Slashdot Mirror
Intel, IBM Announce Chip Breakthrough
Intel announced a major breakthrough in microprocessor design Friday that will allow it to keep on the curve of Moore's Law a while longer. IBM, working with AMD, rushed out a press release announcing essentially equivalent advances. Both companies said they will be using alloys of hafnium as insulating layers, replacing the silicon dioxide that has been used for more than 40 years. The New York Times story (and coverage from the AP and others) features he-said, she-said commentary from dueling analysts. If there is a consensus, it's that Intel is 6 or more months ahead for the next generation. IBM vigorously disputes this, saying that they and AMD are simply working in a different part of the processor market — concentrating on the high-end server space, as opposed to the portable, low-power end.
With this breakthrough and that other one perhaps Moore's Law needs updating.
Sorry but why is this being reported again now? We already knew Intel and IBM had achieved a 45nm process and that it would be coming to mass-market chips in 2007-08. It's 2007 and it's here. Hooray and all that, but is a company following through on its claims really so shocking that it constitutes being reported again... twice?
Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
But can they keep up with Lays? :D
But how much further will that get them before RFI makes it a moot point? At that small of a pathway, I'd think that random radio signals and electrical noise would be disastrous.
Also, how well does this survive long term? Is it resistant to electromigration over time?
All great to hear, but I'm not sure how long this will let them keep pace with Moore's law, at best it buys a couple more years of progress on current processor designs I guess.
Welcome to the club! On your application as editor, did you have to swear that you don't actually read slashdot as a precondition for employment like all the other editors?
Monstar L
here
Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
I thought it's an empiric law; the definition of axiom is quite different from that.
Intel said it had already manufactured prototype microprocessor chips in the new 45-nanometer process that run on three major operating systems: Windows, Mac OS X and Linux.Again, I thought it's the operating systems who run on microprocessors, not vice-versa. And I [not being a kernel developer, though] can't see any reason for an OS to stop functioning on a new processor model if the architecture is intact and no serious hardware-level bugs are introduced.
As a graduate student researching this field, this is an amazing bit of news! - The intel high-k announcement is a *major* breakthrough, and a new, disruptive technology for chip technology especially as far as the the introduction of new materials in the Fab are concerned (and trust me, Fab engineers are paranoid about such kinds of shifts). It essentially involves replacing the SiO2 dielectric gate insulator with a new class of materials, very likely Nitrided Hafnium Silicates (though they have not publicly acknowledged the silicate part, they just mention it as a compound of Hafnium - it is the leading contender in the field).
The high-k film can be made physically thicker than the very thin SiO2 layer (which is only around 12 Angstroms thin at the moment, making it leak like a sieve) without messing up the capacitance requirements for the transistor. The introduction of new metal gate instead of the classic poly-crystalline silicon (called poly) is also abig deal, and there is greater secrecy on what those materials are. The wikipedia article on high-k has the details. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-k_Dielectric
What, now Silicon Valley becomes Hafnium Valley?
This article's summary is far more accurate and informative than the other one. I posted several times in the older post to help clear up some misinformation (the article it linked to misspelled hafnium as "halfnium" and only mentioned it once, and never mentioned IBM or AMD).
I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.
If there is a consensus, it's that Intel is 6 or more months ahead for the next generation. IBM vigorously disputes this, saying that they and AMD are simply working in a different part of the processor market
Didn't read TFA, but is it possible to have a consensus with one party vigorously disputing it?
never buy anything
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
The funny thing about this is that every few weeks you read some article that says, "Yup! That's it! We simply cannot get any more out of Moore's Law! It's dead."
Then a couple weeks later someone says, "Yup! We're gonna squeeze a few more years out of Moore's law. New advance! It isn't dead!"
Moore's Law is like the Energizer Bunny. It just keep's going.
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
Phosphorus http://www.aist.go.jp/aist_e/latest_research/2005/ 20050615/20050615.html
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Well, it's about time. Hafnium oxide dielectrics were the talk of the semiconductor research world in the early/mid 90's. Big-time chip manufacturers refused to adopt the technology, though, hoping that some technology that didn't require the re-vamping of an entire fabrication facility would come along and magically reduce gate oxide lekage current.
The technology is fairly mature by now (from a research standpoint), so the only "news" is that the major manufacturers have finally realized that it is the least of all evils from a commercial point of view.
Personally, I wonder how different the current market would be if one of the commercial fab plants would have embraced the technology 5-10 years ago.
>> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.