Very Embarrassing Question about nm's

[abeck_23]

Can someone please explain the importance and definition of the nanometres in a CPU? All I know is that smaller is better.

I know this is a dumb question, but I don't know the answer and want to know it (instead of pretending). That is why I come here, to get my answers solved. I am embarrassed and I know I am an idiot.

 

[pengwin]

Can someone please explain the importance and definition of the nanometres in a CPU? All I know is that smaller is better.

I know this is a dumb question, but I don't know the answer and want to know it (instead of pretending). That is why I come here, to get my answers solved. I am embarrassed and I know I am an idiot.

man if ppl would use google...

and no i wont answer ur question cu zill explain it weird then go offtopic

dont worry a nice guy will come buy in a few mins

 

[apache_lives]

nm is a size rating (nanometre - one millionth of a meter isnt it?), and intel every year or so scales transistors down (eg 90nm to 65nm) to pack more transistors into the same size chip, each time its scaled down it (should) lower heat output, power consumption, cheaper production (depending) and so on aswell as allowing higher clock speeds.

Size examples - A P2 core (250nm deschutes, no integrated cache even) is twice as big as a P3 (180nm coppermine, 256k cache) core and the coppermine has nearly twice the transistor count!

Heat and power examples - the 350nm P2 333mhz clamath core (2.8v) put out 40+w of heat, where as a P3 tualatin running at 1400mhz with 512k cache puts out a mere 27w of heat (130nm, 1.5v).

Intel and AMD name cores sometimes because of the nm sizes - both P2 cores are exactly the same BUT there 250nm and 350nm, named as deschutes and covington.

 

[corvetteguy]

i'm not really a "nice guy" but i'm pretty sure nm, have to do with how close the manufacturer can place the transistors together on the same piece of silicon, and therefore, how much information can be passed through and "processed" in the proccessor.

i think 8)

 

[Coelocanth]

Can someone please explain the importance and definition of the nanometres in a CPU? All I know is that smaller is better.

I know this is a dumb question, but I don't know the answer and want to know it (instead of pretending). That is why I come here, to get my answers solved. I am embarrassed and I know I am an idiot.

You're not an idiot. The only dumb questions are the ones that aren't asked. Don't worry about not knowing something and don't be upset if someone flames you for asking. For the most part, people that do that are those that have no self-esteem and little confidence. The only way they can feel better about themselves is to tear someone else down. Just ignore them.

Pengwin: sure, a google search might work, but sometimes you get too many hits to wade through and/or you may not understand the ones you get. There's no harm in asking a question.

 

[Sakaris]

It's not a stupid question, its just a term used to describe the size of the space between transistors on a processor. A nm (nanometer/nanometre depending on your regional spelling preference) is actually one billionth of a meter. Until recently this was measured in micrometers (when electronic components are concerned the term micron is typically used in place of micrometer), but it's a little more straightforward nowadays to refer to a technology as "90 nm" as opposed to "0.09 micron."

 

[apache_lives]

i thought it was the actual size of the transistors (which therefor makes a smaller efficent chip)?

 

[Facey]

You may find this interesting http://www.tweak3d.net/articles/howcpusaremade/

 

[ShortyNumber45]

It's not the actual size but it's the actual diameter of a transistors embedded inside a die.

 

[chuckshissle]

In cpu/chip smaller is better because the chip can have more transistors and there are millions of it in a single chip. So its possible to cram more core in a single die/chip, hence the dual core and multicore processor like quad core that are coming out soon. Smaller also means shorter so it means faster and also uses less power/voltage so it generates less heat and makes it more effecient.

 

[Guest]

nm = 10 to the -9

thats a thousanth of a milionth.

Just to make that clear.

 

[apache_lives]

i was reading some random hardware article and it said closer together so there you go, learn somethin new every day - its both smaller and tigher packed

 

[dvdpiddy]

hey peng nice sig where did you get it

 

[apache_lives]

dvdpiddy - your sig is gona cause some serious siht man, either that or anyone with an intel system wont listen to your advice LOL.

 

[pengwin]

dvdpiddy - your sig is gona cause some serious siht man, either that or anyone with an intel system wont listen to your advice LOL.

i go tna intel i agree with him, i hate my intel

i made my sig dvd

 

[dvdpiddy]

really nice man really nice

 

[pengwin]

ty

 

[joset]

Hello!

Mind this:
Ingenuous [from the Latin ingenuus: honest, freeborn], is someone who doesn't know he/she doesn't know;
Ignorant, is someone who knows he/she doesn't know;
Stupid, is someone who knows what an Ingenuous & an Ignorant are, but doesn't recognize himself/herself in neither, never.

Now, compare the above with this: a nanometre (nm) is a millionth of a milimetre (mm), about 100 000 times smaller than the diametre of an average human hair. The next step down, is the picometre (pm), about 1000 000 x smaller than the diametre of a human hair; then, the femtometre (fm), about 100 000 000 x smaller than the diametre of an human hair... and so on.

What were you before knowing all this?
What are you now that you know all this?
What will you be after knowing the previous answers?


Cheers!

 

[KMBaron]

Real simple. You don't need to know what nanometers means. Unless you plan on being a chip engineer.

 

[WBSpring]

Can someone please explain the importance and definition of the nanometres in a CPU? All I know is that smaller is better.

I know this is a dumb question, but I don't know the answer and want to know it (instead of pretending). That is why I come here, to get my answers solved. I am embarrassed and I know I am an idiot.

You may find this interesting http://www.tweak3d.net/articles/howcpusaremade/

abeck_23: If you read the article at the link posted by Facey, you will see a diagram of a transistor. The nm measurement for transistors refers to the "minimum feature size", which is generally (but not always) the width of the area labelled "gate".

As others have said, the smaller the feature size, the more transistors you can pack into a circuit of a fixed size.

Hope this clears some things up!

-WBSpring

 

[corvetteguy]

does anyone know the theoretical limit to how small it can get, i heard that 20nm is where the electrons can't be contained anymore, and begin to leak, thereby ending and performance gains

 

[spookz]

I'm not sure if this is right but here it goes. The smaller the nm, the less power leakage there is and also smaller waffers so more cpu on one waffer means more cost effective. Again I am not sure, don't quote me on it.

 

[mpjesse]

I don't think anyone' calling you an idiot, but there are better ways to get the answer you're looking for. Like pengwin suggested, try using google or wikipedia. You'll get more accurate and unbiased answers that way. (in my opinion anyways)

;-)

-mpjesse

 

[clue69less]

>does anyone know the theoretical limit to how small it can get, i heard >that 20nm is where the electrons can't be contained anymore, and begin >to leak, thereby ending and performance gains

I used to work in the dielectrics industry, but I'm no expert. If I remember correctly, 20nm was the approximate limit a few years ago when polymeric dielectrics were just begining to replace vapor-deposited SiO2. There is an effort to make nanoporous polymeric dielectrics work in order to achieve a significantly higher dielectric constant - meaning that microcircuits can be made smaller because if you use an insulator with a higher dielectric constant, then the conducting and semiconducting layers can be made thinner/narrower without excessive leakage or crosstalk.

Also: smaller means more transistors per unit area as was mentioned earlier but equally (or maybe even more) importantly, it means that the signal paths are shorter, which results in potentially higher processor speeds. This brings up the ultimate dilemma: cramming more circuits into smaller spaces leads to increased current density and that means more heat production. For sure, we think we're getting into the ballpark of a theoretical limit, but I'm not betting the farm that there won't be new tech developed to help get past what we perceive to be a limit right now. What I saw when working in nanoporous dielectrics was difficulty in achieving consistent porosity in the polymer. Not sure where that technology has gone since I left the biz. I sure don't miss it!

 

[endyen]

[No message]