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

ASML unveils EUV light source advance that could yield 50% more chips by 2030

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 111 posts

Re: ASML unveils EUV light source advance that could yield 50% more chips by 2030

#31

Post by hinkley »

flowerthoughts wrote: post #30
atonse wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it was crazy when I first heard about it "wait what? they shoot it in mid-air?" and that was before I found out they did that like 30k times a second. But now 100k times a second apparently. Humans are amazing.

> We are going to spray expensive stuff in an extremely fine and precise line. Then we're going to shoot a laser at each droplet. > To make a better laser. > 100,000 times per second. < [AFK, buying shares.]

I have shares in one of their biggest customers, and one of their customer’s biggest customers.

We are quickly leaving the realm of dependent variables still looking anything like diversification.

Re: ASML unveils EUV light source advance that could yield 50% more chips by 2030

#32

Post by penguin_booze »

ahazred8ta wrote: post #6
throw0101a wrote: post #2

So how small are individual components (e.g., transistors) nowadays? Presumably there's a lower limit: once you're a few atoms across, it seems that you can't go any smaller (?).

Gates are about 30-50 nm wide, even though they're called '3nm' for marketing reasons.

Like free range chicken.

Re: ASML unveils EUV light source advance that could yield 50% more chips by 2030

#33

Post by kakacik »

penguin_booze wrote: post #32
ahazred8ta wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gates are about 30-50 nm wide, even though they're called '3nm' for marketing reasons.

Like free range chicken.

You only need to live in reasonable place for that phrase to have a proper meaning, across whole market from cheapest to most expensive.

Re: ASML unveils EUV light source advance that could yield 50% more chips by 2030

#34

Post by itopaloglu83 »

ranger_danger wrote: post #5
throw0101a wrote: post #2

So how small are individual components (e.g., transistors) nowadays? Presumably there's a lower limit: once you're a few atoms across, it seems that you can't go any smaller (?).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_nm_process

It’s going to be quite funny if they can go below 40nm in gate pitch size, because they’ll need to call it 0nm.

Re: ASML unveils EUV light source advance that could yield 50% more chips by 2030

#35

Post by dogma1138 »

itopaloglu83 wrote: post #34
ranger_danger wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_nm_process

It’s going to be quite funny if they can go below 40nm in gate pitch size, because they’ll need to call it 0nm.

They are moving to angstroms, hence 18A for example.

Re: ASML unveils EUV light source advance that could yield 50% more chips by 2030

#36

Post by lelandbatey »

hinkley wrote: post #22
atonse wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it was crazy when I first heard about it "wait what? they shoot it in mid-air?" and that was before I found out they did that like 30k times a second. But now 100k times a second apparently. Humans are amazing.

You have a machine that’s basically a clean room inside and one of the parts is essentially electrosputtering tin but then throwing all the tin away and using the EM pulse from the sputter to do work. Oh and can you build it so it can run hundreds or thousands of hours before being cleaned? Thanks byyyyyyyyeeeeee!

The inside of those machines are far, far cleaner than the inside of any clean room ever entered by a human. They have to be molecularly clean.

Re: ASML unveils EUV light source advance that could yield 50% more chips by 2030

#38

Post by b3orn »

lelandbatey wrote: post #36
hinkley wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a machine that’s basically a clean room inside and one of the parts is essentially electrosputtering tin but then throwing all the tin away and using the EM pulse from the sputter to do work. Oh and can you build it so it can run hundreds or thousands of hours before being cleaned? Thanks byyyyyyyyeeeeee!

The inside of those machines are far, far cleaner than the inside of any clean room ever entered by a human. They have to be molecularly clean.

Which isn't easy considering they explode tin droplets in the machine. I think that's the point the other commenter wanted to make.

Re: ASML unveils EUV light source advance that could yield 50% more chips by 2030

#39

Post by formerly_proven »

on_the_train wrote: post #28
seanalltogether wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing I didn't understand after watching that video was why you need such an exotic solution to produce EUV light. We can make lights no problem in the visible spectrum, we can make xray machines easily enough that every doctors office can afford one, what is it specifically about those wavelengths that are so tricky.

It really is the specific wavelength. Higher or lower is easier. But euv has tricky properties which make it feasible for Lithography (although just barely it you have a look at the optics) but hard to produce with high intensities.

Specifically, what makes x-rays easy to generate are these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characteristic_X-ray In essence, smashing electrons into atoms allows you to ionize the inner shell of an atom and when an electron drops down from an outer shell, the excess energy is shed as high-energy photons. This constrains the energy range of X-ray tubes ("smash electron into metal") to wavelengths well below 13.5nm.

(These emission lines are also what is being used in x-ray spectroscopy to identify elements)

Re: ASML unveils EUV light source advance that could yield 50% more chips by 2030

#40

Post by tromp »

The light power increase is even more impressive at 67%:

> The company's researchers have found a way to boost the power of the EUV light source to 1,000 watts from 600 watts now.

with more on the horizon:

> We see a reasonably clear path toward 1,500 watts, and no fundamental reason why we couldn't get to 2,000 watts.

Post reply on HN