3 ms·

I’m sure you agree that the measurement given is a marketing term and is generally unhelpful beyond ‘it’s smaller than the current number’.

• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• Tagbert 3y ago
  it also seems to be a roughly proportional change in density so why would it be unhelpful? Just because you can't point to a specific feature and say that is 1.6nm, doesn't make the label meaningless as so many try to assert. It is a label that represents a process that results in a specific transistor density. What label would you prefer?
  • thsksbd 3y ago
    ... transistor density?
    • lostlogin 3y ago
      Correct. Or something else that allowed comparison between fabs without me having to read a ton of explanations.
• __alexs 3y ago
  That you think it needs to convey anything other than "better than the last version" suggests a fundamental misunderstanding of marketing. It's actually even kind of decent because it is actually approximately more dense as you might suspect given the numbers.