SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)
INTC 35.94-5.1%Nov 13 3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Process Boy who wrote (97178)1/22/2000 6:29:00 PM
From: Steve Lee  Read Replies (1) of 186894
 
Thanks PB,

I interpret this as a very important development. Specifically:

"The shorter gate length, together with other refinements described in the paper, reduces the gate capacitance and allows circuits to be built with higher-speed performance at a reduced operating voltage (1.2 to 1.5 V) and with higher current drive and low leakage current.

"The drive current is increased by about 10 percent," said Ghani.

He would not offer specifics on Intel's method for making the gate-shortening notches, but he did say that it's "cost-free" (implying that it requires no extra process steps) and that the lateral and vertical dimensions of the notch are highly controllable ? an important factor in repeatability and reliability."

I assume that this process is protected from the copiers through patents. Does it only apply to 0.18 process or is it equally relevant to 0.13?

Another interesting snippet from that article:

"Ghani added that Intel uses a 16-Mbit SRAM design as a test vehicle for its 0.18-micron process node and that such an SRAM, operating at a 1.16-GHz clock frequency, has been built using the notched-poly process. More details on that circuit are due to be revealed in February. "

That's an impressive frequency, faster than Rambus's 800 Mhz. Am I right in thinking it is even more impressive due to it being SRAM, which is normally slower than DRAM (I need help here). Is this a threat to AMD's flash business? Could it get Intel back into the memory game with patents to protect them from competitive pressures from the Japanese? When Intel makes such breakthroughs, would they normally license the technology out or keep it to themselves?

A lot of questions that probably can't be answered until the February announcement but any pointers to publicly available info would be very useful.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News