Breaking News
News & Analysis

Andes Ready to Rumble in CPU War

9/2/2014 10:30 AM EDT
3 comments
NO RATINGS
Page 1 / 2 Next >
More Related Links
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
kjay
User Rank
Author
Re: Andes licensees?
kjay   9/8/2014 2:25:41 AM
NO RATINGS
At Mindtree we have integrated our Bluetooth Smart IP (Both controller and software stack) with Andes CPU for a lead customer in China and have not had any major issues.

collin0
User Rank
Author
Re: Andes licensees?
collin0   9/3/2014 12:27:44 AM
NO RATINGS
Actually, the Andes is seldom to be heard. Although its IP core is widely used on many hardware modules, we only know the name of IC manufactuer.

 

It is quite different from ARM or MIPS. These two are known to every hardware and software engineer. They have already established their ecosystem. The IC manufactuer would like to say theire CPU is based on ARM or MIPS architecture when they introduce their CPU to engineers. However, Andes was always silent. Noone would like to add its name, because seldom engineers are hear about it.

 

In a word, there is a long long way for Andes to rumble in CPU war. In the CPU world, it is quite different from peripherial modules.

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Author
Andes licensees?
junko.yoshida   9/2/2014 6:14:11 PM
NO RATINGS
If anyone out there who has used or looked into Andes CPU, what's your own experience and pros and cons of their CPU IP?

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