Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: smooth2o who wrote (230074)	4/16/2007 10:22:01 AM
From: eetnoyer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Posting the same link in back to back messages seems a little excessive, but... Reading the article, it seems that if EUV does not in fact make it onto the scene in the requisite time line, both double patterning and immersion will be required to reach 22nm lithography. It looks like double patterning will be sufficient to reach half of the current 65nm line widths (32nm) with increased accuracy of mask placement, but will be able to go no further. On the other hand, immersion lithography will be able to do 45nm with single exposure and a possibility (not sure how much of one) of doing 32nm with single exposure. With double patterning, immersion could make it to 22nm (or even 16nm?) without the requisite of EUV. It seems as though Intel has placed their bet on EUV making it in time for 22nm, while AMD has taken the other side of it. Either way, from what I've heard, EUV may end up being so expensive even if it does make it in time that immersion and eventually immersion/double patterning may be the more cost effective route. Especially if it can make it down to 16nm line widths. Either way, we're talking about things that are a long way off and are subject to a massive degree of uncertainty. Disclaimer: I have very little knowledge of semiconductor manufacturing processes, and as such may be way off base. Eric