Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 111 posts

Re: TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

#81

Post by CamperBob2 »

baybal2 wrote: post #79
awalton wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not correct at all. Most chips made today are created with multipatterning processes using 193nm lasers and optical masks, known in the field as "Deep Ultraviolet Lithography" (DUV(L)). The industry is pushing towards replacing DUV (which has been pushed to its extremes) with "Extreme Ultraviolet Lithography" (EUV(L)), which uses a 13.5 nm light source (just watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yTARacBxHI -…

>- it's both fascinating and terrifying the trouble that EUV brings It is only peanuts in comparison to what is to come. The "nuclear option" on the table is to build a whole fab around a freaking synchrotron light source.

I watched the video recommended by awalton, and it's definitely as insane as he says it is. I can't believe a synchrotron would be that much more expensive, considering that a single storage ring can have an arbitrary number of output ports.

Re: TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

#82

Post by hardwaresofton »

gok wrote: post #77
hardwaresofton wrote: post #53

So one of the most important questions when producing >10nm process is yield . In the article I can't really find yield numbers, and the only thing they mention is the SRAM chips getting "consistent double digits" -- so pessimistically consistently 10% yield. That's not "good" yield. Also, IIRC SRAMs are just about the simplest blocks you can make, which means they're the simplest lithography wise. Simple blocks to m…

I think you mean <10 nm?

Good catch, I definitely meant to write 10nm too, basically it always applies. Doesn't matter if you can make Xnm process if it's not mass producable (unless your market is specialty chips of course)

Re: TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

#83

Post by agumonkey »

rb808 wrote: post #4

Wow. I still remember being amazed when micron widths came out. 7nm is close to a miracle. Semiconductor manufacturing improvements like this really have enabled the whole tech world improvements of the last few decades.

This talk host said he doesn't believe 5nm will crack (unless major electronics breakthrough)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpgV6rCn5-g&t=1136s

Re: TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

#84

Post by JoachimS »

awalton wrote: post #65
CamperBob2 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always assumed that "XX nm" doesn't represent the geometry of any particular feature of the end product, but something related to the wavelength of the radiation used for the imaging process. Maybe it corresponds to the principle emission line of the light source (synchrotron?) In spectral terms, 7 nm is near the border between hard UV radiation and soft X-rays.

This is not correct at all. Most chips made today are created with multipatterning processes using 193nm lasers and optical masks, known in the field as "Deep Ultraviolet Lithography" (DUV(L)). The industry is pushing towards replacing DUV (which has been pushed to its extremes) with "Extreme Ultraviolet Lithography" (EUV(L)), which uses a 13.5 nm light source (just watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yTARacBxHI -…

"but we've made a science out of it"

Not just science, but working, high volume, commercially viable production processes. The science itself is extremely impressive, but then adding commercial requirements and pull it off. Over and over again.

Re: TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

#85

Post by JoachimS »

awalton wrote: post #65
CamperBob2 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always assumed that "XX nm" doesn't represent the geometry of any particular feature of the end product, but something related to the wavelength of the radiation used for the imaging process. Maybe it corresponds to the principle emission line of the light source (synchrotron?) In spectral terms, 7 nm is near the border between hard UV radiation and soft X-rays.

This is not correct at all. Most chips made today are created with multipatterning processes using 193nm lasers and optical masks, known in the field as "Deep Ultraviolet Lithography" (DUV(L)). The industry is pushing towards replacing DUV (which has been pushed to its extremes) with "Extreme Ultraviolet Lithography" (EUV(L)), which uses a 13.5 nm light source (just watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yTARacBxHI -…

Great movie. Those machines are monsters. A 2m high machine that sits inside the ASML machine. And is fed laser light from something like a shipping container in the basement.

Re: TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

#86

Post by JoachimS »

awalton wrote: post #65
CamperBob2 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always assumed that "XX nm" doesn't represent the geometry of any particular feature of the end product, but something related to the wavelength of the radiation used for the imaging process. Maybe it corresponds to the principle emission line of the light source (synchrotron?) In spectral terms, 7 nm is near the border between hard UV radiation and soft X-rays.

This is not correct at all. Most chips made today are created with multipatterning processes using 193nm lasers and optical masks, known in the field as "Deep Ultraviolet Lithography" (DUV(L)). The industry is pushing towards replacing DUV (which has been pushed to its extremes) with "Extreme Ultraviolet Lithography" (EUV(L)), which uses a 13.5 nm light source (just watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yTARacBxHI -…

Imaging presenting the idea for that light source. "How about letting droplets of molten tin fall through a vacuum and then blast it with CO2 lasers."

BTW: The light must be blinking, right? In time with the frequency of the droplets.

Re: TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

#87

Post by kingosticks »

awalton wrote: post #78
CamperBob2 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, what does determine the "marketing" nomenclature for a given process node, if not a specific feature size or wavelength? I find it impossible to believe that some obscure semiconductor industry people get together in a hidden smoke-and-particulate-matter-free room, come up with a completely-random number, and name their process after it.

It used to be a specific feature size: the length of the gate. But, even as the wheels came off of that pretty quickly, the convention stayed pretty simple and familiar: each process node halves the size of the one before it - you can print double the number of transistors at the smaller process node. To make the math work out, that means each process node "name" is sqrt(1/2) ~= 0.7x smaller than the last, which give…

Who exactly would be responding to these alarm bells?

If I'm making a chip I want to use the node that best fits my product. Might not even be the latest one. But if they offer me 2x the memory destiny, 1.6x the logic density all at the same/lower power - I'll take it! Sure, the tracks are huge and I need a huge tall stack-up but that's not really my problem. I really don't care what marketing speak they use to refer to it. I have zero interest how long the gate is, I care about what chip I can make with this.

And Intel can do what they want. Their fab offering is very uncompetitive.

Re: TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

#88

Post by ksec »

hardwaresofton wrote: post #53

So one of the most important questions when producing >10nm process is yield . In the article I can't really find yield numbers, and the only thing they mention is the SRAM chips getting "consistent double digits" -- so pessimistically consistently 10% yield. That's not "good" yield. Also, IIRC SRAMs are just about the simplest blocks you can make, which means they're the simplest lithography wise. Simple blocks to m…

Does it matter though? What matter is cost, because that is the results of yield and direct relate to how many customers will use 7nm. Yield is not a constant and changes / improves over time.

60% Chance Apple will have a new iPad Pro in WWDC using 7nm, and 90% Chance Apple will use 7nm in their next iPhone.

Whatever the yield is, it is good enough for ~200M iPhone next year and the cost is acceptable for close to 50 customers in the next few months. And assuming Apple is going to go 7nm ( I don't see why not ), this volume will likely be more than double Intel shipping their 10nm in the next 12 months.

Re: TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

#89

Post by tim333 »

tux3 wrote: post #15
jannes wrote: post #5

Did any chip vendor announce 7nm chips yet? Or is this still secret?

AMD's Zen2, which should come in or around 2019, will be on GloFo's 7nm. I believe TSMC will use 7nm for some memory and mobile applications. As for Intel their largely accepted equivalent to other foundries' 7nm is their 10nm, which is introduced in Cannon Lake/Ice Lake.

Also "Apple's 'A12' chip reportedly in production using 7nm"... "destined for 2018 iPhone models."

Re: TSMC Kicks Off Volume Production of 7nm Chips

#90

Post by ekr »

This makes me hope that maybe all those chipmakers will finally move on from that extremely long-lived 28nm node. It has been heavily used since 2011-2012 and even companies like Qualcomm have been using it as recently as last year in the lower-end range of products. Companies like Allwinner, Rockchip, Amlogic have yet to release a single chip on newer nodes.

What this means is that the 28nm node has been the cheapest now for 7 years running. Usually, when new nodes came up, the cost per transistor initially was lower, while the yields are slowly improving. But after ~1-2 years, the new node was always more cost-effective then older nodes, per-transistor.

This wasn't the case with the 28nm, which stuck around for 7 whole years, and still seems to be the most cost-effective. But surely, now with 7nm available that won't be the case for much longer. Good riddance.

Post reply on HN