51–60 of 132 posts
Samsung has a dishonorable marketing department. 3nm is not actually 3nm. I'm fed up... OLED is superior so they had to take the path of calling theirs QLED which is actually just an LCD screen with phosphors on top of a blue backlight (and it's nothing new).
I thought the Q stood for quantum dot, which they actually use? (Not that that makes them unique nowadays).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought the Q stood for quantum dot, which they actually use? (Not that that makes them unique nowadays).
Yeah but do you really think they didn't choose that acronym, with that upper case Q with no intention to make people think they were OLEDs/similar to OLEDS. QLED OLED
> process technology migration to 3- and 2-nanometer (nm) based on the company’s Gate-All-Around (GAA) transistor structure I believe GAA is the next gen tech for the node process. Samsung is the first foundry to do GAA w/3nm while TSMC is sticking w/FinFET for their 3nm. It'll be interesting to see how 3nm FinFET compare to 3nm GAA. https://www.anandtech.com/show/16041/where-are-my-gaafets-ts... edit: >After that, t…
> I believe GAA is the next gen tech for the node process. Samsung is the first foundry to do GAA w/3nm while TSMC is sticking w/FinFET for their 3nm. It'll be interesting to see how 3nm FinFET compare to 3nm GAA. Comparing Apples to Oranges, and doing doing a comparison on taste vs. size. The device may well be awesome, but first ICs using it not so. The biggest advancements in under 14nm were in metal, not so much…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>but it was in the past two decades and got particularly ridiculous beginning around "28nm" up to now. I wonder if that is some kind of cultural shift that is taking place that started around 2009, or if it's always been like this and I just never noticed. BMW model numbers used to more or less accurately reflect engine sizes, not anymore, it's just numbers now. 2G, 3G, 4G used to mean something, not anymore. I could…
Waaaaay back in the day, the Electro Motive Division (EMD) of General Motors make railroad locomotive. They had the GP-20 with 2000 horsepower, and the SD-24 with 2400 HP. Then General Electric entered the business with the U-25, having 2500 HP. EMD's next model was the GP-30, with (ahem) 2250 HP. This was in 1961. So, yeah. This is nothing new. Marketers gonna market.
Samsung has a dishonorable marketing department. 3nm is not actually 3nm. I'm fed up... OLED is superior so they had to take the path of calling theirs QLED which is actually just an LCD screen with phosphors on top of a blue backlight (and it's nothing new).
> I'm fed up Cool. I'm excited to get another Samsung phone. Suit yourself.
I can never remember what xnm means as it varies between companies. In this case, Samsung's 3nm = Intel's 7nm I am still waiting for a standard based on transistor density numbers!
It doesn’t relate to any measurement of feature size. It’s just a frustratingly meaningless marketing term.
There are a few comments saying that 3nm is a marketing term and that the transistors are actually larger - how is this allowed? Isn't it misleading and deceptive?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the best metric nowadays? Dhrystones/MIPS/FLOPS per MHz/Watt per square inch? As a complete outsider, millions of transistors per square inch sounds like a very intuitive metric of how small things are.
If we are just looking at the fabrication process, as opposed to CPU architecture, MTr/mm² – million transistors per a square millimetre. But transistor density can be variable depending on the type of circuit, so the standard calculation uses a weighted average of two different cell types – NAND2 and SFF (scan flip-flop) https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/mtr-mm%C2%B2
Whatever the ratio was, it seemed to be roughly consistent going back like 30 years, which surprised me.
So now I don't believe there actually has been a drift towards marketing and inaccuracy. And believe the details of what kind of cells is just excessive precision.
Samsung has a dishonorable marketing department. 3nm is not actually 3nm. I'm fed up... OLED is superior so they had to take the path of calling theirs QLED which is actually just an LCD screen with phosphors on top of a blue backlight (and it's nothing new).
I agree calling their display tech QLED is pretty shady, and clearly just intended to confuse people. But I'm glad their high end display tech is not OLED yet, because nobody seems to have solved burn in satisfactorily yet (if you play a lot of games or use them with a PC).