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 203.14-0.8%Jan 9 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: jspeed who wrote (220120)12/12/2006 12:55:51 PM
From: dougSF30Read Replies (2) of 275872
 
Comparison between Intel & AMD 45nm specs:

investorshub.com

INTC 45nm data/comparison
I don't think INTC has published any 45nm data, but has a summary on their web site here:
intel.com
If we combine this data with what we know of AMD/IBM 45nm we get the following table:

INTC PMOS 65nm/45nm 710/852
AMD PMOS 65nm/45nm 735/840
INTC NMOS 65nm/45nm 1210/1452
AMD NMOS 65nm/45nm 1260/1240

45nm SRAM cell size: INTC= .346, IBM/AMD=.37

Note that the 65nm INTC numbers I have are from the original 2004 IEDM paper. I heard INTC updated these numbers by a few percent at the 2005 IEDM, but that should be a small enough error as to be ignored for now...
--Alan


And note that not much improved from 65nm to 45nm for AMD:

On a related note, the IEDM paper notes that the 45nm NMOS drive current is 1240uA/uM and PMOS is 840uA/uM... versus 1260 NMOS and 735 PMOS for the 65nm technology. It looks like they may hit schedule, but the performance is not going to be that great... and manufacturability is questionable with the conversion to immersion.

On another related note (while we are at it), they presented a paper last year on some advanced strain techniques that improved PMOS drive currents to be near that of the NMOS device. Based on this early look at 45nm, that technique is not going to work out.


investorshub.com

So, Intel appears to have better numbers, and more improvement from 65nm, more certain ability to manufacture (no immersion), and is also a year ahead in schedule.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext