The fact that GF is behind schedule with the process ramp by their very own admission is misinformation from my side ?
Interesting.
Secondly, there is no direct relation for yields and defects wrts to time. I don't know how you came up with that BS. The issue however are the deadlines set in the planning phase and the 32nm process failed to reach its intermediate deadlines.As for Intel's process it is obvious they did not target density. A conscious design choice doesn't make it great or not.
You get the award for the least signal in your post and the most noise. GF by themselves admit there are issues and you spin it that it's Paul searching for a "inkling of a disaster". Paul interpreted the slide GF posted. You may like it or not, but at least try to come up with a shred of counter-evidence instead of turning it personal. But that's far more easier isn't it ?
I hope you'll wake up from your dellusion when in the next 3 months you'll see the 32nm products being officially delayed.
Having a bad day ? Try for once to challenge what I say instead of poking in the air and throwing false accusations.
Bookmarks