4 ms·
From what I have read, 4nm is not really a significant process change and is really just a variant of 5nm. There have been only minimal improvements in chips go
by Tagbert 4y ago
From what I have read, 4nm is not really a significant process change and is really just a variant of 5nm. There have been only minimal improvements in chips going form 5nm to 4nm as a result. 3nm really is different.
- cubefox 4y ago"There have been only minimal improvements in chips going form 5nm to 4nm as a result." I'd like to see evidence for that, i.e. that the change from 4nm to 3nm offers significantly larger efficiency improvements than the change from 5nm to 4nm.
- lcvw 4y agoThose numbers are just for marketing. There is no feature on the chip that is actually 5 nm, 4 nm, or whatever.
- cubefox 4y agoThat's highly irrelevant for my point, which would still stand if the process generations were named differently.
- Tagbert 4y agoThe chip industry articles I have seen say that 4nm is not mean fully smaller than 5nm and really can be just considered a version of 5nm. I don’t have the background to give you more than that but the message has been consistent across multiple tech writers. You can see it in the smaller performance gains of 4nm A16 chips vs 4nm A15 chips from Apple.