4 ms·
That's cool, but your [1] seems to say that the machine uses a wafer 12.5 mm in diameter, which is is probably less area than any of the CPUs in your [2].
by hollerith 7y ago
That's cool, but your [1] seems to say that the machine uses a wafer 12.5 mm in diameter, which is is probably less area than any of the CPUs in your [2].
- LargoLasskhyfv 7y agoShould suffice for my needs, see for example here [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R4200 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R4200 under R4300i which mentions 45mm² for the die. Also mentioned here [2] https://bits-chips.nl/artikel/small-series-of-chips-profitable-by-flexible-concept-minimal-fab/ https://bits-chips.nl/artikel/small-series-of-chips-profitab... are 0.25-micron to be released this year, with 190nm and smaller on the roadmap. Which leads us to [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/250_nanometer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/250_nanometer at least. Maybe not comparable in die size for all the chips mentioned there, i don't care so much, because i don't want to clone or emulate them. I want to go simpler. Rebranch from the 70ies so to speak, to take all the roads not taken since then. Just to see what's there :-)
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- a1369209993 7y agoThat's 122mm², which is larger than some Pentium II dies, so if you're okay with designing to a circular die[0], you could fit a Pentium II-grade CPU on each wafer. 0: The main reason to use a rectangular die is that they tesselate better to fit many dies per wafer.