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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)
AMD 214.11+3.9%3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (72802)3/1/2002 1:16:32 AM
From: Ali ChenRead Replies (3) of 275872
 
TWY, "Are you claiming that this 17A is due to device off current alone? How much active current do you think is included in this stop-clock mode? Also, what frequency NW is this?"

In my posts the term "leakage" was used somewhat loosely,
as a term for a current consumed in a stop-clock state.
More accurately, it is a projection of total consumption
at zero clock frequency.

The 17A is specified in "deep sleep" state for both 2 and
2.2GHz NWs. Deep sleep means stopped clock with the same
Vcc. Co-incidentally, linear extrapolation of dynamic
currents at 2.2 and 2GHz gives exactly the same number
- 17A. The exact budget for this leakage is not
known. There are suspicions that certain semi-analog
circuits that use multi-threshold transistors did
not scale well after the shrink, so not only the classic
off current is there. My position was that I do not know
and do not care, but the fact does exist that 0.13um
CPUs consumes a lot of static current even when clock
is totally stopped.

Some "discussion" can be found here:
realworldtech.com

As L2 cache concerns, assuming a standard 6T cell, it
must be around 25M, but I have no idea what the real
overhead is.

- Ali
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext