AMD ON TRACK TO RECEIVE FIRST CHIPS FROM CHARTERED

[rettihSlluB]

This is the real data showing Intel's Ion/Ioff characteristics compared to IBM/AMD etc node for node.... at the 90 nm node Intel Ion/Ioff for nMos is for high Vt 1260/40 compares to IBM/AMD of 900/40. This is roughly 40% better drive current characteristics for the nMOS device. For PMOS it is 700/40 to 490/40, this is roughly 43% better saturated drive current which translates to better overall gate delays (lower gate delay) hence faster switching transistors. Note, I am comparing 90 nm IBM/AMD to 90 nm Intel, it is a completely fair compare. For the low Vt side of the equation, it tightens up abit Intel is better by 15% on nMOS and 9% better on PMOS... The data is quite clear.

SO, if Intel's process are way better than AMD's, then why is it that Intel's 65nm can't keep it up against AMD's 90nm??

Now I know you going to call "BS" but just because you don't understand the data does not invalidate the data.

:roll:

 

[9-inch]

Quote:
This is the real data showing Intel's Ion/Ioff characteristics compared to IBM/AMD etc node for node.... at the 90 nm node Intel Ion/Ioff for nMos is for high Vt 1260/40 compares to IBM/AMD of 900/40. This is roughly 40% better drive current characteristics for the nMOS device. For PMOS it is 700/40 to 490/40, this is roughly 43% better saturated drive current which translates to better overall gate delays (lower gate delay) hence faster switching transistors. Note, I am comparing 90 nm IBM/AMD to 90 nm Intel, it is a completely fair compare. For the low Vt side of the equation, it tightens up abit Intel is better by 15% on nMOS and 9% better on PMOS... The data is quite clear.


SO, if Intel's process are way better than AMD's, then why is it that Intel's 65nm can't keep it up against AMD's 90nm??

Looks like someone got owned. 8)

 

[SexBomb]

Quote:
Quote:
This is the real data showing Intel's Ion/Ioff characteristics compared to IBM/AMD etc node for node.... at the 90 nm node Intel Ion/Ioff for nMos is for high Vt 1260/40 compares to IBM/AMD of 900/40. This is roughly 40% better drive current characteristics for the nMOS device. For PMOS it is 700/40 to 490/40, this is roughly 43% better saturated drive current which translates to better overall gate delays (lower gate delay) hence faster switching transistors. Note, I am comparing 90 nm IBM/AMD to 90 nm Intel, it is a completely fair compare. For the low Vt side of the equation, it tightens up abit Intel is better by 15% on nMOS and 9% better on PMOS... The data is quite clear.


SO, if Intel's process are way better than AMD's, then why is it that Intel's 65nm can't keep it up against AMD's 90nm??



Looks like someone got owned.

WORD!! :lol:

 

[SexBomb]

Hey rettihsllub, nice links.

I really liked the one about Tom on AMD's fab.

 

[Legenic]

Quote:
This is the real data showing Intel's Ion/Ioff characteristics compared to IBM/AMD etc node for node.... at the 90 nm node Intel Ion/Ioff for nMos is for high Vt 1260/40 compares to IBM/AMD of 900/40. This is roughly 40% better drive current characteristics for the nMOS device. For PMOS it is 700/40 to 490/40, this is roughly 43% better saturated drive current which translates to better overall gate delays (lower gate delay) hence faster switching transistors. Note, I am comparing 90 nm IBM/AMD to 90 nm Intel, it is a completely fair compare. For the low Vt side of the equation, it tightens up abit Intel is better by 15% on nMOS and 9% better on PMOS... The data is quite clear.


SO, if Intel's process are way better than AMD's, then why is it that Intel's 65nm can't keep it up against AMD's 90nm??

Looks like someone got owned. 8)

jumpingjack is providing you with a lot of data, explaining it for you, and doing it politely, yet someone posts a pointless argument that ignores everything he said and you turn around and say he got "owned".

wow.

jumpingjack, you should make a writeup about process tech and post it. like; what you should know, how it differs from architecture, etc. write it with comparisons and make it as idiot proof as possible. that would be incredibly handy to refer to. ..if you want.

edit: just realized you're talking about making a writeup anyways. nevermind.

 

[gr8mikey]

Looking forward to it Jack.

Although I never finished college, I did pretty well in chemistry and physics. I think I will find your writeup quite interesting. Don't get you're hopes up on it having any effect on the ignorance of a select few though.

 

[joefriday]

[btw there are ppl spatting **** about cars in a post about AMD receiving chips from chartered company?

Most people on this forum are tired of these nonsensical crap postings from 9 inch and his toadies. If 9 inch continues to post useless threads, I will give useless replies. Who knows, maybe it'll highjack the thread and something useful will actually come out of it.

 

[Linear]

Im a great fan of Technology and especially Computer Hardware , im no genius , and frankly not particularly smart enough to have fully understood all or any of what you have said. In fact my grasp of Mathmatics and the English Language isn't great either (no suprise there), i do however have a great want to learn things (although with short term memory problems , along with eye sight problems) remembering and understanding things aren't my strong suit . I have however enjoyed reading your (Jumpingjack's) comments and information regarding the AMD/IBM // Intel architecture/perfomance/differences and such (even if they're not all linked or related to one another) , i cant say i browse forums much , staring at still pages of text gives me terrible migranes , so quick burts of reading and bookmarking things for later continuation is all i can muster , so i was possibly quite intrigued to have stumbled upon this topic and have gleen alot of information . Of which not being that physics savvy have tried to understand in my own way. I do very much appreciate that there are people out there with the time and patience to think about the less (i'll steer away from saying less intelligent) 'understanding' folk out there.

I must admit , that my main interest in PC's/Technology is Computer Games , but i'am also very interested how programmers make these games to take advantage of current Technology and the things inherent in these Components , and how these 'technologies' (because my brain cant think of the proper term for them) are designed and intergrated within Hardware (a topic of daily amazement for me).

I will greatly appreciate your Writeup and will greatly enjoy reading it (and attempting to understand it) i shall also have a good search though these forums for more of your posts , because it seems for once , there is someone that actually knows what there on about , which is a form of rare in forums these days.

Thanx muchly


-Linear

 

[gOJDO]

I must admit , that my main interest in PC's/Technology is Computer Games , but i'am also very interested how programmers make these games to take advantage of current Technology and the things inherent in these Components , and how these 'technologies' (because my brain cant think of the proper term for them) are designed and intergrated within Hardware (a topic of daily amazement for me).

I will greatly appreciate your Writeup and will greatly enjoy reading it (and attempting to understand it) i shall also have a good search though these forums for more of your posts , because it seems for once , there is someone that actually knows what there on about , which is a form of rare in forums these days.

Thanx muchly


-Linear

First of all, Wellcome to the forum.
You can learn a lot of things from forums like this one, but there are much more untrue stories(read lies) than having-a-point usefull posts. JumpingJack understands the things he is posting and is more educated(I guess), so I am enjoying reding his posts also. There are other good discutants who are well informed with no-stereotypic and fanboyistic points of view, like Joset and some others I don't remember their nicks. But, I will recomend you to use apropriate literature, rather than rading meaningless posts on the forums, if you really want to learn something right. Forums are more for debating and clearing up the dillemas about things you allready learned and maybe you learned them wrong.

 

[gOJDO]

However, since you guys assert yourselves to be smarter than I, how about you answer me a simple question:

Why is it that GaAs (for your feeble minds, this Gallium Arsenide) is used for the lasers in your DVD rom drives and not a Silicon based laser?

For such brilliant young men (or women) who are soooooo educated on the PROCESS, device physics, and such, this should be a very simple question to answer. A piece of cake!

Sillicon is mass produced and much more cheaper than Gallium Arsenide. Anyway Gallium Arsenide is used in military for many years and thats why it is like-a "forbiden" for mainstream use. It has 4 times better dielectric propreties than silicon, and if used instead of silicone many times more superrior chips can be made...
Anyway there are gallium arsenide transistors available for buying but are 20-40 times more expencive than the "normal".

 

[BigRat]

Why is it that GaAs (for your feeble minds, this Gallium Arsenide) is used for the lasers in your DVD rom drives and not a Silicon based laser?

Its the wavelength of the laser produced. I think.... :roll:


Edit:
Upon looking it up I think you were referring to:

GaAs has some electronic properties which are superior to silicon's. It has a higher saturated electron velocity and higher electron mobility, allowing it to function at frequencies in excess of 250 GHz - Answers.com

I got it wrong

 

[spud]

Good try, but now qute the correct answer. Gallium arsenide does have better electrical properties than Si, the overall electron mobility is higher by about a factor of 8, and depending on the doping, impurities, and such can range from a factor around 5-15 x better.

The problem is that GaAs is a binary compound semiconductor, which means processing is very difficult. Also, only a few dopants are available to dope GaAs and that can be done in only under special conditions.

I once attended a seminar where the speaker was talking about research on GaAs, he once said "GaAs the semicondutor material of the future, and it always will be"... mostly because it is difficult to process.

Though there are companies out there that are using it for very specialized application for high power, high frequency devices.

Jack

Word.

 

[apache_lives]

I still can't believe that the first chips will be based on 90nm and not 65nm. AMD is still far behind in the technology race against Intel.

What are you talking about??
AMD's process is A LOT better than Intels. Even you are witness that 90nm A64s perform better and consume less power than intel's 65nm offerings.

Let's just give them time for them to mature the process. I believe once we see 65nm offerings from AMD they will perform 40% better than current 90nm processors. I do believe intel is scared to sh!t about AMD's new and improved ssgoi process, that's why they're shouting out loud about their 45nm experiments.

So thats why a 90nm dothan, within 20% performance does ~27w of heat max on 90nm? and a 65nm yonah does the same with dual core and equals the A64 clock for clock? The P4's have always been hot, and there being canned so who cares fanboy.

 

[BigRat]

Thanks for the physics lesson mate.

 

[gOJDO]

Good try, but now qute the correct answer. Gallium arsenide does have better electrical properties than Si, the overall electron mobility is higher by about a factor of 8, and depending on the doping, impurities, and such can range from a factor around 5-15 x better.

The problem is that GaAs is a binary compound semiconductor, which means processing is very difficult. Also, only a few dopants are available to dope GaAs and that can be done in only under special conditions.

I once attended a seminar where the speaker was talking about research on GaAs, he once said "GaAs the semicondutor material of the future, and it always will be"... mostly because it is difficult to process.

Though there are companies out there that are using it for very specialized application for high power, high frequency devices.

Jack

Yes, I might be wrong with the numbers. I was reading an article about GaAs long time ago.
It needs special conditions and circumantes in order to be produced, I am not sure but is it growing crystal like a sausage?
I think that is not that hard to be produced, but someone don't want to be mass-produced. Do you agree?
If you have some usefull info about GaAs, lets open a topic about it. I will try to find and learn something when I go back home
It is more interesting than the Conroe vs AM2 K8 pointless discussions....

 

[Atolsammeek]

I think everyone needs this lesson. Wait and see. Even Jumpjack. But It always seem Amd right intel right fight. But I will say this. Untel The facts are layed out No one Right. So sit back drink a beer and have a ball. If someone finds info talk about it. Not flame it. Like the Intel flameboys or Amd flameboy.

But one fact is ture. Amd or Intel will say the other side is right so both sides quit acting like babys.

 

[hashv2f16]

I still can't believe that the first chips will be based on 90nm and not 65nm. AMD is still far behind in the technology race against Intel.

What are you talking about??
AMD's process is A LOT better than Intels. Even you are witness that 90nm A64s perform better and consume less power than intel's 65nm offerings.


what are YOU talking about, FANBOY? He said the technology race, not the power comsumption and performance race.

 

[joset]

Yes, I might be wrong with the numbers. I was reading an article about GaAs long time ago.
It needs special conditions and circumantes in order to be produced, I am not sure but is it growing crystal like a sausage?
I think that is not that hard to be produced, but someone don't want to be mass-produced. Do you agree?
If you have some usefull info about GaAs, lets open a topic about it. I will try to find and learn something when I go back home
It is more interesting than the Conroe vs AM2 K8 pointless discussions....

Allow mw to disagree (sort of):

I'm not up to the chemistry/physics of the processes... but I try.
Since the "GaAs vs Silicon" riddle is solved, now try this:
http://www.darkgovernment.com/wp/?page_id=36
and
http://www.intel.com/technology/silicon/sp/
and a helpful glossary:
http://www.intel.com/technology/silicon/sp/glossary.htm

Amazing, I'd say!

As for the "Conroe" vs "K8x", there's much, much more to be discussed than just mere designations/code names... and, laser optics & microprocessors are not, necessarily, independent matters, if you care to "investigate".


Cheers!