Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
B A401 Intel  Corporation Part3
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

B A401 Intel Corporation Part3

743

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
743
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Intel Product Line and Situation in Late 1984
  • 2. Intel Product Line and Situation in Late 1984 <ul><li>By the end of 1984, logic product were the dominant source of Intel’s revenue. </li></ul><ul><li>The 80186 and 80286 were tremendously successful. </li></ul><ul><li>IBM PC purchased microprocessors either from Intel . </li></ul>
  • 3. Intel Product Line and Situation in Late 1984 <ul><li>The only serious 16-bit architectural </li></ul><ul><li>competitor was Motorola. </li></ul><ul><li>Intel had developed a microcontroller </li></ul><ul><li>which integrated logic and memory to </li></ul><ul><li>provide one-chip computer which </li></ul><ul><li>were used to control everything </li></ul><ul><li>from house fans to complex satellites. </li></ul>
  • 4. Intel Product Line and Situation in Late 1984 <ul><li>Late 1985 was the successor to the 80268, the 32-bit 80386 microprocessor. </li></ul><ul><li>Motorola had developed a strong 32-bit product, the 68020,and was </li></ul><ul><li>already in the marketplace </li></ul><ul><li>winning designs. </li></ul>
  • 5. Intel Product Line and Situation in Late 1984 <ul><li>The 80386 was scheduled to be one of the </li></ul><ul><li>first product made with the new </li></ul><ul><li>complementary MOS (CMOS) process. </li></ul>
  • 6. Intel Product Line and Situation in Late 1984 <ul><li>In 1984, the Livermore group was developing two distinct processes for SRAM and microprocessor. </li></ul><ul><li>The high-volume SRAM segment demanded a new four-transistor cell design and process. By contrast, the high-speed SRAM and the new 80386 microprocessor both demand six-transistor CMOS design. </li></ul>
  • 7. Intel Product Line and Situation in Late 1984 <ul><li>The high-volume SRAM process required a complex polysilicon resistor technology. </li></ul><ul><li>Eventually,they decided to drop the polysilicon resistor process and go with six-transitor (focus on 386). </li></ul>
  • 8. Intel Product Line and Situation in Late 1984 <ul><li>Development the 386 with a double </li></ul><ul><li>metalization process while as the same </li></ul><ul><li>time to reducing line widths to 1.5µm </li></ul><ul><li>(from 2µm) and implementing the CMOS process. </li></ul>
  • 9. Intel Product Line and Situation in Late 1984 <ul><li>Market and technology development which may have contributed to the loss of a competitive SRAM product. </li></ul><ul><li>SRAM received less attention for high-quality designer. </li></ul><ul><li>They had a strong position in high-speed SRAM but they give it up without really making a conscious decision. </li></ul>
  • 10. Intel Product Line and Situation in Late 1984 <ul><li>The end of 1984 represented the same </li></ul><ul><li>30% of revenue that MSO had represented </li></ul><ul><li>in 1973. </li></ul><ul><li>While a great deal of system business </li></ul><ul><li>comprised development products aimed at </li></ul><ul><li>microprocessor and microcontroller users. </li></ul>
  • 11. Manufacturing and Process Fungibility
  • 12. Manufacturing and Process Fungibility <ul><li>Intel took great pain to standartlize each facility as it expanded its manufacturing base </li></ul><ul><li>Each Intel chip would </li></ul><ul><li>“ look and taste” the same </li></ul><ul><li>no matter which facility produced it </li></ul>
  • 13. Manufacturing and Process Fungibility <ul><li>As larger-diameter silicon wafers became available,Intel developed a process on one line and then transferred the technology to its other facility. </li></ul><ul><li>By 1984,Intel had seven fab in the united States.Due to more stringent manufacturing standard, the cost of a fab area had risen dramatically since the 1970s. </li></ul>
  • 14. Manufacturing and Process Fungibility <ul><li>Around the time they were deciding to put up a fab in Israel or Japan </li></ul><ul><li>- Israel had tremendous government subsidies and good labor market. </li></ul><ul><li>- Japan have a tapped the expertise </li></ul><ul><li>of Japanese DRAM technology </li></ul><ul><li>development,silicon maker and </li></ul><ul><li>the infrastructure support. </li></ul>
  • 15. Manufacturing and Process Fungibility <ul><li>There are three main process areas : fabrication,assembly and test. </li></ul><ul><li>Fabrication is usually the bottleneck in times of tight capacity. – the good one was allocation. </li></ul><ul><li>The finance group thought of DRAM as a “low ROI,high beta” product line. </li></ul>
  • 16. Environmental Forces
  • 17. Environmental Forces - Competitors - <ul><li>1.U.S. full line digital design and supply houses </li></ul><ul><li> - Motorola: produced DRAM, </li></ul><ul><li>microcontroller and microprocessor </li></ul><ul><li> - National Semiconductor </li></ul><ul><li> - Texas Instrument : microprocessor </li></ul>
  • 18. Environmental Forces - Competitors - <ul><li>2. AMD </li></ul><ul><li>3. Japan- Hitachi, Fujitsu, NEC, Toshiba </li></ul><ul><li>- DRAM SRAM and EPROM. Served second source to U.S. microprocessor microcontroller suppliers </li></ul>
  • 19. DRAM Situation in 1984 Loss of Leadership Position
  • 20. DRAM Situation in 1984 Loss of Leadership Position <ul><li>By the end of 1984,Intel had lost significant market share in DRAM.The first real difficulties had come with the 64K generation. </li></ul><ul><li>Ron Whittier said that 64K version, </li></ul><ul><li>the memory cell size was reduced, </li></ul><ul><li>but the actual die size still had to be increased significantly. </li></ul>
  • 21. DRAM Situation in 1984 Loss of Leadership Position <ul><li>The DRAM group calculated that the </li></ul><ul><li>required die size would be too big.The 64K </li></ul><ul><li>DRAM would be too slow to be acceptable, </li></ul><ul><li>In order to boost yield,the group decided to </li></ul><ul><li>build in redundancy at the chip level. </li></ul>
  • 22. DRAM Situation in 1984 Loss of Leadership Position <ul><li>Redundancy – Intel added an extra column of memory elements so that in the event of a process-induced defect,the auxiliary column could be activated.There was a physical switch, or “fuse” built into each column which could be address by the tester machinery. </li></ul>
  • 23. DRAM Situation in 1984 Loss of Leadership Position <ul><li>TI ,engineers had concluded redundancy would not be economical and </li></ul><ul><li>had deferred the discussion </li></ul><ul><li>until the next generation. </li></ul>
  • 24. Attempts to Regain Leadership Position
  • 25. Attempts to Regain Leadership Position <ul><li>NMOS to CMOS </li></ul><ul><li>- CMOS circuit was more complex </li></ul><ul><li>- used in laptop </li></ul><ul><li>Intel produced CMOS 64K and 256K DRAM in a niche strategy. </li></ul>
  • 26. Attempts to Regain Leadership Position <ul><li>In1983 </li></ul><ul><li>Demand was in an upswing,and Intel seemed to have a techonology strategy which could lead to dominance in the 1-meg DRAM. </li></ul>
  • 27. Attempts to Regain Leadership Position <ul><li>In 1984 </li></ul><ul><li>CMOS DRAM price at about one and a half to two times the prevailing NMOS price. </li></ul><ul><li>Niche strategy : differentiate the product from other offering, and sell it on features. </li></ul>
  • 28. Attempts to Regain Leadership Position <ul><li>The price of NMOS DRAMs fell by 40% from </li></ul><ul><li>May to August 1984. </li></ul><ul><li>By late 1984 Intel was down to less than 4% </li></ul><ul><li>of the 256K market and had lost its position </li></ul><ul><li>entirely in 64K DRAMs. </li></ul>
  • 29. Attempts to Regain Leadership Position <ul><li>In the future </li></ul><ul><li>The 1-meg DRAM will be a technically </li></ul><ul><li>outstanding product, at least one and a half </li></ul><ul><li>to two years ahead any competition. </li></ul><ul><li>A technology transfer deal should with </li></ul><ul><li>a Korean chip manufacturer. </li></ul><ul><li>New competitor </li></ul>
  • 30. Option for DRAM
  • 31. Option for DRAM <ul><li>1. drop it all together. </li></ul><ul><li>2. stay on the business as a niche player. </li></ul><ul><li>3. license the technology to another company </li></ul><ul><li>4. invest in DRAM capability at the 1-meg level and commit to a low-margin business. </li></ul>
  • 32. Option for DRAM <ul><li>We have been trying to find a clever way </li></ul><ul><li>to stay in this business without betting </li></ul><ul><li>everything we have, but maybe there </li></ul><ul><li>is none. </li></ul>

×