Text Size
IBM confirms PowerPC G5 CPU yield problems
updated 12:45 pm EDT, Fri April 16, 2004
PowerPC yield problems
IBM has confirmed its : "One of the problems is ongoing yield issues within the company's 300-mm fab in East Fishkill, N.Y. For months, IBM has been struggling with yields in the fab, a 130- and 90-nm plant. 'We do see demand, but we need to make the products,' Joyce said. 'We need to improve our yields in our 300-mm plant. Our yields did see some improvement, but not as fast (as the company had hoped).'"
Deja Vu
04/16, 01:06pm reply
Wasn't this the same problem with Moto?
MacnTX
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Apr 2004
Well...
04/16, 01:09pm reply
...I doubt IBM will go the way of Moto in ragards to PPC production (as IBM obviously has a vested interest in its success), but it goes to show that even Big Blue can be affected by the fab goblins.
jaisun
Forum Regular
Joined: Feb 2000
Re: Well . . .
04/16, 01:16pm reply
Maybe they need the fab 5 to come over and help them out! :-)
PBG4 User
Senior User
Joined: Feb 2001
yeah, right
04/16, 01:35pm reply
Surely the Fab 5 will get everything greased. ;^)
This DOES feel like time warp back to the Motorola G4 delays!
It IS IBM, but, DAMN, we NEED faster G5s... in QUANTITY! NOW!
JeffHarris
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Oct 1999
Not MOTO.
04/16, 01:51pm reply
Unlike Motorola, IBM is not cutting funding or moving engineers away from the PPC.
koolkid1976
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: May 2003
Wasn't Apple's Fault
04/16, 02:12pm reply
Well, those people who seemed to think that Apple was delaying the next-gen G5s (and G5 powerbooks) just out of some personal spite of their own users can officially shut up now.
I don't think this qualifies as Motorola-like yet; IBM has several large clients (MS XBox anybody?) for these chips, and unlike Moto no doubt care whether they scale.
Makosuke
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Aug 2001
Not MOT like
04/16, 03:00pm reply
The G4 was stuck at 500 MHz for 18 months. We have only been "stuck" at 2GHz since June (10 months) or September (7 months) depending on how you like to look at it.
kupan787
Senior User
Joined: Jun 1999
I'm confused????
04/16, 03:32pm reply
I don't get what 300mm has to do with 130nm and 90nm production. I understand there is a problem, but I don't get it. A nm is way smaller than a mm or a um as far as that goes. What am I missing?
slider
Mac Elite
Joined: Oct 1999
hope yields now better
04/16, 03:49pm reply
300 mm is the size of the waffers produced in Fishkills. On a 300 mm waffer, you put 2,5 more PPC 970FX (aka G5) than on the 200 mm waffer as those produced in the IBM Burlington fab which had good yields beyond IBM estimations. But I don't know if this latter fab plant is working on 90 nm process... ;)
Stephane
Forum Regular
Joined: Sep 2001
3GHz
04/16, 03:52pm reply
If Apple can't meet its 3GHz summer deadline, the press is going to have a field day. You see what they do with a few problematic iPod Minis, as it is...
SpiffyGuyC
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2000