3 ms·
Why do you care? Are you designing a standard cell library for it? Seriously. I don’t understand why so many people care that the “nm” number is a marketing te
by audunw 3y ago
Why do you care? Are you designing a standard cell library for it?
Seriously. I don’t understand why so many people care that the “nm” number is a marketing term. The chip manufacturing processes are now often improving in ways that measuring the minimum pitch doesn’t really capture. So they bump down the number whenever it improves in some other way. It’s that simple.
I have designed a standard cell library. I don’t care what number they use in marketing. If you actually want to know the performance/characteristics/dimensions of the process there are so many other numbers you need to know and you’d refer to the actual documentation.
As an end user customers, all I need to know is that “3nm” is slightly better in performance/density/power than “4nm”, and the label they assign achieves that goal.
- nottorp 3y agoIt depends on what you consider an acceptable marketing lie. Tbh I used to not care until they started lying about power consumption too.
- akvadrako 3y agoWell nm is not something anyone should care about. Chip designers care about gate density. But end users only care about speed, power consumption, capacity, etc.
- moondev 3y agoPreach. I figured it was implied by now it's an indicator of processor generation with roots in the history of the semiconductor industry. * iPhones count up * Ubuntu LTS counts YRMO 24 months from April * Debian counts toy story characters * CPU nodes count down