Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators
Thanks to Anonymous,bruncher,niord,gvonge,Shelford, for Donating to support the site
IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 7383
- Joined: February 7th, 2017, 9:36 pm
- Has thanked: 10514 times
- Been thanked: 4660 times
IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
It's significant I think. But probably more so is the closing comment on the article.
And Intel's chief executive has announced a $20bn (£14.6bn) investment in two new plants in the US, telling the BBC that having 80% of the world chip supply in Asia is not a good idea.
AiY
It's significant I think. But probably more so is the closing comment on the article.
And Intel's chief executive has announced a $20bn (£14.6bn) investment in two new plants in the US, telling the BBC that having 80% of the world chip supply in Asia is not a good idea.
AiY
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: December 9th, 2016, 6:44 am
- Has thanked: 237 times
- Been thanked: 316 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more performance with less energy
In a science thread "power", "energy", ... should be treated as terms of art and used carefully.
-
- 2 Lemon pips
- Posts: 237
- Joined: January 28th, 2017, 11:58 am
- Has thanked: 319 times
- Been thanked: 87 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
At the same time this news both changes everything and changes nothing
-
- Lemon Slice
- Posts: 924
- Joined: February 5th, 2021, 4:45 pm
- Has thanked: 688 times
- Been thanked: 316 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
An article here about the hoops various manufacturers are jumping through to acheive sub-5 nm devices.
https://semiengineering.com/new-transistor-structures-at-3nm-2nm/
https://semiengineering.com/new-transistor-structures-at-3nm-2nm/
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 7335
- Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
- Has thanked: 1703 times
- Been thanked: 3913 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more performance with less energy
9873210 wrote:In a science thread "power", "energy", ... should be treated as terms of art and used carefully.
I've given up moaning about sloppy use of dimensions. I regularly see "amps per hour", "kiloWatts per day" and similar nonsense written by people who really ought to know better. Using the terms "power" and "energy" as synonyms also drives me demented, power being the rate at which energy is being used (loosely!)
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
For other silicon geeks out there - there is more information in the following IBM blog post.
https://www.ibm.com/blogs/research/2021/05/2-nm-chip/
Still very little information on leakage and variance, Personally I would like to see some figures.
https://www.ibm.com/blogs/research/2021/05/2-nm-chip/
Still very little information on leakage and variance, Personally I would like to see some figures.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4131
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:24 am
- Has thanked: 3284 times
- Been thanked: 2869 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
When I started out in the semiconductor industry in the 1970s, were were talking about 10 micron (10,000nm) features on 2 or 3 inch wafers. Clock speeds of a MegaHertz or two. And now here we are with 2nm, 12 inch wafers and GigaHertz clock speeds. I worked in semiconductors for 35 years, but I still find the state of current technology utterly boggling.
--kiloran
--kiloran
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
kiloran wrote:When I started out in the semiconductor industry in the 1970s, were were talking about 10 micron (10,000nm) features on 2 or 3 inch wafers. Clock speeds of a MegaHertz or two. And now here we are with 2nm, 12 inch wafers and GigaHertz clock speeds. I worked in semiconductors for 35 years, but I still find the state of current technology utterly boggling.
--kiloran
Completely agree, I'm 35+ years in the industry and still consult for a few days a week (following early retirement that didn't quite go to plan). The idea that transistors less than 10 silicon atoms wide are considered to be viable is astonishing. The idea that you can attempt accurately model the operation of these devices is even more unbelievable.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: December 9th, 2016, 6:44 am
- Has thanked: 237 times
- Been thanked: 316 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
25 to 20 years ago I was using 68HC11 micro controllers. For development we used the EEPROM version, which had a window so you could see the die. We had three generations of these in use. On the oldest the die filled the window, about 1cm across. The newest (still ancient by todays standard) was about 2mm across, a small dot in the middle of the window.
We also found a few bugs in our circuit boards. They did not work at the temperature extremes with the newer chips. We traced these to missing pull-up resistors. On the older, larger chips the intrinsic pull-ups could sink enough current to hide our design errors; the smaller chips were not so forgiving.
We also found a few bugs in our circuit boards. They did not work at the temperature extremes with the newer chips. We traced these to missing pull-up resistors. On the older, larger chips the intrinsic pull-ups could sink enough current to hide our design errors; the smaller chips were not so forgiving.
Last edited by 9873210 on May 9th, 2021, 2:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2591
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
- Has thanked: 1120 times
- Been thanked: 1181 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
9873210 wrote:For development we used the EEPROM version, which had a window so you could see the die.
Small technical point, they would be EPROM (one E).
UV light (short wavelength that can give you skin cancer and cataracts) was used to erase them. There are a few devices still available that use EPROM such as some of the PIC microcontrollers (The ones with a C in their names) but they do not have windows and are, therefore, not eraseable. Most PICs available now use FLASH which can be reprogrammed many times, in most cases, using a cheap Chinese programmer off eBay.
Julian F. G. W.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: December 9th, 2016, 6:44 am
- Has thanked: 237 times
- Been thanked: 316 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
jfgw wrote:9873210 wrote:For development we used the EEPROM version, which had a window so you could see the die.
Small technical point, they would be EPROM (one E).
UV light (short wavelength that can give you skin cancer and cataracts) was used to erase them. There are a few devices still available that use EPROM such as some of the PIC microcontrollers (The ones with a C in their names) but they do not have windows and are, therefore, not eraseable. Most PICs available now use FLASH which can be reprogrammed many times, in most cases, using a cheap Chinese programmer off eBay.
Julian F. G. W.
Yes one E, the details get foggy after 20 years.
The HC11 family pulled the trick you mention with the PIC. The PROM version (one time programable) we used for production were the same die, but packaged without the quartz window so they could not be erased. Rumor had it they could be erased with soft x-rays which would go through the ceramic packaging, but we never got that desperate.
The FLASH chips I've used have all be programmed in circuit without any off board programmer. That saves the cost of a socket, which is sometimes more expensive than the chip.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2591
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
- Has thanked: 1120 times
- Been thanked: 1181 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
9873210 wrote:The PROM version (one time programable) we used for production were the same die, but packaged without the quartz window so they could not be erased. Rumor had it they could be erased with soft x-rays which would go through the ceramic packaging, but we never got that desperate.
I had not heard of that but it makes sense since X-rays are higher energy than UV. I had read that if an EPROM didn't have a foil sticker over the window and someone photographed it using a flash gun, the data could be corrupted.
Julian F. G. W.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2496
- Joined: November 7th, 2016, 2:40 pm
- Has thanked: 84 times
- Been thanked: 830 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
Intel is struggling to keep third or fourth ranking, never mind the #1 it was only a few years back. It blew things when it failed to mass-produce 10nm chips and its 7nm ones are a year or so away from production.
Taiwanese TSMC who make the new chips for Apple that replace Intel’s have also taken the unusual step of offering fabrication facilities to other chip designers, something Intel has now said it will also do at its planned hugely-expensive fabrication factories in Arizona. Intel has no real choice: it is either 'bet the company' or die.
So huge congrats to IBM for making a 2nm chip although there is a long long way – at least five years - from a lab chip to mass production. (IBM also once 'bet the company' with System 360: totally new hardware and operating system that at a stroke obsoleted its current range. A huge $$risk - but they won.)
Chip fabrication is currently driven by TSMC, US-based Global Foundries and Samsung, with Chinese SMIC some way behind (one reason perhaps why China wants Taiwan ‘back’!)
Taiwanese TSMC who make the new chips for Apple that replace Intel’s have also taken the unusual step of offering fabrication facilities to other chip designers, something Intel has now said it will also do at its planned hugely-expensive fabrication factories in Arizona. Intel has no real choice: it is either 'bet the company' or die.
So huge congrats to IBM for making a 2nm chip although there is a long long way – at least five years - from a lab chip to mass production. (IBM also once 'bet the company' with System 360: totally new hardware and operating system that at a stroke obsoleted its current range. A huge $$risk - but they won.)
Chip fabrication is currently driven by TSMC, US-based Global Foundries and Samsung, with Chinese SMIC some way behind (one reason perhaps why China wants Taiwan ‘back’!)
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 10928
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
- Has thanked: 1490 times
- Been thanked: 3032 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
AsleepInYorkshire wrote:It's significant I think. But probably more so is the closing comment on the article.
And Intel's chief executive has announced a $20bn (£14.6bn) investment in two new plants in the US, telling the BBC that having 80% of the world chip supply in Asia is not a good idea.
AiY
Wouldn't that just be a bit of corporate pique about being marginalised in this century's growth areas - particularly the last decade - by the ARM ecosystem?
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1269
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:38 pm
- Has thanked: 149 times
- Been thanked: 400 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
UncleEbenezer wrote:AsleepInYorkshire wrote:It's significant I think. But probably more so is the closing comment on the article.
And Intel's chief executive has announced a $20bn (£14.6bn) investment in two new plants in the US, telling the BBC that having 80% of the world chip supply in Asia is not a good idea.
AiY
Wouldn't that just be a bit of corporate pique about being marginalised in this century's growth areas - particularly the last decade - by the ARM ecosystem?
It's not the ARM ecosystem on it's own, it's ARM in combination with the TSMC 5nm process at least in Apple's case.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/10/215 ... -processor
AMD are also eating Intel's lunch with TSMC's fabrication technology plus they have x86/x64 compatablility.
Disclosure, I hold TSMC and AMD shares.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 12636
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
- Been thanked: 2609 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more performance with less energy
Mike4 wrote:9873210 wrote:In a science thread "power", "energy", ... should be treated as terms of art and used carefully.
I've given up moaning about sloppy use of dimensions. I regularly see "amps per hour", "kiloWatts per day" and similar nonsense written by people who really ought to know better. Using the terms "power" and "energy" as synonyms also drives me demented, power being the rate at which energy is being used (loosely!)
Not sure I see the problem here (unless quotation marks should have been used) as it is surely, in a sense, a play on words (possibly unintentionally):
"It is also more energy efficient - using 75% less energy to match current performance, IBM said."
"power" = Computational 'power' (performance)
"energy" = Electrical energy used
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3161
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:12 am
- Has thanked: 3716 times
- Been thanked: 1533 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
Sorcery wrote:UncleEbenezer wrote:AsleepInYorkshire wrote:It's significant I think. But probably more so is the closing comment on the article.
And Intel's chief executive has announced a $20bn (£14.6bn) investment in two new plants in the US, telling the BBC that having 80% of the world chip supply in Asia is not a good idea.
AiY
Wouldn't that just be a bit of corporate pique about being marginalised in this century's growth areas - particularly the last decade - by the ARM ecosystem?
It's not the ARM ecosystem on it's own, it's ARM in combination with the TSMC 5nm process at least in Apple's case.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/10/215 ... -processor
AMD are also eating Intel's lunch with TSMC's fabrication technology plus they have x86/x64 compatablility.
Disclosure, I hold TSMC and AMD shares.
I'd never heard about TSMC 5nm process until I looked it up after reading your post. It amazes me that chip manufactures are able to continue to make such improvements. Long may Moore's law continue. My son is much more in the know about computer chips than me and he says that in the PC market AMD have a significantly better CPU line-up v Intel. The Apple M1 chip looks pretty outstanding.
RC
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1269
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:38 pm
- Has thanked: 149 times
- Been thanked: 400 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more power with less energy
ReformedCharacter wrote:Sorcery wrote:UncleEbenezer wrote:Wouldn't that just be a bit of corporate pique about being marginalised in this century's growth areas - particularly the last decade - by the ARM ecosystem?
It's not the ARM ecosystem on it's own, it's ARM in combination with the TSMC 5nm process at least in Apple's case.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/10/215 ... -processor
AMD are also eating Intel's lunch with TSMC's fabrication technology plus they have x86/x64 compatablility.
Disclosure, I hold TSMC and AMD shares.
I'd never heard about TSMC 5nm process until I looked it up after reading your post. It amazes me that chip manufactures are able to continue to make such improvements. Long may Moore's law continue. My son is much more in the know about computer chips than me and he says that in the PC market AMD have a significantly better CPU line-up v Intel. The Apple M1 chip looks pretty outstanding.
RC
TSMC claim to have 3nm ready, at least for an ARM variant that I think they used as a test of principle. Apple are fairly certain to use it in their next product iteration. https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Tech/S ... -chip-tech
Not sure about Intel using it in that article, TSMC are hardly likely to tell Intel their secrets unless protected by patent. It's possible Intel will source chips from TSMC, since Intel seem to have not kept up with TSMC.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: December 9th, 2016, 6:44 am
- Has thanked: 237 times
- Been thanked: 316 times
Re: IBM 2nm chip breakthrough claims more performance with less energy
XFool wrote:Mike4 wrote:9873210 wrote:In a science thread "power", "energy", ... should be treated as terms of art and used carefully.
I've given up moaning about sloppy use of dimensions. I regularly see "amps per hour", "kiloWatts per day" and similar nonsense written by people who really ought to know better. Using the terms "power" and "energy" as synonyms also drives me demented, power being the rate at which energy is being used (loosely!)
Not sure I see the problem here (unless quotation marks should have been used) as it is surely, in a sense, a play on words (possibly unintentionally):
"It is also more energy efficient - using 75% less energy to match current performance, IBM said."
"power" = Computational 'power' (performance)
"energy" = Electrical energy used
There is always a problem with bad puns.
Even in terms of "computational power" the units are wrong. Computer power is measured per unit time, e.g. in "Floating Point Operations Per Second", not in "Floating Point Operations". The easiest way to get more power for less energy is get a powerful CPU and turn it off, which is why I spent several months of my life getting sleep mode to work.
"More calculations for less energy" would be correct.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests