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.'"
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.
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).
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
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.