3 ms·
The most interesting to me is that Intel apparently stopped publishing transistor counts starting with the 14nm node. This is significant because as structure
by nhaehnle 11y ago
The most interesting to me is that Intel apparently stopped publishing transistor counts starting with the 14nm node.
This is significant because as structure sizes become smaller, the restrictions on possible layouts (so called DRCs, design rule constraints) become ever stricter. For example, you can't just place wires wherever you want; you have to take into account the relationship to other wires. With stricter rules, the end result may be that the effective scaling achieved is worse than what the structure size suggests, because the rules force a lower density of transitors.
So what are Intel hiding? Are they far ahead of the competition in terms of DRCs and don't want others to know how much, or are they struggling (like apparently everybody else) and want to hide a less-than-ideal effective scaling? Obviously, your guess is as good as mine, but it's certainly fascinating to watch the competition as Moore's law is coming to an end.
- jychang 11y ago> Are they far ahead of the competition in terms of DRCs I'm sure other companies like AMD can figure out the transistor count without consulting the Intel press release. If Intel isn't publishing a figure like total transistor count, it's for marketing purposes. All indicators point to the fact that Intel is struggling at the 14mm process.
- yoha 11y ago*14nm
- jonah 11y agoHow has/hasn't CPU reliability changed over the decades? Are these generally as sturdy as a 486? A 286 machine was mentioned in a recent article here, will you be able to find a running Skylake machine in 2045? How does the process size affect this? What other factors?
- hga 11y agoA 286 machine was mentioned in a recent article here, will you be able to find a running Skylake machine in 2045? I've been thinking about this lately, and between the jihad against lead (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_pest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_pest) and these machines storing the BIOS etc. in flash memory, I'm beginning to doubt it.
- cfallin 11y agoI'm nowhere near an expert in this, but I've heard that electromigration in the really thin wires can cause wearout over time. I imagine that this is probably near-negligible in the micrometer-sized interconnect layers in the 286 but a non-negligible issue in 14nm.
- userbinator 11y agoI'd say that it's decreased, because of how tiny the transistors and interconnects are getting. The CPUs still work today (obviously), but the margins are much thinner than they used to be because they don't design for more than a few years' lifespan. The 486 was produced in a 1um (1000nm) to 600nm process and runs on 5V+/-5% (4.75-5.25, a 250mV range), with an absolute maximum of 6.5V. The 14nm Skylake has a core voltage of ~1V, tolerance of a few tens of mV, and an absolute maximum of 1.52V. Electromigration will likely become a significant source of IC failures in the future.
- Symmetry 11y agoDue to Intels integration of design and fab they've been in a good position to make tradeoffs regarding design rules. Intel has been first to a new node pretty consistently and they've generally had better drive currents at a given node than their competitors. But I'd be willing to bet all this causes lots of extra work for their design teams who, given how much money Intel can throw at the problem, are large and very skilled.
- cbd1984 11y agoIs it reasonably feasible for a company like AMD to decap a processor and count?
- DiabloD3 11y agoLegally? No. AMD wants Intel hardware nowhere near their R&D people.
- effie 11y agoI doubt looking and counting under microscope is illegal. Also, not to learn from successful competitor's product would be very foolish.
- MichaelGG 11y agoThe KGB compromised US intelligence officers over decades for less money than Intel spends on a single advertisement. If knowing some internal details is going to make a huge difference, it is absolutely doable for basically any corp to compromise another's secrets.