> Since nm are Now Marketing, unrelated to physical dimension That's not entirely true. They might not decrease the minimum gate length, but generally the impr

> Since nm are Now Marketing, unrelated to physical dimension That's not entirely true. They might not decrease the minimum gate length, but generally the improvements made when bumping down the "nm" number has been a similar improvement as what making the gate length smaller would have given. So I don't find the numbering as misleading as others think. It's not like any of us a designing gate cell libraries (well, I have, a very basic one, but I'm guessing most here haven't), and actually care about the gate length. Using the minimum gate length as a naming scheme was always been a proxy for things chip designers actually care about: logic density, timing, power, etc.