Design Con 2015
Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 3 / 3
OtisTD
User Rank
Rookie
Re: Why not 22nm?
OtisTD   5/20/2014 1:13:27 PM
NO RATINGS
Intel used double patterning at 22nm.

 

It would depend on the design, but 28nm FDSOI should be pretty comparable to 22nm bulk planar (maybe even better?) from a power vs. performance standpoint.  Die size will be bigger, which normally means higher cost, but in this case that isn't so clear.  Based on the releases so far the argument in favor of the 28nm FDSOI is that for medium-low TAM products 28nm cost is a sweet spot, there is minimal re-design/re-optimization cost to go to FDSOI, so that offsets the additional substrate cost.  The process flow might be a little simpler with FDSOI than with 28nm bulk planar and certainly simpler than 22nm, further offsetting the cost.  I haven't seen any indication yet that they will introduce additional body biasing techniques for this 28nm node, but they could and that would further reduce power for some products.  Keep in mind Intel has high TAM products that require very high performance- FinFET/TriGate has an advantage there.

 

rick merritt
User Rank
Author
Re: Why not 22nm?
rick merritt   5/19/2014 9:03:49 PM
NO RATINGS
@Gondalf: An interesting alternate take on the news.

AKH0
User Rank
Manager
Re: Why not 22nm?
AKH0   5/19/2014 4:31:42 PM
NO RATINGS
In principle it is possible, but it comes at the expense of less design flexibility. The gate and metal pitch at 28nm allows bidirectional poly and metal, whereas Intel's 22nm is unidirectional. A bidirectional M1 is almost equal to 2 layers of unidirectional metal for most designs.

AKH0
User Rank
Manager
Re: Why not 22nm?
AKH0   5/19/2014 4:27:44 PM
NO RATINGS
Did Intel fabricate either bulk 22nm to proove FinFET was only 2-3% cost addrer? Did they run FDSOI to see it is 10% cost addrer? No, it was all powerpoint. Same as the famous chart that claimed 37% performance advantage coming from FinFET with no silicon data to back it up -- yes, they actually showed ring ocsilator data at VLSI to support that claim, but I am sure they wish they didn't.

Gondalf
User Rank
Freelancer
Re: Why not 22nm?
Gondalf   5/19/2014 4:17:33 PM
NO RATINGS
Strange enough Intel (and TSMC) are thinking the opposite about FD-Soi.

On Intel 22nm the FinFet adoption only charge 2-3% of more costs, FD-Soi was not utilized because means a strong 10% charge over bulk.

The real story is that Samsung has not a good experience in processes for CPUs, GPUs or SOCs. Samsung has never developed something of exciting in this segment, it's processes for SOCs are licensed from Common Plataform (IBM mainly). in this moment Samsung is in crisis because IBM is out of the game and GloFo has not money to develop anything.

The more easy street to gain a bit of power reduction is to license (again) a process from another Company out of Common Plataform...

Samsung is late on 20nm bulk and likely is VERY late in FinFet, so an expensive FD-Soi could be an interim solution for it's SOCs. Too bad Samsung is losing the shrink and this will rise the costs even more. Too bad "money" is not enough to gain proof in silicon science, it needs "men" and their experience, Samsung has not them.

I can see only two companies able to gain a lot of momentum in silicon industry in the near future: Intel and TSMC.... all others have not the experience to face the upcoming very difficoult silicon nodes.

alex_m1
User Rank
CEO
Why not 22nm?
alex_m1   5/19/2014 10:07:32 AM
NO RATINGS
Are there efforts to go down to single patterning 22nm like intel, and if not why ? And how does 28nm fd-soi compares to 22nm with regards to power consumption ?

<<   <   Page 3 / 3


Flash Poll
Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Max Maxfield

Want to Present a Paper at ESC Boston 2015?
Max Maxfield
8 comments
I tell you, I need more hours in each day. If I was having any more fun, there would have to be two of me to handle it all. For example, I just heard that I'm going to be both a speaker ...

Martin Rowe

No 2014 Punkin Chunkin, What Will You Do?
Martin Rowe
Post a comment
American Thanksgiving is next week, and while some people watch (American) football all day, the real competition on TV has become Punkin Chunkin. But there will be no Punkin Chunkin on TV ...

Rich Quinnell

Making the Grade in Industrial Design
Rich Quinnell
12 comments
As every developer knows, there are the paper specifications for a product design, and then there are the real requirements. The paper specs are dry, bland, and rigidly numeric, making ...

Martin Rowe

Book Review: Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design
Martin Rowe
1 Comment
Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design, Third Edition, by Michel Mardiguian. Contributions by Donald L. Sweeney and Roger Swanberg. List price: $89.99 (e-book), $119 (hardcover).