T Rittenhouse wrote: > > My thinking is the cost of the wafer is only part of the cost of the chip. > The engineering, and production costs would be relatively constant across > chips of the same complexity while the cost of the wafer would be > proportional to size. Therefore a 12x18mm 6mp chip might be roughly 3/4 the > cost of 24x36 6mp chip despite being 1/4 the size. That all of course > presupposes that a breakthrough occurs in the manufacturing of wafers.
Are you considering yield here, as well? Some chips of some size, just simply don't give a good final yield, for some reason, and not necessarily related directly to complexity. Might be any number of factors, but some chip designs are terrible to get a good yield from. Lotsa scrap! keith > Ciao, > Graywolf > http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 4:47 PM > Subject: Re: Full frame D-SLR - get over it > > > the smaller chip will still be cheaper roughly proportional to area. the > constant and fixed cost may change. > > > > Herb..... > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "T Rittenhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 14:27 > > Subject: Re: Full frame D-SLR - get over it > > > > > > > That assumes that there is not a break through in the production of > larger > > > chips. At the rate of change in FAB quality, I would predict that the > cost > > > differential will soon be less than the difference in chip area. Almost > no > > > one 10 years ago believed they would ever be able to make the chips that > are > > > nothing special today. > > > > > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 8/4/03
