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.
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.
Instead of just saying they're going to do it.
Talk is cheap.
FTFA: "IBM said that computational scaling overcomes these limitations by using mathematical techniques to modify the shape of the masks and the characteristics of the illuminating source used to image the circuits for each layer of an integrated circuit."
That gives you an idea. They are not being more secretive than normal.
"Civis Europaeus sum!"
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.
Full Tilt
The writeup is misleading. 45nm is in production now, and 32nm is due in 2009. The work at IBM is basic research which will be used by both Intel and IBM to make 22nm chips later on.
At least I think that's how it works. I guess Intel and IBM license patents from each other to allow them all to use the same level of technology. It certainly seems unlikely that IBM will be ahead of Intel in introducing smaller feature sizes since Intel is usually at the head of the pack.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Via their press release: http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/25147.wss
Because it isn't just the technology you develop. You have to get several other companies to align their technology roadmaps with you. Processing/handling equipment, raw materials, and a number of other technologies are involved in the production of a wafer.
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.
D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
Using some of SCO's intellectual property, of course...
Do you have ESP?
"...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
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
What a joke of an article. Every semiconductor manufacturer has several generations of process in various states in the lab. Woo IBM's showing sneak peaks at 22nm!
...it sort of takes 3D transistors and all that, but we know how to do these things. It's all using standard silicon, it's CMOS it's extraordinarily well charictarized right? But we've got transistors running at 11 nanometers, I can show you photographs of them. We have the leakage issues but we've got a very good plan.
I met with an Intel VP for an interview a while back and talked about where things are going. He had some nice lab-pr0n of what the photos claimed were 11nm transistors. I believe it was said that was "about 15 years out", and meant to offer reassurance that Moore's Law still had a bit more time left to go.
Actually here, let me go dig up my transcript so I can get a proper quote:
You're going to see that platforms are going to continue to evolve. We're moving to a faster cadence. The processor cadence is about a two year cadence, in terms of process technologies. By the way this is interesting. We know how to do Moore's Law for about another fifteen years which we've never had that kind of length of projection before.
That was 2 years ago, early October 2006. Who leapfrogged what now?
Introducing the new Occam Fusion! Now with sqrt(-1) fewer blades!
Here in Denmark we want our chips big and crunchy. Silly americans' chips are so small they can drink them from a mead-horn.
If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
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.
45nm chips do not pop out of the vaginae of 65nm chips. -1, Bad non-car analogy
I just read Slashdot for the articles.
Yer Intel Captains can't do that anyway matey. The kind of bosuns Intel hires are the finest on the seven seas! The finest sailors won't sit on their arses and grind their swords, them kinds like to be up and doing! They like the smell of fresh booty in the morning! If Intel let those people sit, they'd keel-haul the bosses and set sail for new horizons! YARRRRRRRRR
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
Most users are just fine with a fixed system on a chip with no PCI. (ram too if you could pull that off) If you want to reduce power and cost you'd place as much as possible on a single chip.
Chips like TI's OMAP series (found in the Nokia handhelds, OpenPandora, and a load of other things) have a CPU, DSP, GPU and a load of other things in the same die. They use a stacked-chip design so you can plug 128MB of RAM (256MB coming soon) on top of the package. Power usage is around 250mW.
How about a working variation of Hyperthreading?
Hyperthreading is a Intel's implementation of an idea that IBM brought to market first (based on an academic research project which produced the first prototypes, with the original designer now working at Sun). Sun and IBM have had it working for years. As have a few others. Unlikely in ARM chips, since the performance/power benefits in this space are worse than with multi-core (Cortex A9 allows up to 4 cores). It only makes sense for Intel in the Atom because it allows two context to share an instruction decoder, which reduces the cost of x86 bloat a bit.
How about hardware accelerated stacks?
x86 chips have had hardware accelerated stacks for well over a decade - rewrite an iterative algorithm with a software stack as a recursive implementation and you'll see a speedup.
MMUs that can handle a driver memory space
IOMMUs have been in Sun and IBM chips since they introduced 64-bit CPUs and wanted to plug in 32-bit PCI devices. Newer Intel and AMD designs also include them.
Advances in clockless processing?
Asynchronous designs have been floating around for a few decades but still don't deliver the kind of performance benefit that offsets the extra complexity (which equates to extra power usage).
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
That isn't how chip fabrication or design works at all.
Intel has three design teams, in three countries. They compete for the next Intel release. The israeli team won the Core/Core 2 Duo design. All the design teams were expected (and told) to keep Moore's law in mind as the miniaturization teams worked out the shrinking details. The Core/C2D was the most efficient processor for that many transistors.
The new 80 core machines are also coming out of the Israeli design team. These things don't even have (many) more transistors than a C2D. But each core is basically a streamlined Pentium 2 core (like the Core architecture), and they all share a large cache, and Apple has first dibs. Sweet.
After all, I am strangely colored.
It's not about only fab's, it's also about R&D on the production technology, the machines that perform the 'deep magic' also need to be developed, tested and put into production.
I'm working for ASML myself, which makes more than half of the lithography gear on the market, and I can attest that a surprisingly LARGE number of people on-site here know all the ins and outs of ASML scanner technology, both the stuff already on the market as well as the bleeding-edge stuff that no-one outside is supposed to know about.
ASML has 6500+ employees, so it's a pretty safe bet knowledge leaks out. I don't see why this would be different for IBM.