LONDON Ė Chip giant Intel and the research partnership clustered around IBM and STMicroelectronics are each set to report progress on their approaches to leading-edge IC manufacturing during the International Electron Devices Meeting (IEDM) in San Francisco in December.
Research teams are set to present on the FinFET approach--called tri-gate by Intel--on fully-depleted silicon-on-insulator (FDSOI) and on bulk planar processes at around 20 nm and beyond.
[Get a 10% discount on ARM TechCon 2012 conference passes by using promo code EDIT. Click here to learn about the show and register.]
Intel is set to deliver a paper on its 22-nm FinFET technology for SoC applications. In the same session, a research team drawn from CEA-Leti, STMicroelectronics, IBM, Globalfoundries and Renesas will present a paper on ultra-thin box and body (UTBB) FDSOI transistors for a multiple threshold voltage strategy at 20 nm and below.
ST will also report on switching energy efficiency in the UTTB process while IBM will describe a 22-nm SOI process. Meanwhile, Samsung researchers will deliver a research paper on the extensibility of its bulk 20-nm planar HKMG process.
Intel is already making processors using a 22-nm FinFET manufacturing process technology. It has described that process as a CPU process that was not optimized for lowest power consumption whereas the subject of the IEDM presentation is called an SoC process. Intel will provide engineering details of its 22-nm tri-gate SoC process and discuss its use of the approach to build a technology platform for SoC applications. That implies broad families of high-speed, low standby power and high voltage tolerant transistors, as well as RF and mixed-signal capabilities, according to the paper's abstract.
High-speed logic transistors have sub-threshold leakages ranging from 100-nA per micron to 1-nA per micron, while the low-power versions feature a leakage of less than 50-pA per micron. Nonetheless, the process retains 1.8- and 3.3-volt transistors for analog circuits, and legacy circuits.
The Intel 22-nm SoC platform also includes carbon-doped oxide interconnect and three different types of SRAM bit cell to provide options between density, performance and low voltage operation, according to the the abstract.
In another session on Dec. 11, a paper authored by a team from IBM, STMicroelectronics, Globalfoundries, Renesas, Soitec and CEA-Leti will report on another SOI process at 22-nm known as ETSOI for extremely thin silicon-on-insulator. This process has a silicon channel for n-type transistors and strained silicon-germanium channel for p-type transistors.
IEDM runs from Dec. 10 to 12 at the Hilton San Francisco Union Square.
My foundry contact has studied Intel's 22nm SOC FinFET manufacturing flow and claims that it is not cost effective (compared to foundry 28nm/32nm) to manufacture mobile chips hence even Intel over next 3 years will still make most of its Infineon mobile cell phone chipsets at TSMC.
Chips such as the 2 main chips in Apple's iphone 5: MDM9615 and A6 have an average ASP of $20 compared to similar die size X86 that Intel sells for $100-200)
I have seen others post this as well. Can you address why repeating the intel spin on "manufacturing show down" makes any sense when today most advanced atom SOC is on 32nm and will stay that way until end of 2013 ! while Qualcomm is shipping 50M units 28nm this year in just the iPhone 5 design alone and
(2) I thought all you guys were writing about intel winning mobile market with 22nm finfet last year (2011) and intel has not demo anything close to A6 CPU or graphic power/performance (at mobIle power level) .... Even demoed something close to what is already shipping !
I was not aware that Intel has a position on a "manufacturing show down" and therefore did not try to repeat it.
My intention was to tell readers that papers will be presented at IEDM on many of the leading-edge process technologies that will be producing chips in the near future. And therefore San Francisco in early December would be a good place to find out more.
The rigor of the IEDM review process means that these should be detailed, quantitative presentations albeit likely to be only on certain aspects of each of these processes.
From my perusal of the program the 14-nm logic node is being discussed mainly by academic groups looking at aspects of doping and strain in individual transistors.
To your second point. All what guys?
22nm not cost-effective ? I suppose that depends upon the level of integration. While it's probably not a cost-savings to replace small individual 32nm devices with 22nm, there is a definite cost-savings thru higher integration at smaller process geometries to reduce PCB area, total BOM, and possibly power-savings as well.
Intel cannot afford to implement beyond 20nm. SandyBridge Moble Mfg Cost $0.40 per sq mil dice area.
US Government & Intel are concealing Corp. is looted by employees and stakeholders & Bankrupt in future terms.
5 Sources; 1) infiltration by cartel organized network crime; 2) banked cost constructing surplus barrier limiting competitors beyond 32 nm; 3rd, theft from stockholderís administers cost of channel price fix tie; 4th, theft fm end customers charged price fix in invoice plus monopoly overcharges. Likely PC end buyers will see some recovery. 5th industrial theft processors dumped at price less than cost. 5 categories record $178,713,547,976 misrepresented & unreported cost burden on Intel.
Where are present cost burdens? 1st, inventories Xeon Westmere EX, Aarondale, Sandy Bridge Desktop & Mobile. 3 Issues; first, surplus processors banked in channels on deferred revenue recognition; 2nd, completed systems stalled in channels showing now what is occurring inside Intel; 3rd, surplus banked goods; processors, systems, repurposed for apps that will compete against Intel future product placing burden on industry in total.
Finally, one must ask why Intel is sustaining price on prior runs instead of flushing at cost to recover investment burden?
For Intel to dump inventories means twin tower effect on supply chain. Processor margins eliminated AMD becomes system house to capture remaining downstream producer values. Same for other processor design producers impacted by surplus raining down.
Collapse flattens Intelís long time channel & contract manufacturers finally take over for certain.
Final question was price hold a hidden condition in Docket 9341 consent agreement? Itís time for regulatory mechanisms in this country that are supposed to police monopolization, cartel and investment fraud, including at Intel, to do that job of be replaced with administrations that will do that job.
I hope your foundry contact is an ex-intel guy and he knows what he is comparing to. Most likely he is comparing what their FINFET will be in the COST sense. I will never doubt Intel's manufacturing cost much or significantly lower than foundry offering. Intel's biggest expense might not be in wafer manufacturing, they also need to cover IP/EDA tool development/product design teams, in addition marketing cost..... You should consider Synopsys/Candence/ARM/Virage../TSMC/SPIL/ASE../Qualcomm/nVidia.... before you start calculating the selling price. Too bad Intel can't just open its technology/manufacturing capability for design houses. You might want to check the baseband/AP SOC chips Clover Trail are made at TSMC or not? How about even 32nm SOC Medfield chip in TSMC? Who cares about legacy chips at TSMC? Also x86 atom is in the range 20x2 =40 price range. Nobody is using server chip for mobile phone. The war is getting more excited finally.