3 ms·
Intel's 14nm process uses 2 fins per gate for an SRAM cell size of 59nm x 59nm [1, corrected]. Samsung's 10nm process uses 3 fins per gate -- unknown what an ap
by sounds 10y ago
Intel's 14nm process uses 2 fins per gate for an SRAM cell size of 59nm x 59nm [1, corrected]. Samsung's 10nm process uses 3 fins per gate -- unknown what an apples-to-apples SRAM cell size would be on this node.
It will be interesting to see final benchmarks of performance, power consumption and price (PPP).
It's worth noting that Samsung announced 10nm DRAM back in April [2].
[1] http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-14nm-broadwell-y-core-m,3904.html http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-14nm-broadwell-y-c...
[2] https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-starts-mass-producing-industrys-first-10-nanometer-class-dram https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-starts-mass-producin...
- WhitneyLand 10y agoAT should really be pointing this out. Samsungs announcement by itself it not much more than marketing propaganda.
- ploxiln 10y agoIt's like GHz. Pretty soon people will figure out that this number is not useful to compare different foundries, or even members of different families from the same company. You just have to test what it can do.
- reitzensteinm 10y agoNote that this is (59nm)^2, not 59nm^2. The latter being smaller than the feature size of a 14nm process. Tom's Hardware, of course, gets it wrong.
- sounds 10y agoThanks, I updated my post with that correction.
- fivesigma 10y agoHere is another metric that measures logic density [1]. At the 10nm process, Intel has a 21% advantage over Samsung using these numbers. [1] https://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/6160-2016-leading-edge-semiconductor-landscape.html https://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/6160-2016-leading-edg...
- sounds 10y agoOk, using Intel's currently shipping 14nm numbers vs Samsung's currently shipping 10nm numbers from your source: • Intel: 13.4nm "standard node value" • Samsung: 12.0nm "standard node value" • TSMC: 18.3nm "standard node value" • Global Foundries: 16.6nm "standard node value"
- mappu 10y agoThe question is moot for the mobile market, since Intel don't fab a competitor to Snapdragon 400/600/800 with the same power/performance categories.