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: combjelly who wrote (243113)	10/31/2007 9:06:34 PM
From: graphicsguru	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Comb, thanks for the link. But it's a bit confusing. It says (a) ... Barcelona's gate leakage about half that of Woodcrest ... and (b) ... the leakage current I_off for the nFets was two to five times lower in the Woodcrest ... (a) and (b) seem a bit contradictory to me. Am I missing something? Also, do you have any idea how the gate oxide thickness compared at 90nm?

To: combjelly who wrote (243113)	10/31/2007 9:23:47 PM
From: Saturn V	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

It is not clear if AMD 65nm designs will leakier, or Intel 65nm designs. AMD's p-channel gates leak less current, but AMD n-channel devices have much higher OFF state current. The contribution of each component to the quiescent power is a function of the details of the circuit design. However there is no question that the HiK dielectric will reduce both leakage currents by an order of magnitude. Not surprisingly this has translated into dramatically lower power dissipation numbers on the Penryn. So until AMD can put its HiK dielectric gates into production, Intel will be King on the Quiescent Power Dissipation issue.