Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Makes 45nm Chip

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the it-is-wafer-thin dept.

dolphinlover writes "Intel announced today that it created its first microchip using the 45 nanometer manufacturing process that it says will go into its processors in the second half of 2007. Intel said that this development provides it with a 'considerable lead over our competitors in the 45-nanometer generation'."

11 of 249 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Says You by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Unlike other fields, production ramps in semiconductor manufacturing are pretty easy to spot... the amount of new machinery and construction associated with a new process being deployed to a facility are hard to hide, and it's all over the trade press 18 months before stuff starts shipping typically.

    AMD has traditionally been behind Intel on the bleeding edge fab stuff. Intel's dominated the fab tech race by six months or so for years and years. That is not changing here, as far as anyone I know of can see. AMD using SOI sort of blurs the line here, but in terms of process shrinks and the like Intel's ahead.

    AMD's chips being better performers despite being behind some in chip fab is an important feature. But roadmaps based on imaginary pixie dust, in an industry where fabs cost $4 billion or so, are a waste of time even on slashdot.

  2. Why do they always screw up Moores Law by rminsk · · Score: 5, Informative
    The new chip makes good on Moore's Law, an industry maxim set forth by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore that stipulates the number of transistors on a chip -- and therefore its processing power -- doubles roughly every 18 months to two years.
    Who added the "and therefore its processing power" to the quote? Was it the reporter or someone from Intel? Moores law has nothing to do with processing power.
  3. Re:What about AMDs 45nm??? by taskforce · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I think you'll find that it was 65nm which AMD were readying for production, which Intel have been using since last year. Yet AMD Desktop cores at 90nm with SOI still manage to outperform, underconsume power, and underemmit heat compared to their counterparts.

    It just goes to show that design does play a part in making a chip, and not trying to cram as many transistors as one can onto a die.

    --
    My 3D Texturing Skinning work (under construction)
  4. Re:Says You by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Informative

    AMD has a co-development agreement with IBM and is planning to introduce 45nm parts in 2008.

  5. Re:Says You by uujjj · · Score: 5, Informative

    AMD is nearly a full year behind Intel rolling out 65nm. Intel began volume production at 65nm last summer; AMD will be ramping up in the middle of this year.

    While the parent may be joking, down below you'll find a lot of posts from AMD fanboys insisting that AMD must somehow be ahead. These fanboys are as clueless as the average tech magazine reporter. You can be quite certain that AMD will not be ramping up 45nm before Intel.

  6. Re:What about AMDs 45nm??? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Wow, the AMD fanboys are out in force tonight. From this source, which is three months old and so relatively recent:
    • AMD's new fab, Fab 36, supports 300mm wafers (like Intels have for some time).
    • It uses a 90nm process (Intel and IBM have been on 65nm for some time).
    • It will transition to 65nm by the end of 2006.
    • It will use 45nm and 32nm processes by the end of the decade.
    It doesn't really sound like Intel is playing catch-up here.
    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  7. Re:Aren't we getting close to the Theoretical Limi by uujjj · · Score: 5, Informative

    molecule? This is a crystal we are talking about, so the entire wafer is a "molecule". An atom of Si is about .3nm across.

  8. Doing the hard work by ranton · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It seams to make sense that because Intel has the most money, that they can spend money on developing better manufacturing and engineering techniques than their competition. But with all of this extra money, and seamingly having better technological capabilities, AMD is still beating out Intel as far as performance.

    Looks like Intel basically does all of the hard work figuring out how to do things for the first time, and AMD just has to wait until Intel is finished and then just learn from them. I of course know nothing about how to make processors, but it seams that this is the most plausible reason why Intel has trouble making chips that are as good as AMD.

    This news about the 45nm manufacturing looks very bad for AMD, but I doubt it will matter very much. If Intel is doing it by the end of 2007, AMD will probably be doing it by first or second quarter 2008. And if history is any indicator, they will probably be doing it better. But I guess time will tell, maybe this 45nm technique really is too hard for a company without endless money to figure out.
    --

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  9. Speaking of Theoretical Limits... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Mr. Scott. To put it another way -- how big would one of your gates have to be, with a 300 mm wafer, to resolve properly using your current method of lithography?

    Intel Exec. That's easy. Six molecules. We have stuff that big in stock.

    Mr. Scott. Well, suppose I could show you a way to build a gate that could do the same job -- but be only one molecule thick. Would that be worth somethin' to ye?

    Intel Exec. You must be joking.

    Dr. McCoy. Perhaps the professor could use your computer...

    [Later]

    Dr. McCoy. [Whispering] You realize that by giving him the formula we're altering the future.

    Mr. Scott. How do we know he didn't invent the thing?

    Dr. McCoy. [Smiling] Yeah.

  10. Re:Says You by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 5, Informative
    Silicon On Insulator; see the silicon on insulator wikipedia entry for a high level summary, or google the phrase for more details.

    Basically, instead of a solid slab of silicon on which you fab chip components, you put a solid slab of an insulator (sapphire / alumina for example; see silicon on sapphire wikipedia entry) down and then an insulating silicon oxide layer, and then a thin layer of silicon on which you fab the parts. Since what's under the parts is insulator, rather than more semiconductor, it reduces the energy of switching and reduces the time to switch a transistor. Also reduces radiation effects on the semiconductor and other good stuff.

  11. Ok, can we just put more empty space in now? by fwitness · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously? Can't I have a chip that runs relatively fast, does everything a modern computer is used for, sans games, and I *don't* have to water-cool? Something like what the VIA Epia series does, but with Intel's backing?

    Is it just me, or is web-browsing and document writing fast enough? It seems like 99% of the time these days I just want something smaller and quieter. If I want pretty shiny games, I'll play them on my xbox390 or sumsuch. Sure you can make bunches of chips for gamers, but give me a slimline chip and I, like many others would flock to it.

    I'm writing this on my 733Mhz laptop, bought for college way back when, and my typing fingers really don't recognize the lack of dual cores.

    --
    -- I have fans? Wow.