Breaking News
News & Analysis

Micron broadening support for memory cube

3/23/2012 02:36 PM EDT
5 comments
NO RATINGS
More Related Links
View Comments: Oldest First | Newest First | Threaded View
selinz
User Rank
Author
re: Micron broadening support for memory cube
selinz   3/24/2012 1:11:19 AM
NO RATINGS
As quick as this gets developed, look for others to develop specs that are functional similar but available on a royalty-fee rather than royalty-free basis. I won't mention names...

DrFPGA
User Rank
Author
re: Micron broadening support for memory cube
DrFPGA   3/24/2012 6:21:45 PM
NO RATINGS
Altera and Xilinx in the same consortium? Look for some delays in getting them to both agree on the same thing...

sharps_eng
User Rank
Author
re: Micron broadening support for memory cube
sharps_eng   3/24/2012 10:17:23 PM
NO RATINGS
Aren't these things going to get pretty hot with certain patterns of usage and data? For instance if the access pattern does not allow the stacked devices time to cool off between bursts? The internal layers are short on cooling opportunities that's for sure. Perhaps they can rely on certain friendly usage patterns, with particular cache controllers and DMA engines in specific architectures etc.

goafrit
User Rank
Author
re: Micron broadening support for memory cube
goafrit   3/26/2012 9:29:29 AM
NO RATINGS
Great point. The pricing will become the strategy

docdivakar
User Rank
Author
re: Micron broadening support for memory cube
docdivakar   3/30/2012 7:20:04 AM
NO RATINGS
@sharps_eng: yes, you are right about the thermal challenges in the stack and this will have some limitations on the logic die. The hybrid memory cube site claims the memory cube will consume 70% less energy per bit than DDR3 DRAM memories but will deliver 15x the performance. This remains to be seen. MP Divakar

Most Recent Comments
michigan0
 
SteveHarris0
 
realjjj
 
SteveHarris0
 
SteveHarris0
 
VicVat
 
Les_Slater
 
SSDWEM
 
witeken
Most Recent Messages
9/25/2016
4:48:30 PM
michigan0 Sang Kim First, 28nm bulk is in volume manufacturing for several years by the major semiconductor companies but not 28nm FDSOI today yet. Why not? Simply because unlike 28nm bulk the LDD(Lightly Doped Drain) to minimize hot carrier generation can't be implemented in 28nm FDSOI. Furthermore, hot carrier reliability becomes worse with scaling, That is the major reason why 28nm FDSOI is not manufacturable today and will not be. Second, how can you suppress the leakage currents from such ultra short 7nm due to the short channel effects? How thin SOI thickness is required to prevent punch-through of un-dopped 7nm FDSOI? Possibly less than 4nm. Depositing such an ultra thin film less then 4nm filum uniformly and reliably over 12" wafers at the manufacturing line is extremely difficult or not even manufacturable. If not manufacturable, the 7nm FDSOI debate is over!Third, what happens when hot carriers are generated near the drain at normal operation of 7nm FDSOI? Electrons go to the positively biased drain with no harm but where the holes to go? The holes can't go to the substrate because of the thin BOX layer. Some holes may become trapped at the BOX layer causing Vt shift. However, the vast majority of holes drift through the the un-dopped SOI channel toward the N+Source,...

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed