News TSMC to Initiate 1.4nm Process Technology R&D

gfg

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2005
83
9
18,645
1
I feel like fractions of nm is so much harder to garner a relative % difference from compared to integers. 2nm to 1.4nm is the same % as 7nm to 5nm, yet is seems so much less significant.
are ~logarithmic equivalents, not linear scales

proceso (nm)note i vs i-1nodo i vs nodo 45 nm
4511
280,62x1,61x
220,79x2,05x
140,64x3,21x
70,50x6,43x
50,71x9,00x
30,60x15,00x
1,40,47x32,14x
 

AtrociKitty

Commendable
Apr 23, 2020
48
49
1,570
2
Intel: pfffft our 10nm is just as good...
I'm glad Intel rebranded, because too many people misunderstood the actual ranking of nodes when you compared them based on half-pitch scaling of an equivalent (in transistor density) planar transistor node:

15. 32nm Intel​
14. 28nm TSMC / 28nm UMC / 28nm Samsung/GlobalFoundries/IMB​
13. 22nm Intel /22nm IBM​
12. 20nm TSMC /20nm Samsung/20nm Intel (marketed as “22FFL)​
11. 18nm TSMC (marketed as “16nm”) / 18nm Samsung/GF (marketed as “14nm”)​
10. 17nm GF (marketed as “12nm” (12LP) by GF)​
09. 16nm TSMC (marketed as “12nm” (12FFC) by TSMC)​
08. 14nm Intel / 14nm Samsung (marketed as “10nm” by Samsung)​
07. 13nm Samsung (marketed as “8nm” by Samsung)​
06. 10nm TSMC (marketed as “7nm” (N7/N7P))/ 10nm Samsung (marketed as “7nm”)​
05. 9nm Intel (marketed as “10nm”)/ 9nm TSMC (marketed as 7nm (N7+))​
04. 6.7nm TSMC (marketed as “5nm”)​
03. 6.4nm Intel (marketed as “7nm”)​
02. 5nm TSMC (marketed as “3nm”)​
01. 4.5nm Intel (marketed as “5nm”)​
 

gfg

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2005
83
9
18,645
1
is logarithmic...
65 vs 45 = ~ - 30% area...
7 vs 5 = ~ -30% area...
2 vs 1.4 = ~ -30% area

65-45= 20 nm and 2 vs 1.4 = just 0.6 oooo noooo.... by -30% node by node....
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY