Slashdot Mirror


IBM Leapfrogs Intel With 22nm Chips

Slatterz writes "Intel may be touting 45nm CPUs, but IBM says it can go much further with a strategy to produce future chips using a 22nm fabrication process. The company is adopting a technique called 'computational scaling' in order to manufacture circuits small enough to deliver more powerful and energy-efficient devices. Intel plans to introduce 32nm chips in 2009, but chipmakers have hit a problem in that current lithographic methods are not adequate for designs as small as 22nm owing to fundamental physical limitations. IBM claims to have solved this problem." Unfortunately the phrase "computational scaling" doesn't actually convey any information about how they've solved it.

16 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. Well duhhhh.... by Rod+Beauvex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I figured out how to do something that would lay a serious hurting on my competition, I wouldn't exactly go around saying how I did it either.

    1. Re:Well duhhhh.... by neonleonb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Patents, dude. That's the reason they're around: so you can tell people how you did it, and still be the only one to do it. Some patents are evil, but I hope *someone* is using the system as it's intended.

    2. Re:Well duhhhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Patents are mostly useful when you've outrun the competition by a few seconds. As a reward for you get to beat your competition with a stick for 17 years.

      Any *real* breakthrough is better protected by trade secrets. You stay ahead even longer, avoid having to look for infringement, avoid litigation altogether, and prevent cheap knockoffs from countries that don't enforce patents.

    3. Re:Well duhhhh.... by HungryHobo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well they can still take your product apart and try to build a knock off.
      and if someone else discovers your trade secret on their own and files a patent then you can have problems.

    4. Re:Well duhhhh.... by russotto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Telling how you did it and then defending your patents by taking violators to court is costly and time-consuming. Keeping your mouth shut and forcing your competitors to take apart your product to even begin to comprehend how you did it is much cheaper

      But IBM has traditionally taken the former strategy. And given the number of partners they have in this (Mentor Graphics, RPI, Toppan) it seems a lot safer for them to get the patent than to try to maintain a lead with trade secrets.

  2. Yawn. Wake me when they've DONE it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Instead of just saying they're going to do it.

    Talk is cheap.

  3. Who knows.. by eebra82 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article doesn't mention when such chips would be ready for production and I doubt that IBM's original press release sheds any light on that subject. So all this COULD mean is that IBM only announced their breakthrough ahead of Intel, not that they are ahead or behind Intel.

    It's still good to see that Moore's law is hanging in there.

  4. Physical Limitations by LS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "...but chipmakers have hit a problem in that current lithographic methods are not adequate for designs as small as 22nm owing to fundamental physical limitations. IBM claims to have solved this problem."

    This is virtually the same statement made every time a smaller fabrication process is announced. It conveys no information. Obviously some physical limitation was preventing them from making smaller circuits, and then they overcame them to make them even smaller.

    LS

    --
    There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
  5. Re:Why can't you skip a generation? by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The semiconductor manufacturing industry pretty moves together as a whole. Even if one company is out in front in terms of technology it isn't that far ahead, which is why so many companies just focus on design and have foundaries make their stuff.

    Actually it is "that far ahead", but the investments are so absurdly huge only a few companies can afford to keep up. Do the math, going from say 65nm to 45nm means the surface area is halved but the real business difference is in the margin. Say it costs AMD 100$ to make, maybe they can sell it for 110$. Enter an Intel 45nm, they produce it for 50$ and still sell it for 110$. Which is why AMDs Atom competiton is ridiculous - yes it can concievably keep up on performance but the margins are abysmal compared to the extremely small die size of an Atom which means Intel will be the only one making any money. In the long run it'll be better for everyone if Intel stumbles a little and competition stays intense, because they are bleeding their competitors dry. Notice that Intel is making substantial pushes into UMPCs, mobile devices, motherboards (more than chipsets before), graphics and SSDs. All of that is funded first and foremost from their superior process technology, their designs are good too but not that spectacular.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  6. *yawn* Intel announced their 15nm process in 2001 by HannethCom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=10810046

    Though a more recent article stated that the first plant using 15nm won't be online until late 2011, or early 2012 at the latest.

    In the silicon production market there is usually about a 5 year, or more, period between when something is announced, and when it is in production. Which means we will see IBM's 22nm process as early as late 2013.

    --
    Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
  7. Still not a good idea by Moraelin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, unfortunately it's a bit like the problem with conspiracy theories: anything that needs the complete cooperation of thousands to keep a secret, isn't going to really stay a secret. Building a 22nm fab is going to require a lot of stuff, and a lot of people knowing what is being done there, how, and why. It takes only one disgruntled employee, or some chinese subcontractor going, "hmm, I wonder what'd they buy that big an electron gun for... too big for electron microscopy... could it be they're using electrons at this many electron-volts instead of light?" to lose that trade secret in a jiffy.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Still not a good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A fab is huge, most of the people who work on a site are completely ignorant of the details of how such deep magic is performed, most of those thousands are only concerned about keeping the xyz network up or replacing/upgrading servers in the datacenter.
      Many of the machines are closed units which only ever get opened by a small number of techs.

      Actual knowledge of how they do what they do can be kept between a surprisingly small group of people.

      Yes someone could take a stab at it but much of the time it's the fine details rather than the general idea that make an idea workable.

    2. Re:Still not a good idea by twostix · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Well, unfortunately it's a bit like the problem with conspiracy theories: anything that needs the complete cooperation of thousands to keep a secret, isn't going to really stay a secret."

      Sooo...there's no such thing as secret military weapons development and programmes, and *definately* no state secrets. Every one knows the exact inner workings of every aspect of the CIA and NSA, the exact recipe for Coke and millions of other major trade secrets across the world aren't secrets either.

      Also Germany must have known the exact details of the D-day landings, and France and the rest of the world had intimate knowledge of Germanys plan to invade, date, time and all! Cause like you said all those hundreds of thousands of men involved in the preparation of those operations couldn't possibly have kept the details of it to themselves...right?

      Rabid anti-conspiracy theorists are on the opposite side of exactly the same bent coin as rabidly pro-conspiracy theorists, both are living in a demonstrable fantasy world. It's not hard to protect a secret, everyone does it many times a day one way or another. I'd say that in general, the tiny piece of the puzzle that one person is exposed to is meaningless to them and even if they did tell everyone, who would listen?

  8. Re:Why can't you skip a generation? by HungryHobo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, I got that impression too, it's not so much that their chips are the most fantastic on the market but rather that they can produce more, faster and for less money than everyone else.

  9. Re:Why can't you skip a generation? by something_wicked_thi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nanometers aren't discrete units, you know.

    The real reason they don't skip generations is because it's not cost effective. Intel is making a killing on its tick/tock model where they shrink the process in one model and change the architecture in the next. This way, they can pipeline. They can have their semiconductor people working out how to make it smaller while the VHDL people are throwing together a new chip. They each have twice as long as if they were coordinated, delays in one don't necessarily affect the other, and everybody is kept busy.

    If they wanted to skip a generation, then the fab guys would probably take longer, which means they'd have a time when they weren't pumping out new, incrementally better CPUs to sell to people. They'd make less money, and the consumer would have to wait longer to get something better.

  10. Re:Why can't you skip a generation? by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If they go too fast then this screws up the core team because they suddenly have more transistors than they expect.

    I don't see how that would be a problem. Being able to put more transistors on a chip != have to put more transistors on a chip. In this case, having a better process would lead to higher profits, so there is an incentive to advance process technology ASAP.