4 ms·

"2nm node" means "one technology iteration after 4nm". (Well, actually after 3nm, but let's not get even more into that nonsense) These numbers stopped having

• lidavidm 2y ago
  It might be funny to use this as a software versioning scheme. ("What do you mean the next version after v3 is 20A?")
  • wtallis 2y ago
    Dividing by the square root of two with each iteration isn't any weirder than how Knuth does software versions.
    • B1FF_PSUVM 2y ago
      But Knuth's shtick converges to a known quantity ... let me rephrase that, non-zero quantity ...
  • amelius 2y ago
    Reminds me of: https://www.reddit.com/r/LaTeX/comments/etiuh4/just_noticed_that_my_pdftex_version_is_pi/ https://www.reddit.com/r/LaTeX/comments/etiuh4/just_noticed_...
• blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  So is there any objective way to compare one company’s claims or capabilities against another?
  • jupp0r 2y ago
    Here is an amazing discussion of that problem and a description of several metrics that answer your question: https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/a-better-way-to-measure-progress-in-semiconductors-2650280265 https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/a-better-way-to-measure-progre...
  • brennanpeterson 2y ago
    The sram density is a pretty good equivalent. You can arguably do the average of sram and some logic. If you take the square root of that...you pretty much end up with (modulo a linear scale) the existing nodes. That gets you size. You then need power and speed, which are a bit trickier to compare without a standard/reference device.