News & Analysis
Intel's 22-nm tri-gate SoC, how low can you leak?
Sylvie Barak
12/10/2012 4:30 PM EST
Scalable roadmap
Ultimately, said Bohr, the distinction between regular processors and SoCs is blurring, with even CPUs like Ivy Bridge incorporating typical SoC elements like multiple computing cores, graphics, high performance IO circuits and cache. SoC,s however, are still taking those components to the extreme. “It’s a matter of degree,” Bohr said.
Indeed, Intel’s SoC is almost identical to its CPU version in terms of structure, including only some “minor tweaking” to provide either the lower leakage or higher volatage. It could even be described as a “superset” of the CPU version with expanded features.
The SoC and CPU versions share many of the same process features; the same transistor structure and pitch along with similar interconnect and fab process equipment. “These two technologies can be run side by side in the same factory,” said Bohr, noting that all the yield learning for Ivy Bridge had been translatable.
Bohr acknowledged that SoCs had presented Intel with new challenges. “When you talk about leakage, once you get down into the below 30 pico amp range, you have to deal with multiple sources of leakage, whether it’s through the gate oxide or leakage from source to drain or leakage from the drain to the substrate,” he said, adding that it had taken a lot of “tweaking an balancing” to finally get it right.
The turning point had finally been reached, he said, with the firm’s 32-nm Medfield SoC. “You’ll see some pretty impressive SoC products coming next year on the 22nm generation,” he said.
In terms of how Intel’s 22-nm SoC process stacks up against the 28-nm low power or forthcoming 20-nm processes from TSMC, Bohr claimed Intel had “far surpassed” the performance and low leakage capabilities of competitors. “We have a significant lead over our competitors,” he asserted.
Intel is also banking on he new technology process having a long tail. “We know that it’s scalable to 14-nm,” he said, concluding that tri-gate was not only a big power advantage for Intel’s CPUs, but for other low power SoCs.
Related Stories:
Top 15 technology challenges for 22-nm node
Intel putting fins on at 22 nm
Intel's 22-nm process gives MOSFET switch a facelift
Intel tips 22-nm tri-gate, but mobile is MIA
Intel details 22-nm Ivy Bridge at ISSCC
Ultimately, said Bohr, the distinction between regular processors and SoCs is blurring, with even CPUs like Ivy Bridge incorporating typical SoC elements like multiple computing cores, graphics, high performance IO circuits and cache. SoC,s however, are still taking those components to the extreme. “It’s a matter of degree,” Bohr said.
Indeed, Intel’s SoC is almost identical to its CPU version in terms of structure, including only some “minor tweaking” to provide either the lower leakage or higher volatage. It could even be described as a “superset” of the CPU version with expanded features.
The SoC and CPU versions share many of the same process features; the same transistor structure and pitch along with similar interconnect and fab process equipment. “These two technologies can be run side by side in the same factory,” said Bohr, noting that all the yield learning for Ivy Bridge had been translatable.
Bohr acknowledged that SoCs had presented Intel with new challenges. “When you talk about leakage, once you get down into the below 30 pico amp range, you have to deal with multiple sources of leakage, whether it’s through the gate oxide or leakage from source to drain or leakage from the drain to the substrate,” he said, adding that it had taken a lot of “tweaking an balancing” to finally get it right.
The turning point had finally been reached, he said, with the firm’s 32-nm Medfield SoC. “You’ll see some pretty impressive SoC products coming next year on the 22nm generation,” he said.
In terms of how Intel’s 22-nm SoC process stacks up against the 28-nm low power or forthcoming 20-nm processes from TSMC, Bohr claimed Intel had “far surpassed” the performance and low leakage capabilities of competitors. “We have a significant lead over our competitors,” he asserted.
Intel is also banking on he new technology process having a long tail. “We know that it’s scalable to 14-nm,” he said, concluding that tri-gate was not only a big power advantage for Intel’s CPUs, but for other low power SoCs.
Related Stories:
Top 15 technology challenges for 22-nm node
Intel putting fins on at 22 nm
Intel's 22-nm process gives MOSFET switch a facelift
Intel tips 22-nm tri-gate, but mobile is MIA
Intel details 22-nm Ivy Bridge at ISSCC
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
sranje
12/10/2012 4:58 PM EST
Thank you Sylvie very much !
It would be interesting to hear what will be the impact on IC packaging.... Any information on that? Thanks once again
Sign in to Reply
SylvieBarak
12/10/2012 5:52 PM EST
My pleasure. I don't have any information on how this will affect the packaging just yet, but I'll try to find out for you. Glad you enjoyed the article!
Sign in to Reply
iniewski
12/10/2012 6:40 PM EST
The slide shows leakage getting smaller as the feature size decreases...this can't be true!!!
Sign in to Reply
resistion
12/10/2012 10:39 PM EST
This looks like (at least) a dual gate oxide SoC, so it's definitely more expensive to make than single gate oxide logic. Triple gate oxide is not unheard of either. The gate layer in this case is therefore already triple patterned for non-lithographic, electrical reasons alone.
Sign in to Reply
danny1024
12/11/2012 6:15 PM EST
Everyone who plays/played the "Master of Orion" or the "Civilization" series of global/galactic strategy games knows that "raping the tech tree" is the key to victory. I can't see how that's any different for the semiconductor industry and the process technology tree.
Sign in to Reply
WiLess
12/11/2012 8:10 PM EST
TSMC has an infrastructure and process to enable IP houses to develop analog, memory and other process-specific IP. That way anyone who uses the new process can choose from many offering. That's my understanding why Intel's mobile offerings are so poor-featured compared ARM-based developed by Qualcomm, Samsung and Nvidia. Tri-gate process is a great improvement and the step in the right direction to enable mobile market, but I am not sure if this is sufficient alone. Even if Intel opens its fab to others today, it still has a lot to catch up with the way other fabs are supporting their customers. Thanks for the interesting article!
Sign in to Reply