ridiculously stable combination.

      Intel's motherboards are just re-branded Asus motherboards.

      So buy an AMD chip and get an Asus motherboard for it. Doesn't take a rocket scientist...
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    4. Re:Motherboards by MojoStan · · Score: 1
      They used to have their own chipset and it sucked(speedwise and feature wise) compared to the VIA chipset that was out at the same time.

      That's because the first VIA chipset for the AMD Athlon (Apollo KX133) didn't ship until about 6 months after the Athlon (and AMD 750 chipset) launch. I'd expect a brand new chipset (with PC133 and AGP 4x) to outperform and have more features than a six-month-old chipset (with PC100 and AGP 2x).

      If I remember correctly, AMD has said they are not in the chipset business (for desktops, anyway). They only made the 750 chipset for the platform's launch and expected others (VIA, SiS, ALi) to produce chipsets in volume eventually.

      Besides, the grandparent's point was about stability (and probably compatibility). At that time, I wouldn't have trusted VIA chipsets to be stable and compatible with my PCI/ISA cards.

      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

    5. Re:Motherboards by Herr_Nightingale · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've found the nVidia nForce 3/4 to be better than Intel's latest; AMD's HTT makes a huge difference for memory-intensive computation :)
      With Intel having HT it's probably 6(1) or 1/2 dozen t'other, but I like my nForce.

    6. Re:Motherboards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree here. nForce chipsets are very stable in my experience (atleast the nForce 2 models), and I would imagine that the nForce 3/4 are just as good or better. I have only used Asus motherboards with that chipset, so not sure about other manufacturers. But Asus is incredibly stable (such as the A7N8X or A7N8X-E Deluxe).

    7. Re:Motherboards by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      Agreed AMD has 4 chipset makers. SiS, Via, Nvidia and um that other one... you know.

      And they will probably get some ATi Mobo's assuming ATi doesn't fold after the x700 fiasco.

    8. Re:Motherboards by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Really bad mods here... What I said is true. The negative mod is clearly based on someone's pro-Intel bias.

      I have as many complaints about AMD as anyone, but this stability BS has got to die, because it's just blatantly untruce.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    9. Re:Motherboards by DrMrLordX · · Score: 1

      Nvidia has been making good chipsets for AMD processors since the Nforce2 days. Yeah, sure, the entire Super7 platform had bad chipsets, and VIA's lovely offerings in slot/socketA had crappy southbridges until the KT266 and KT266A. That's all history.

      In fact, SiS makes chipsets too, at least in terms of stability. The boards that use them aren't always built to the best standards, but the chipsets themselves are fine.

    10. Re:Motherboards by DrMrLordX · · Score: 1

      Er SiS makes good chipsets. That's what I meant to say. Really. Feh.

    11. Re:Motherboards by mikis · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't say "rebranded" (because they are not exactly the same), but "Intel" motherboards are/were definately manufactured by Asus, Foxconn, Wistron and other Taiwanese companies. For example, see:

      http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mainboards/display/20 040702071453.html

      And btw, AMD *does* make their own chipsets, for use on server (Opteron and Athlon MP) boards:

      AMD-8000(TM) Series Chipset
      AMD-760(TM) MPX Chipset

  5. Moore's Law by AsmCoder8088 · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I bought a 3.0ghz (800Mhz FSB) PC almost two years ago and today, there still isn't anything out there that seems noticeably faster... I can't wait for Longhorn to come out; maybe then the processor industry will catch up :). Or perhaps I should just by a dual processor PowerMac? http://www.basicreations.com/

    1. Re:Moore's Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a 3 gig 800mhz FSB p4, and a 3500+ AMD64. Both run on 400mhz memory, and the AMD64 spanks the p4 hollow.

      Probably a bit to do with it using SATA instead of IDE.

      But still, screaming fast. :)

    2. Re:Moore's Law by The+Lost+Supertone · · Score: 1

      This is one reason I'm seriously considering buying a PowerMac to go with my PowerBook... processors are practically at a stand still, I figure this is one of the best times to buy a new machine to stay competitive. Not to mention a Dual 2 something after the next update will certainly be more powerful than my 1Ghz 12 inch PowerBook.

    3. Re:Moore's Law by jm.one · · Score: 1

      So you believe Speed=Frequenzy?

    4. Re:Moore's Law by AsmCoder8088 · · Score: 1
      Actually, what I meant was that I can't notice a great jump in performance, regardless of AMD64 or Intel; and I agree, frequency does not necessary equate to speed.

      However, I have toyed around with some of the newer machines, and in comparison to my two year old machine, the difference is negligible (maybe a few seconds off of an Excel spreadsheet, for example)

      It seemed like not too long ago, just a jump of two or three hundred megahertz made quite a bit of difference, especially for games... But as processors are getting to their peek, I have found that it is going to take a much larger jump to get anywhere near that difference today.

      http://www.basicreations.com

    5. Re:Moore's Law by DrLex · · Score: 0

      There is faster stuff, but you said it correctly: there isn't anything that seems faster. We seem to have reached the point where most users are unable to find use for the extra processing power. Let's wait for our favorite software companies to upgrade their products to use those poor redundant CPU cycles, indeed...

    6. Re:Moore's Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll even go a little further with that. I have a P4 1.8A that I don't even bother overclocking most of the time, despite it going to 2.4 easily. With a good video card and 1GB of RAM, I just haven't felt a performance squeeze yet worthy of rebuilding my system yet. The only time was when playing some of the large outdoor city maps in Half Life2.

    7. Re:Moore's Law by OAB_X · · Score: 1

      It seemed like not too long ago, just a jump of two or three hundred megahertz made quite a bit of difference, especially for games... But as processors are getting to their peek, I have found that it is going to take a much larger jump to get anywhere near that difference today.

      That was probably because games were CPU limited, as opposed to GPU limited as they are now. Remember, games used to have the T&L all be processed on the CPU as opposed to on the graphics card.

    8. Re:Moore's Law by Stevyn · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but the processor industry hasn't been sitting on their asses for the past two years. They're reaching the limits of how much they can push silicon technology. Frequency isn't increasing on the same rate as it did in the 90s because new issues like leakage become a bigger issue as the transistors get smaller.

    9. Re:Moore's Law by phsdv · · Score: 1
      400 milli hertz is really slow, I pitty you... I bet that my 733 Mega Hertz P3 with a 133 Mega Hertz memory is faster ;-)

      btw last time I check SATA was also IDE.

  6. I agree by spidereyes · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    The benefits are obvious: smaller components mean that more of them can be packed into a small space.
    But what if she likes just one big components?
    --

    I say we just grow up, be adults and die.
  7. Crystal ball sees press release -- by SpookyFish · · Score: 5, Funny

    Early '06:
    "Dell considering building machines with AMD thanks to new fab capacity"

    Early '06 + 1 week:
    "Dell sticking with Intel"

    Well, at least it will help remove one of the theories (AMD supposedly not having the capacity).

    1. Re:Crystal ball sees press release -- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My crystal ball only sees the dupe articles :(

  8. New toys aren't cheap by tofucubes · · Score: 4, Informative

    better have a big wallet...looks like a lot of geeks will be window shopping... the low-end Opteron 865 chip will cost $1,514 USD dual-core Opteron 870 will run $2,149, with the Opteron 875 priced at $2,649 http://www.betanews.com/article/DualCore_AMD_Opter on_Prices_Leak/1113922595

    --
    Some people believe 1-1=3 and for the sake of being politically correct, we should respect their differences
    1. Re:New toys aren't cheap by MrAnnoyanceToYou · · Score: 1

      New toys have cost this much in the past, and then become cheaper over time. Just like anything else in this industry, really.

      AMD seems to be aiming at a different market - 2k is not that much for a server that can handle the web hits their new chips should be able to...... if they can get their reliability up with Intel's....

    2. Re:New toys aren't cheap by CajunArson · · Score: 3, Informative

      Opteron 865 chip...
      If you want to build a 4/8 way machine (which is the only reason to buy from the 8x series) $1500 is not a bad price for a chip at all, and $2149 for the dual-core is only ~40% markup! If you want cheap.. buy a normal PC, after all the extra CPU's won't make your games faster and many of the server boards that take these chips don't even bother with high-speed graphics ports since they're designed to be servers. Opterons are cheap (err.. inexpensive) compared to Itaniums or other 64 bit architectures out there.

      --
      AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
    3. Re:New toys aren't cheap by ciroknight · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The real problem is, AMD's Opteron will probably be done and shipping by the time Intel gets 64-bit dual core Xeons out the door. Not that they couldn't go ahead and shift all of their production capacity to dual core now, and have early chips ready by the end of this year, it's more like they won't.

      More and more I get my hopes up that Intel is doing research into a 64-bit enhancement for the Pentium-M, and I believe this to be the only reason we haven't seen Dual Core Pentium-M's yet. We're just now starting to see a move for the Pentium-M to the desktop, which is a good start, but without the cutting edge memory controllers present on new chipsets, it doesn't stand a chance.

      I believe Intel is also probably investigating adding memory controllers to their next Xeon line, which is definitely going to extend the amount of time in which we expect to see it. Intel really would see this as defeat, but as DDR2 becomes prime, Opteron's with DDR2 controllers will be able to completely smash any Intel offering, simply because it can get the data faster, get it processed, and pumped back out, while the Intel chips still wait for the laggy north bridge memory host to allocate the resources.

      Reliability will always be in Intel's court, simply because they control all factors of production, beginning to end. AMD's trying to take this approach, and by opening new fab facilities, maybe they can get into competition in other chip segments (like the Turion vs the Pentium-M). It also doesn't help that AMD is no longer making chipsets, but I believe a new fab facility will open this up as a possibility once again.

      Oh I love competition.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    4. Re:New toys aren't cheap by ciroknight · · Score: 0, Troll

      Hah, no they aren't. They are cheap in comparison to Intel's 64-bit offerings, but are definitely NOT cheap in comparison to Apple's/IBM's/(hell, I'm tempted to put Sun's) 64-bit offerings.

      A single G5 will run you about $1500, including the whole computer to wrap around it, ram and all. You can go up from there, but the limiting factor is a two processor chassis. But the fact is, 4 XServes be cheapter to assemble, run, and maintain than the processors used to make one 8-way Opteron server. You can argue all that you like that shared memory will make these Opterons faster than the G5's, but in that case, you could simply throw twice the number of processors at the problem using G5's, with a relatively equal price (after you count hardware, networking equipment, etc).

      The fact is, Apple really won the cheap high end server market, and they're starting to get market acceptance there as well (as far as Low-end super computing goes). Any company thinking about building a super computer really should look at their options. The only thing I think that could be really prohibitive, would be the need to run Windows on the systems, which would then make the Opteron option cheaper, but without 64-bit support, their system will hardly live up to its capabilities.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    5. Re:New toys aren't cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you compare system costs, there's no significant difference between a high-end Opteron 8xx system and an Itanium box and a POWER box. (Which one is faster depends on what codes you are running.) Going AMD will not really save you any cash in that market.

      I do find it funny when AMD fanboys wake up and realize there's a whole world outside of $79 CPUs tho.

    6. Re:New toys aren't cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DDR2 can get more data but it takes more time to do it than DDR

      A64 needs low latency not hight bandwith

    7. Re:New toys aren't cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any argument you make about clustering cheaper machines applies to AMD as well. Since Apple doesn't even sell 4-8 way machines, they are irrelvant to any discussion about the Operton 8xx chips.

      "Apple really won the cheap high end server market"
      (A) Supercomputers != Servers
      (B) Apple only has a tiny % of the supercomputer market.

    8. Re:New toys aren't cheap by ciroknight · · Score: 2, Insightful

      By integrating the memory controller, they've assured low latency. DDR2 simply says they can get all of the data they need all at once, and store it in a local cache. Meanwhile, the Pentium 4 beast is a memory hungry chip; most operations the chip spends its time toiling on are operations that require a lot of data (SIMD) (why do you think they hyped it for movies and such??). This means the Pentium 4 has to hit the memory bus more often, or increase its cache size. We've already seen the Prescott go up to a 2 meg cache, and the Extreme Edition go up to an L3 cache to keep local copies of even more data, but it's simply not enough to keep the Pentium 4 competitive (not to mention it drives up the thermal profile of the chip quite a bit). The fact is it simply needs to go to local memory more often. Integrating a memory controller makes it cheaper to go to local memory, instead of waiting on the North Bridge to fetch the information from memory and send it back up the pipe. This is why A64 can go to ram, pick up huge chunks of memory at once, process it, and send it back, while Intel's Netburst chips sit and wait, idling their time away.

      Processors have actually gotten too fast for their respective systems. AMD tries to get around this by bringing the memory closer to the chip. Intel's trying to get around it to bringing the memory on the chip, and Intel's approach isn't working as well as they'd hoped.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    9. Re:New toys aren't cheap by VoidWraith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A single G5 is not in the same bracket as these new Opterons. If you want an AMD chip to compare to G5s, look at Athlon-64s. I'm not speaking about Suns, because frankly I don't know enough about them.

      Your suggestion of using more less expensive processors works for x86 processors too. Why use an opteron 8xx when you could use a few Athlon-64s? That's the sort of approach Google takes, redundant arrays of inexpensive computers.

    10. Re:New toys aren't cheap by greg_barton · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is FUD. The 865 is not "low end" no matter what the article says. It's the chip that's capable of 8 way SMP, as opposed to the 2 and 1 way. Those are cheaper.

      Here is the source article for the price leak from DigiTimes. The prices for the 1 and 2 level chips are much less:

      165 chip: $637
      265 chip: $851

      Don't believe the FUD.

    11. Re:New toys aren't cheap by ciroknight · · Score: 1

      The thing is, with computers the way they are now, an 8-way system configuration is unnessicary to do the work. Name an application (pick anything). If you need 8 processors to run it, the chances of it being a parallel operation are insanely high. Any parallel operation is fitted well to distributed computing (a no brainer).

      I know there are still situations where an 8-way machine could be nessicary, but these days aren't like they used to be; processors are damned fast. Applications have hit barriers to even keep these processors fed with things to do! The kinds of problems that we are solving with computers now are the kinds of problems that distribute well over hundreds of machines, as long as the network latency isn't horrible (which actually replaces the argument in the early 90's of memory latency [faster chip vs multiple slower chips], if you remember the state of "Supercomputing" then).

      8-way Opterons are a waste. They'd be better off selling 4-way configurations for more expensive, and making a better profit. The kinds of companies that buy 8-way systems are the kind of companies who put together clusters, and most of these companies stick to what they know, and what they know is Intel's track record is impecible, though more expensive.

      There is an argument here as well that Apple needs to make a 4-way system, but I think they've probably evaluated that option by now, and realized that any problem anyone's trying to solve can be done with 2 processors, cheaper, even if it does take more time. Time costs money, and I'm guessing someone somewhere did a time-cost projection to model the Xserve as they did. It simply isn't economically feasable to build a 8-way machine, when 4 2-way machines can do the same work.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    12. Re:New toys aren't cheap by ciroknight · · Score: 1

      using more less expensive processors works for x86 processors too. Why use an opteron 8xx when you could use a few Athlon-64s? That's the sort of approach Google takes, redundant arrays of inexpensive computers.

      Frankly, you've summarized exactly what I said into two short sentences. :)

      And G5's do qualify for this argument, because they are cheap, 64-bit chips, even if they do run on a different archetecure. And they've been shown to have a higher IPC (Instruction Per Cost) ratio, making them a more than ideal candidate.

      I think the biggest thing that would prohibit moving to G5's is (a) Windows-only software, and (b) Simply needing more machines that Apple is capable of producing. Google, for instance, runs somewhere in the neighborhood of 300,000 machines. Apple simply can't produce volumes like that; Thousands at a time are pushing it (they seem to be going at a 750 machines per big installation rate). When Google orders machines, they most likely stay with AMD or Intel simply because the code's already there, and because it fits with what they already have. But if a company is new, evaluate Apple.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    13. Re:New toys aren't cheap by VoidWraith · · Score: 1

      The point I was trying to make is that Opterons are for massively high end single or slightly distributed servers, and that the G5 and AMD-64 are more for distributed computing. I'm not, however, implying that one method is inherently better than the other... although if I had to, I'd tend to favor distribution, more flops/dollar as far as I can tell.

    14. Re:New toys aren't cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Name an application (pick anything)

      Oracle. It sells more high-end tin than anything. Sure it has clustering support, but there's a ton of complexity and overhead and tuning required that can be avoided by sticking with high-end SMP.

      > Apple needs to make a 4-way system

      Since they have almost no commercial application support, it would be a waste of time at this point.

    15. Re:New toys aren't cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > And G5's do qualify for this argument

      Look at where IBM sells G5s (PPC970) -- only in low end blade systems and the like. Their real systems use those massive POWER4/5 chips. PPC970 is in the same market as Xeon and Opteron 2xx, which is way below the 8xx/POWER/Itanium zone.

    16. Re:New toys aren't cheap by GoRK · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of applications where UMA or NUMA SMP systems beat the pants off of clusters; obviously these are applications that, while suited to parallel processing, do no good when you spend all of your time synchronizing the data set. Maybe there's not that many of them in the commercial market (ie general purpose applications) but there certainly is room for these systems.

      There is another reason to have large n-way systems as well. Strange as it may sound, there is still some very expensive software out there that is licensed 'per server' and that sometimes means everything from a single cpu up to however many are managed by the same kernel. It can be way less expensive in certain cases to license one copy of a piece of software for a single 8-way machine than 8 copies for a cluster of 8 machines, even though the latter might even give better performance.

    17. Re:New toys aren't cheap by evilviper · · Score: 3, Insightful
      A single G5 will run you about $1500,

      Okay, but the Opteron in question is a DUAL-CORE chip, for servers only (desktop chips are much less expensive), still unreleased, and it's only the MSRP, whereas the real price you can buy them for will surely be lower.

      Besides, that is the high-end Opteron. The low-end dual-core chip is the 165 for $637.

      4 XServes be cheapter to assemble, run, and maintain than the processors used to make one 8-way Opteron server.

      Yes, but people that need an 8-way system can't just use 4x 2-way systems, otherwise they'd be doing that! Just as people that bought a 64-bit system so they could use 16GBs of memory, can't just have 4GBs of RAM in 4 different systems instead...

      If they wanted the equivalent of an XServe, they'd be going with lower-end Opterons, such as the $637 one. The parent even said as much in the first sentence, which you completely ignored. Show me an 8-way G5 system, and then you can compare prices...
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    18. Re:New toys aren't cheap by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      And G5's do qualify for this argument, because they are cheap, 64-bit chips, even if they do run on a different archetecure. And they've been shown to have a higher IPC (Instruction Per Cost) ratio, making them a more than ideal candidate.


      Compared to Pentium/Xeon, sure! But what about when comparing to Athlon64/Opteron?

      And considering that in your original post you compared dual-core 8xx-series Opteron (capable of 8-way SMP, that would mean 16 cores on single system) to G5 (single-core CPU limited to 2-way SMP), really shows that you have no idea what you are talking about! If you want to compare G5 to something AMD offers, compare them to Athlon64's or Opteron 2xx-series (which costs alot less than 8xx-series does)!

      If we do compare 2x G5 to 2X Opteron 2xx, we will notice that the Opteron-machine has twice as much L2-cache (1MB vs. 512KB per core), 4 times as much L1-cache (128KB vs. 32KB per core), twice as much mem-bandwidth, and more effective FSB-bandwidth than the G5-system does.

      Yes, G5 is a nice CPU. But it's not the ultimate CPU some Apple-fanboys think it is.
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  9. Here's a question... by DrKyle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why is the building so darn yellow inside? Is it important for the process, the workers, the ability to keep the environment clean? It's just so yellow, I think I'd get a huge headache working there.

    1. Re:Here's a question... by Blapto · · Score: 4, Interesting

      True fact:
      When I was at school, the walls were painted "bright spark yellow". According to our teacher, studies had been done and it was found that this particular colour made people think more productively. He had entire studies to give us and everything, being 11 I'm not quite sure what we did with them.

    2. Re:Here's a question... by tofucubes · · Score: 2, Funny
      I have a theory: the workers would feel they're missing out when they where yellow goggles, so they painted the place all yellow...

      personally I thought it was kind of like golden, but that's just me

      --
      Some people believe 1-1=3 and for the sake of being politically correct, we should respect their differences
    3. Re:Here's a question... by jjthe2 · · Score: 0

      Typical photoresists are less sensitive to yellow light, maybe it's safer (for the lithography steps) to just have the whole fab in yellow light rather have separate photo areas.

    4. Re:Here's a question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they smoke too much, it kind of reminds me of my old apartment.

    5. Re:Here's a question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The reason it's yellow is because of the photolithography operations going on there. The yellow light doesn't expose the wafers like the white light does.

    6. Re:Here's a question... by Zocalo · · Score: 2, Informative
      If you are talking about a clean room, then it's part of the environmental control. In addition to the usual temperature, humidity and particulate matter controls, you also need to regulate static, ionisation and the lighting. The silicon wafers, the photomasks and other manufacturing devices are incredibly sensitive to all those things at varying stages of production. Basically the design of a chip is projected onto the silicon wafer in a manner kind of like projecting a photographic transparency onto a projection screen, except that the image from the photomask is made smaller rather than larger. The photomasks are quite sensitive to certain wavelengths of light, hence the special lighting requirements.

      Besides, once you are cooped up inside one of those natty suits that you have to wear in modern chip fabrication environments, believe me when I say that the lighting is *not* a major concern... I'm certainly not complaining if I don't have to do any work in our clean room environment on a given day. OK, yes, it is *very* cool at first though! ;)

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    7. Re:Here's a question... by DrLex · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I visited an experimental fab here (at IMEC) a while ago and there also was a great deal of yellow light in some places. As far as I can remember, it has something to do with the processing. Some methods involve 'developing' photoresist layers on wafers, like developing a photographic film, and this process is insensitive to yellow light -- just like good ol' black & white photographs were insensitive to the typical red light in dark rooms.
      However, I recently visited a new cleanroom in the same fab, made for experimenting with 30mm wafers. Next to the fact that all the tiny rooms from the older fab were replaced by one large 'ballroom', all the light was simply white. I guess the new process is insensitive to visible wavelengths.
      So maybe they just colored the photograph to evoke the typical cleanroom-look of a decade ago. Or the photograph is simply from an old fab.

    8. Re:Here's a question... by El · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's not yellow. The picture is shot through a window, which has a UV-blocking coating on it. This makes everything appear yellow. Apparently certain frequencies of light are bad for the wafers.

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    9. Re:Here's a question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having worked in a wafer fab, I can tell you with certainty that any room with yellow (uv-blocking) glass has monochrome yellow light inside as well.

    10. Re:Here's a question... by solarium_rider · · Score: 1

      Besides, once you are cooped up inside one of those natty suits that you have to wear in modern chip fabrication environments, believe me when I say that the lighting is *not* a major concern...

      I was under the impression that modern chip fabrication environments were all automated and didn't require the full garb since all the wafers are enclosed and pushed around on air. As is explained in the 3rd paragraph of that article. Of course, I'll let you know in a few weeks, since we're taking a field trip there.

      --
      -- How many sigs are as useless as this one?
    11. Re:Here's a question... by Kenrod · · Score: 1


      Photo areas in wafer fabs use chemicals (photoresist) that harden when exposed to UV light, which ordinary fluorescent lights emit in very small amounts (and mostly the harmless UVB type). Fluorescent lights around photoresist have "yellow" (more amber, actually) coatings to absorb the UV.

      --
      Good heavens Miss Sakamoto - you're beautiful!
    12. Re:Here's a question... by IcePop456 · · Score: 1

      They aren't bad for the wafers, but rather the photoresist applied to define/block metal and other features of the device.

    13. Re:Here's a question... by macshit · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... My final year in grade-school was in a new school (constructed in 1976), and the walls were all sorts of cheerful shades of yellow and orange, with just a bit of white to rest your eyes. The school layout was sort of cool too, all the classrooms surrounded a large open-plan library (none of the "endless corridor" feeling most schools have). I remember really liking that school, so I suppose there was something to it.

      When was your school built? It seems like a very mid-70s sort of thing to do... :-)

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    14. Re:Here's a question... by geggo98 · · Score: 1

      In fact, you will see yellow light in many clean rooms. Blue light can interfer with chipm aking process, so you can only use the green and red spectrum of the light. And green and read appears as yellow to the eye.
      The yellow light is not a problem, you get used of it within minutes. Then yellow will appear as white to you. But beware when you leave the clean room - everything will look quite funny until your eye recalibrates.

    15. Re:Here's a question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "all the wafers are enclosed and pushed around on air. As is explained in the 3rd paragraph of that article."

      Third paragraph of the article:

      "Currently, AMD's devices in Dresden are still produced on 200 mm wafers according to the APM 2.0 standard; the new APM 3.0 using 300 mm wafers won't be ramped up until Fab 36 opens. Production startup at the new facility is slated for the beginning of 2006, at which point the company will have invested an additional $2.5 billion."

      ??? enclosed? pushed around on air? ???

    16. Re:Here's a question... by platem · · Score: 1
      It is yellow. The reason for this are indeed the frequencies of light. Although the photoresist used on wafers under process during the litho steps is most sensitive to a certain wavelenght (193 nm for 90 nm feature size, see wikipedia on litho), unindented exposure most be avoided at all costs.

      Working under normal light would ruin any wafer with photoresist. Working in total dark would be ideal, but yellow is supposed to be some good compromise between working conditions and process issues.

      Allthough the litho part of chip manufactering happens under the yellow light, other parts of a cleanroom normally have normal lightning.

    17. Re:Here's a question... by Blapto · · Score: 1

      It was a tiny place, about 120 pupils. The building was probably built in then 1930s, but I imagine they repainted it every couple of years while it was a school. Kids can be pretty messy.

  10. yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wanna go there and tell them to put 8 cores on my custom chip, :D lnnb

  11. Chipsets would suffice by toadlife · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Back when AMD still made chipsets for their own chips, the motherboards that used them were incredibly stable. I wish they hadn't stopped making them.

    --
    I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    1. Re:Chipsets would suffice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. The Slot A 750 with AMD chipset irongate as I recall, though it is not clear any longer.

    2. Re:Chipsets would suffice by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Informative

      It seems the only boards that bothered with AMD chipsets were boards intended for server and workstations.

      I think the 8000 series chipsets are still made, but generally are only put in Opteron systems. They had not yet made a PCIe replacement for the 813x chips. I think that update will become necessary in the next year to keep pace in the server market, though PCI-X seems to still be going pretty strong.

    3. Re:Chipsets would suffice by ajlitt · · Score: 2, Informative

      AMD still makes chipsets, but they're pretty much never found in desktop configurations. AMD produces chipsets mainly as a platform to help get the chips on the market before third party chipset manufacturers get a design out. Seems that third parties aren't keen on investing in a chipset design without seeing what the part looks like in real life.

  12. the dual hardware trend by tofucubes · · Score: 3, Interesting
    dual cpu and gpu...
    I'm betting the same people who bought SLI configs are going to buy dual core...
    the problem with dual core vs. SLI is that people can buy one video card now and one later...
    which is not the case with dual core

    anyway I wonder if this all started people buying two of the same ram modules for more bandwidth performance

    and I wonder if this trend will continue?

    --
    Some people believe 1-1=3 and for the sake of being politically correct, we should respect their differences
    1. Re:the dual hardware trend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought a second mouse today, it definitely improves my productivity and it's sooo much more confortable to use when I am :
      browsing 10 heavy-flash-enabled news site
      while compressing a DVD
      and recording HDTV
      and defragmenting my HD
      and zipping 60Go of p0rn
      and playing HL2 in 1920*1200 resolution.

      I just wish I could have 3 brains and zillions eyes to keep up with the multi-tasking.

      Any similarity with some ridiculous multi-tasking tests found in recent reviews of the dual-core P4 MIGHT be intentionnal.

  13. Enemies Closer... by fostware · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'm suprised they let Tom's even close, seeing as they've always been Intel fanboys.

    Maybe it's a case of keeping an eye on the enemy...

    --
    "We know what happens to people who stay in the middle of the road. They get run over." - Aneurin Bevan
    1. Re:Enemies Closer... by Blitzenn · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't say Tom's has been an ardent Intel fan. They have done a wonderful job at documenting AMDS virtues in the overclocking arena and bashing Intel's attempts to thwart the practice.

    2. Re:Enemies Closer... by scum-e-bag · · Score: 1

      The whole article looked like one big AMD promo to me.

      --
      Does it go on forever?
  14. Re:down the drain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    did. 3Q 2004. $43.8million net profit.

  15. Any market for single-core-only rejects? by G4from128k · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Looking at the die layout, its easy to imagine that AMD (and Intel) will be produces a good many dual-core chips with one defective core (maybe 10-25% of production). I'd bet that somebody finds a market for those partially-functional chips. I also wonder what will happen when people discover that one core can be overclocked more than another core. For applications/loads that only use a single core, the system could disable the slow core and run the fast core at full speed.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      It's been done before, so why not? Intel used to sell "defective" 80486DX chips where the fault lay in the numeric processor as perfectly functional 80486SX chips. It only makes sense that the design be engineered so that defective cores can be disabled after fabrication and leave a functional chip.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      I also wonder what will happen when people discover that one core can be overclocked more than another core.

      At $1600+ for a 4way config, I don't think anybody is going to be overclocking these bad boys.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    3. Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? by edwdig · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The dual core chips with one defective core will simply be sold as single core chips. The single and dual core chips both use the same motherboards, so really the only way someone could tell them apart would be by the writing on it anyway.

      As to overclocking, there's only one bus and one clock driving both chips, so you can't clock them differently.

    4. Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? by GoRK · · Score: 1

      That is like saying people who plunk down a few hundred thousand dollars for a really nice (or at least expensive) car or boat will not tune it. $1600 is dirt cheap for a 4-way configuration; I expect that the overclockers will give it a lot more attention than they give current quad-cpu offerings.

    5. Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is like saying people who plunk down a few hundred thousand dollars for a really nice (or at least expensive) car or boat will not tune it. $1600 is dirt cheap for a 4-way configuration; I expect that the overclockers will give it a lot more attention than they give current quad-cpu offerings.

      Exactly. At $300k, you're buying a pretuned car that is damn fast and difficult to improve on. A $1600/cpu 4way box starts at around $10k or more and is useless for games. I can't see overclockers spending the price of a cheap car on a computer just to crank up the speed and burn it out. That's potentially a $6400 mistake.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    6. Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? by mikis · · Score: 1

      Don't be so sure ;)

      "If you have a lot of money. this is a great board for gameing if you set it up right using to dual operations and full all the banks with 8 Gbs of pc 3200. Best board ever."

      Rich gamer,12/15/2004 2:07:24 PM

      (from a review of a TYAN Thunder K8SR Dual Opteron board on Newegg)

  16. Speed differences were negligable by toadlife · · Score: 2

    I seem to remember the speed differences between the VIA and AMD chipsets to be pretty small. I would take improved stability over a 5% gain in performance any day.

    My wife still uses my old Athon 750 machine with a gigabyte MB/AMD chipset. That machine has been rock solid for five years now. Back when I still used it I did all the standard benchmarks and compared them to other Athlon 750 machines, and mine with it's 'slow' AMD chipset compared just fine.

    --
    I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
  17. Lions and Tigers and Chips, oh my... by ndykman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Firstly, after reading the article, I was shocked to note that AMDs processors come out of one fab line, and the American fab line was flash only. If this is the case, well, wow. That seems a bit risky. If you get a tricky or persistent process issue (and it happens, no matter how cool you are), that seems like it could really impact AMDs output and yield a good deal.

    Of course, that's the main question here, and no way you are going to find out that answer. Yield. How many chips are good in a wafer?

    You can guess, but the answer may speak alot about AMD and Intel. It could very well be (here comes the flames) that Intel has an advantage in being consistent in volume and yield that allows them to keep large-scale contracts.

    It is a big question in my mind if AMD can currently provide the large-scale on demand volume that the big companies require in some product lines. Could an HP, a Gateway rely exclusively on AMD for chips? (I don't know)

    Certainly, it seems that have one fab plant only could be a big bottleneck or issue to make major vendors concerned and place a cloud on that question.

    Toss in this which the fact that you can get chipsets (heck, network chips if you'd like) from Intel as well, and you have a real competitive advantage that is tough to beat. All your motherboard bits, one vendor.

    And, sure, Intel chips have disadvantages, but in real-world experiences, the performance of similarly priced AMD and Intel desktop solutions aren't so obviously different that most people will notice enough to overcome those other issues at play.

    Just a thought.

    1. Re:Lions and Tigers and Chips, oh my... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No asshole, he's spot on. While AMD produce a faster, cooler CPU, they're not beating Intel for two reasons:

      1) Intel supply the whole package, motherboard chipset, peripherals, everything. And it all works together.

      2) The majority of computers in business aren't used to their full potential. Most just run MS Office.

      Yes. AMD produce better processors, but they don't produce everything Intel does, and at such a high volume. Deal with it and grow up. Nothing's stopping you buying AMD, what does it matter if a few peopl buy Dells?

    2. Re:Lions and Tigers and Chips, oh my... by Brain_Recall · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Quite right. The Austin plant hasn't done CPUs since the aluminium Athlon days (think Thunderbird core).

      But we are talking about the Dresden Fab 30, which was for a long time considered the most advanced fab in the world.

      "In May 2001, Fab 30 was awarded the coveted "Fab of the Year" title by Semiconductor International. The magazine recognized Fab 30 as the first facility in the world specifically designed to produce microprocessors with copper interconnects." http://www.amdboard.com/amdfab30.html

      With over 150,000 square feet of clean-room, it could, and does, handle the load.

      As a side note, here's AnandTech's tour of Fab 30: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.html? i=1773

    3. Re:Lions and Tigers and Chips, oh my... by ndykman · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the links. This brings some light on things. Now, off to see if I can find any info on Intel fabs. (See if I can find wafer start info, for example).

      And just for the record, I believe that both AMD and Intel have top-notch fabrication apabilities, which, for all the arguments about one company vs. the next, we do reap the benefit of as consumers. You know, you get a pretty amazing chip for less than 200$ these days.

      Frankly, I want both companies to stick around for a while.

    4. Re:Lions and Tigers and Chips, oh my... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you get a tricky or persistent process issue (and it happens, no matter how cool you are), that seems like it could really impact AMDs output and yield a good deal.
      I would expect it to be just as bad for Intel - they strive to maintain a "virtual fab" - in theory, all their fabs for a given line are supposed to be absolutely identical.

  18. Re:down the drain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which precisely explains why they've stayed in the game for so long.

    Wait, no it doesn't.

    Go troll elsewhere.

  19. Here's an answer by SlightlyOldGuy · · Score: 2, Informative

    They took the photo through a yellow-tinted clean-room window. Taking a camera into a clean room is a lot of work and bother (it has to be, well, cleaned). I think the widows are tinted to prevent UV transmission or something.

  20. Re:Intel is better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    How do you define stability Mr. Intel Fanboy ?

    freezes? BSODs ?

    wouldnt that be the OS ?

  21. What will turn out to be by Patrick+Mannion · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    A small room.

    --
    In America, you spam computers In Soviet Russia, computers spam you!
  22. why is this wafre round? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doesn't that give you less space to "print" the chips on? Why not square?

  23. Re:Intel is better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you have been trolled.

    However just since you're asking, if there's a problem with the CPU, RAM or motherboard due to heat or whatever, you will get random crashes which are not the fault of the OS.

  24. Re:Intel is better... by VoidWraith · · Score: 1

    Old AMDs had stability issues because of heat. Its not a problem with them anymore though, they've overcome that obstacle.

  25. Re:down the drain by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2, Informative

    Quarterly results going back to 1999:

    1999 Q1: ($128.4M)
    1999 Q2: ($162.0M)
    1999 Q3: ($105.5M)
    1999 Q4: $65.1M

    2000 Q1: $189.3M
    2000 Q2: $207.1M
    2000 Q3: $408.6M
    2000 Q4: $178.0M

    2001 Q1: $124.8M
    2001 Q2: $17.4M
    2001 Q3: ($97.4M)
    2001 Q4: ($15.8M)

    2002 Q1: ($9.2M)
    2002 Q2: ($185.0M)
    2002 Q3: ($254.2M)
    2002 Q4: ($854.8M)

    2003 Q1: ($146.4M)
    2003 Q2: ($140.1M)
    2003 Q3: ($31.2M)
    2003 Q4: $43.2M

    2004 Q1: $45.1M
    2004 Q2: $32.2M
    2004 Q3: $43.9M
    2004 Q4: ($30.0M)

    2005 Q1: ($17.4M)

    At the vert least, 2000 did seem to be a good year for them, and losses (when they have occurred) have been light in the last 18 months.

    --
    You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
  26. Thunderbirds? by Sanguis+Mortuum · · Score: 2, Funny

    Fab 36? Wow, the Thunderbirds have come a long way since the initial 1-5.....

    1. Re:Thunderbirds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      IIRC, AMD's FAB naming convention refers to the year (relative to AMD's founding) that the FAB opened. So FAB 25 in Austin was built when AMD was 25 years old, FAB 30 in Dresden when AMD was 30 and now FAB 36 when AMD turns 36.

  27. Re:why is this wafer round? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's just the way the crystal-growing process works.

  28. 200 & 300 mm??? by EmptyBuffalo · · Score: 1

    ...produced on 200 mm wafers; the new APM 3.0 using 300 mm wafers...
    When I was in college mm stood for millimeter, which would mean we're talking about 8-inch wafers now, and 12-inch wafers with the new APM (rounded to nearest inch). Am I misunderstanding the mm abbreviation, or was this mis-typed in the article and supposed to be something else?

    --
    cat life | grep joy >> memory
    1. Re:200 & 300 mm??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, the wafers really are that big.

      Remember, a great many chips are made from each
      wafer (the same pattern, or die, is repeated many times across the wafer surface, which allows for many chips to be made in parallel). They are cut into chips with a saw at the last stage.

    2. Re:200 & 300 mm??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Laser saw.

    3. Re:200 & 300 mm??? by phsdv · · Score: 1

      The wafers are indeed 300 millimeter in diameter. Some times also named 12 inch but this is incorrect there they only are about 11.8 inches...

      This is about the same size as a LP (you know, the black disks we used to have music on before the CD?)

  29. Re:AMD cannot compete by magadass · · Score: 0

    I hope your being sarcastic, especially when the marketing giant Intel is the one that is really having problems right now, the only reason intel still holds so much ground is Dell, without dell intel would be a boat in the water without a paddle.

    --
    "If I was smarter I could rule the world!"
  30. forget about fab 36 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what about fab 5 ?

    they are queer, but they sure can do some heavy lifting...

  31. Deactivated L2 cache by femto · · Score: 1
    From the article:

    > In the new 90nm model of the Athlon 64 with Winchester core, half of the L2 cache is deactivated; the production process for the chips is identical to that of the larger variants.

    Any one know whether this deactivation is reversible?

    I know if I was building such a chip I would make it so either half of the cache could be activated. That way in case of a production fault, either half of the cache could be used. Consequently yields would go up and AMD gets more dollars in the bank.

    If either half of the cache can be activated, perhaps it is possible to activate both halves simultaneously???

    1. Re:Deactivated L2 cache by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      "Any one know whether this deactivation is reversible?"

      No. The traces are cut by a laser before the CPU ships.

    2. Re:Deactivated L2 cache by Herr_Nightingale · · Score: 1

      I believe it's a physical process, like cutting with a laser.

    3. Re:Deactivated L2 cache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Any one know whether this deactivation is reversible?"

      No. The traces are cut by a laser before the CPU ships.


      Nothing some scotch tape, silver conductive lacquer and box cutter can't fix!

  32. Don't open the door, I'm Developing CPUs! by kesuki · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Doh you opened the door, now this batch is all shot!

    As many have stated here, if the window is tinted yellow, the room inside infact has all yellow (amber) lighting. This is because much as a photo negative will expose under more than the slightest infrared lighting, CPUs will not be etched correctly if exposed to UV rays in the wrong areas.

    The entire building is not yellow, as only certain processes are UV sensative, and once the part has been given the needed chemical baths they are no longer light sensitive.

    White light would burn out the chips about to be etched as surely as opening the door to a dark room before the film/photo paper can be given it's chemical bath to 'crystalize' the paper/films light sensitivity.

  33. Re:AMD cannot compete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no I wasnt sarcastic. just stating the facts. So basically what you are saying is that without a customer a manufacturing company is nothing. Well wouldnt that hold true for any manufacturing company ? If no one bought from AMD , wouldnt they have problems ? And I dont know what problems you are talking about. are you talking about the record revenue or the awesome bonuses we have been getting or the annual 5.5 billion dollar r&d budget we have this year or the new fabs we are building all over the world or the 60 % profit margin we have
    which one ? pray tell.

  34. Dresden Nuclear Power Station by HiggsBison · · Score: 1
    What makes Dresden so interesting to AMD?

    Well, how about the Dresden Nuclear Power Station?

    Wait! No! That's in Illinois! Sorry. Never mind.

    --
    My other car is a 1984 Nark Avenger.
  35. 300mm wafers thanks to Intel by AutumnLeaf · · Score: 1

    The reason their new fab is their first 300mm wafer facillity is because Intel paved the way last year.

    1. Re:300mm wafers thanks to Intel by phsdv · · Score: 1

      ha ha ha. There are about 5 companies that run a 300mm fab for more than a year now.

      Intel paving the way, probably. They are definitely a driver, and it it was not last year. I think Intel is running 300mm fabs for over 3 years already.

  36. Department of Redundancy Department by Thing+1 · · Score: 1
    I'm not sure if you're joking or not, [...]

    You're not sure whether you're sure?

    --
    I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  37. Agree by x4u · · Score: 1

    Dresden was called the saxony silicon valley aready during the 80s. Famous products have been chips for a PDP 11 clone and the very popolar Z80 clone U880 which was the CPU of all east block home computers.

  38. Re:AMD cannot compete by magadass · · Score: 0

    Money means nothing when it comes to R&D, its the technology that comes out of R&D that matters, if someone designed something in their backyard with 10,000 dollars and the same thing was designed using a R&D team with 1.5 million does the technology change? The answer is NO.

    IMO, of course that all we have is our opinions isnt it now, neither of us are right or wrong, but in my opinion, AMD has been more innovative and more successful in the processor market than intel, whats really suprising is Intel was the market 6 years ago, AMD came back, and came back big, now Microsoft is toting AMD's 64 bit architecture instead of Intels, thats a huge slap in the face for intel. Centrino technology? Can we say marketing BS!! There is no new technology in Centrino, its all market propaganda, something intel is famous for mind you, and I understand if you are all hunky dory with your company cause you work for them, I am the same way with HP, but only cause I work for them... I still see flaws where flaws lie, HP Desktops suck ass, their laptops have room for improving, and why the hell are we making tv's!!

    Even though you work for someone doesnt mean you have to agree with everything, can you not see the apparrent flaws in intel? Why would computer enthusiast choose AMD over Intel? Its simple, you have performance to dollar ratio's, AMD wins! Intel may not care so much for End User retail, I really dont think the majority of money comes from CPU's sold at CompUSA or mom and pap shacks, the majority of it comes from Vendor lockin, and thats what I am trying to say, Dell cannot afford to get out of vendor lock-in (it would to pricey to support), this is the only reason Intel still dominates, and no every market is not like this, only a couple I can think of even compare, Pepsi and Coca-Cola is one, but other markets are flooded with competition, you dont have vendor lockins due to the sheer amount of flexability the end user has to choose, sellers need to offer variety. This market is unique.

    --
    "If I was smarter I could rule the world!"
  39. Re: Answer's from a former AMD intern by gatormse · · Score: 1

    Background: I worked as an intern in photolithography at AMD in Austin, TX for most of 2001, and was in their FAB25 almost every day during that period. I was also one of the persons tapped to give FAB

    The yellow light comes from the aggressive filtering of blue (and UV) light in the photolithography processing area. This is to prevent premature development of the wafer's photoresist during transport of wafers between processing tools.

    The photo in the article is actually of a subfloor region, the equipment used to make the chips is above, you can even see the edge of the perforated floor grating at the top of the photo.
    Semiconductor manufacturers are VERY private about the vendors (and model numbers) of their chip making tools.

    AMD/Spansion's Fab 25 in Austin actually has two complete subfloors for the main fab area. One was "clean" the other "dirty."

    Working in a fab "bunny suit" is actually quite comfortable. The fab temperature is pleasant, and the air quality is amazing (if a bit dry), I highly recommend it if you have any sort of allergies! You've never felt your lungs so clear...

    About the only thing that ever sucked was sneezing in your hood and having to leave to change it.

  40. I had no idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We take a behind-the-scenes look at AMD's technologies for its 90 nm SOI, duel core and Athlon 64

    I had no idea they were into core wars with silicon chips. Do they have them fight to the death?