🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec30.192345.7949@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1992Dec30.000820.3526@athena.mit.edu> jfc@athena.mit.edu (John F Carr) writes:
>
>>In article <sheldon.725671411@pv141b.vincent.iastate.edu>
>>	sheldon@iastate.edu (Steve Sheldon) writes:
>
>>> But since these are targeted for commercial usage, they're most likely
>>>only testing 1 in every 100 or so, as Mike said, a few out of each batch.
>
>>I thought yields for recent microprocessors were well under 100% (and
>>probably under 50%).  If this is the case, every chip must be tested.
>
>I think 30% (or less) is a more realistic yield number.

Perhaps they test a few processors on a wafer? And if the processors
fail then the whole wafer is thrown out? Makes sense to me.. perhaps
what causes problems are registration of masks or bad doping, which 
would affect entire wafers, not just one chip on the wafer.



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !