5 ms·
Not quite. You need bigger feature sizes to get good yields and good voltage resistance and performance over wider temp ranges, so a modern design would still n
by Kliment 5y ago
Not quite. You need bigger feature sizes to get good yields and good voltage resistance and performance over wider temp ranges, so a modern design would still need to be built on large-feature nodes. The car industry did cause this, but they caused it with their whims, purchasing practices, nasty contract terms, and general fucking over of suppliers, not with their allegedly outdated designs.
- mschuster91 5y agoThe main problem is that the car industry didn't want to spend the money to safety-certify new microcontroller designs - by law/regulations, that's a requirement for anything that's safety critical.
- Kliment 5y agoNew microcontroller designs that would meet the requirements for safety certification in those conditions are also manufactured on larger process nodes.
- p_l 5y agoHonestly, the MCU market is not that bad off according to some people in the embedded industry that I know. MCUs can be made, profitably, on newer smaller nodes. It's the things like power management ICs, that have to deal with much larger currents and voltages, that are problematic, and you can't respin those on smaller node, and that's before you go for automotive grade tolerances. That new MCU with new safety certification (and there's a lot of those going on, even a layman like me can see a push for equivalent of Integrated Modular Avionic in automotive) is going nowhere if it can't get power.
- MangoCoffee 5y agothe article say to invest in 40nm. why not move up to 28nm or even 14nm? 28nm by today's standard is already a very old tech. maybe the car vendors should move up
- mastax 5y ago- Cost. Double or more. - Would require a redesign. - Certain parts of the die cannot be shrunk: bond pads, esd protection, output drive transistors. - Certain parts of chips are designed for proprietary processes (eFLASH, analog)