Online information source for semiconductor professionals

AMD spin doctors have quickly come out of the bunker to refute claims that CEO Dirk Meyer ever said that they would spin-off its manufacturing arm. The story everyone is quoting over at the Austin American Statesman is apparently wrong in its assertions, and seems to be a classic case of misinterpretation of what Mr Meyer actually said.

This aspect was covered over at eweek.com.

However, if there isn’t a spin-off in some shape or form, poor Hector is going to find it very hard to persuade anyone what on earth his yet-to-be-officially-announced ‘asset-smart’ plan actually is, or if it actually exists. So my initial view that there never was a plan could still stand.

Remember also that rumours were rife not that long ago that a deal had been done between AMD and TSMC, a deal that would see TSMC take over the Dresden operations.

Others have speculated that a third party such as the Abu Dhabi Government’s investment arm would shell out $$$ to be a partner.

Have you spotted the theme here?

All focus is on Dresden and manufacturing. Of course we could all be wrong, but I haven’t seen one story suggest that AMD would spin off the design of the chips!

On another note, I was recently challenged in regard to one of my blogs, which highlighted that AMD’s 45nm ramp (volume production) would be in 2009 and not mid-2008. As pointed out in AMD’s latest quarterly conference call, production ramp is expected in Q408, so the real volume ramp is in 2009.

Now that we have had the spin doctors try and distance the company from what has been said, especially since this story appeared a week ago in print and there seems to be no change to the online version to suggest AMD questioned this in the first place, then I wouldn’t put much value on the denials.

Indeed, it is rapidly becoming a scenario where AMD needs to come out and prove we are all wrong about our interpretation of the ‘asset-smart’ plan - something I seriously doubt will happen.

Updated:28th July

 IBM Common Platform

I had a number of emails regarding this point after posting this blog so thought it best to make my views in that area, clear for everyone.

The spin-off of AMD’s manufacturing as a quasi-captive foundry, wouldn’t last many technology migrations without joining and being highly active in the IBM fronted ‘Common Platform’ alliance. The process development costs would be too severe to support on their own.

Does that mean they compete with the likes of TSMC, UMC and in particular Chartered Semiconductor?

Yes and no-ish!

TSMC would retain graphics (ATI) business until the fusion chip is ready. Then the production could be shared between Dresden and TSMC. That brings the NY fab into the mix as this could also be the main production home for the chip in 2010 onwards and would be part of the manufacturing spin-off.

That could see less dependence on TSMC down the road, rather than a greater level of reliance.

Chartered is the competitor straight away, but when you consider it has played only a small and secondary support role for AMD, I see little need for fabless AMD to change that arrangement.

So a spin-off doesn’t change the foundry relationships in the short to near-term, which would suit most parties involved.