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

Intel Reinvents Transistors Using New 3-D Structure

newsroom.intel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 104 posts

Re: Intel Reinvents Transistors Using New 3-D Structure

#91

Post by jimmywanger »

highfreq wrote: post #52
daeken wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're closer together, but the distance traveled in total is the same. Imagine the transistors are pieces of paper, and you're drawing a line over them. If the paper is flat, then you're drawing a line of distance n , and the points are n apart. If you fold the ends of the paper together, then the points are 0 units apart (or near enough to make no matter), but that line still has a distance of n .

The previous commenter wasn't talking about this transistor 3d feature, but about stacked transistors. Just like a city full or high-rise buildings can pack a lot more people in per square mile, a stacked transistor IC could pack a lot more transistors per square mm.

The only reason we haven't had stacked transistors now is because of trace density/heat dissipation.

We need pin outs and thermal conductivity - stacking layers of transistors is bad for both.

Re: Intel Reinvents Transistors Using New 3-D Structure

#92

Post by vondur »

nightlifelover wrote: post #66
vondur wrote: post #29

I often wonder at the incredibly small size of these chips (22nm) if the have to worry about relativistic effects of electrons "jumping".

The quantum tunneling effect [1] is what you are referring to, right? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling

Yes, sorry, been a while since I took P-chem.

Re: Intel Reinvents Transistors Using New 3-D Structure

#93

Post by 6ren »

ajross wrote: post #23
stephenjudkins wrote: post #14

From what I've heard, using 50% as much power for the same performance as the previous generation still will not be sufficient to bring Intel's Atom performance/energy consumption ratio to that offered by ARM chips. However, it's a huge leap in the right direction. Add better-designed power-saving features on the next generation of Atom chips, and future process shrinkages, and it's easy to see ARM's lead getting chi…

This is orthogonal. An ARM Cortex (or GPU, or whatever) on this process would see similar gains. It's also worth pointing out that current Atoms in the market are still 45nm parts, not even 32nm. Intel, for obvious reasons, tends to prioritize production of high-margin desktop and server CPUs over low-margin embedded parts. Really, this announcement isn't about ARM-based vs. Intel-based SoC designs. I think it's clea…

> An ARM Cortex (or GPU, or whatever) on this process would see similar gains.

...provided Intel grants the IP, know-how and equipment to its rival.

> dominance of high end digital logic fabrication

Disruptions typically begin at the low-end, with the disrupted incumbent earning great margins at the high-end - just before they get killed. Smartphones are the low-end. ARM is probably already too well established there for Intel to win it (with popular machines, OSs and applications dependent on ARM).

The danger to Intel is that as ARM improves in performance, it brings other benefits with it (eg. low power consumption; configurability), that are also valuable in high-end logic. Once ARM is performant enough, those server-farms could switch, to solve their heating/power problems.

But it's interesting that Intel hasn't made the low-end a priority, not applying their best process to it; maybe they have a reason to think they're safe.

Re: Intel Reinvents Transistors Using New 3-D Structure

#95

Post by pjscott »

acgourley wrote: post #84

"Moore's Law" is mentioned 14 times.

I predict that, two years from now, it will be mentioned 28 times. And so on, doubling every two years. I call this trend "Moore's Law," because all such trends are eventually mislabeled as Moore's Law.

Re: Intel Reinvents Transistors Using New 3-D Structure

#96

Post by schmittz »

Although not the link for this story, the fact that this story broke in the NYT (not that surprising), with an explanation to attempt transistor design and functionality (incredibly surprising) is really uplifting. A good piece of purely anecdotal evidence against those who claim America is in perpetual intellectual decline. The general populace IS interested enough to try to understand complex ideas.

Re: Intel Reinvents Transistors Using New 3-D Structure

#97

Post by eru »

sliverstorm wrote: post #74
svjunkie wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. It's all magic to me but it seems like, if this breakthrough can keep Moore's Law chugging, it's worth a pretty penny. I'm surprised their stock isn't up more today.

The funny thing about silicon is a breakthrough is only worth anything if it doesn't cost practically anything! (on a per-chip basis)

Yes, and that's already included in Moore's law, which explicitly talks about costs per transistor.

Re: Intel Reinvents Transistors Using New 3-D Structure

#98

Post by gjm11 »

highfreq wrote: post #46
daeken wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having transistors closer together can also help overcome speed-of-light delay. This can be important in caches. But in this case, while they take up less space, the distance is the same -- they're simply traveling up and over, rather than just over. Unless I'm missing something here.

He was just referring to packing more transistors in a given area. The theory is that the far transistors of SRAM cache are closer than they would be at a lower density, and that difference might make a performance difference. I'm not sure what the electrical propagation speed is in modern ICs, but let's assume its about 1mm per pico-second (3 times that of vacuum). So for each mm we move our cache elements closer we…

> let's assume it's about 1mm per pico-second (3 times that of vacuum).

If Intel had found a way of making signals propagate three times faster than the speed of light in vacuum, everyone would be too busy rewriting the laws of physics to take notice of their transistor technology improvements.

A 3mm path-length difference would be more like 10ps; 20ps for a 2x3mm round trip.

(But I bet Intel take a lot of trouble to reduce those distances. There probably isn't anything that has to happen in a single cycle that involves 6mm-worth of propagation delays.)

Re: Intel Reinvents Transistors Using New 3-D Structure

#100

Post by ephemient »

thebandrews wrote: post #90
sliverstorm wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The risk would be once Intel is the world's source of ARM CPU's, suddenly ARM's biggest competitor has a chokehold on the market's access to their silicon. It would basically come down to whether Intel chose to embrace ARM, or tried to use the new position to quietly strangle it.

Intel did ARM a while back and got out. Not sure what kind of license they still have.

Wikipedia says "Intel still holds an ARM license even after the sale of XScale." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XScale

I don't know if it's true five years later now, though.

Post reply on HN