I intend this to be the "question and answer thread," for JumpingJack's IBM, Intel and AMD comparison thread: http://forumz.tomshardware.com/har [...] 82836.html . Post your questions here about their techniques. We will try to answer your questions to the best of our ability.
I intend this to be the "question and answer thread," for JumpingJack's IBM, Intel and AMD comparison thread: http://forumz.tomshardware.com/har [...] 82836.html . Post your questions here about their manufacturing techniques. We will try to answer your questions to the best of our ability.
When I have question, I ask Google.. No need for another thread about AMD and Intel s[b][/b]hit...
I intend this to be the "question and answer thread," for JumpingJack's IBM, Intel and AMD comparison thread: http://forumz.tomshardware.com/har [...] 82836.html . Post your questions here about their manufacturing techniques. We will try to answer your questions to the best of our ability.
When I have question, I ask Google.. No need for another thread about AMD and Intel s[b][/b]hit... No wonder this thread isn't going anywhere, the public don't like it Joset! It burns . Oh well.
my 1st question: what is the possible limit, in terms of nm. we all know by quantum physics u cannot scale down forever.
2nd question: what progress do we have in optical computing so far?
i don't think u need to post all those academic details. some people won't face the fact even it is in front of them. they will turn back and say " oh, i didn't see".
here are some simple facts up to this day:
intel lead in MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY to the rest of the world by 9-12 months. larger wafer, better yield(even under same 90nm) and smaller gate. that should give intel some advantage in price but too bad we didn't see that because intel was too greedy.
amd lead in cpu design. amd's 64bit solution is WAY better than intel's. as for 32bit computing, FX60 is still the fastest one!
i think the future is not belong to them, neither intel nor amd. it will belong to some smaller company whoever 1st get optical computer into market. it will be at least 100 faster.
thanks for the answer.
i only remember tiny part of solid state physics i learned 20 years ago. but mostly just names, cannot remember those equation at all.
I hate Dirac symbol. i almost failed in quantum mechanics.
lol
ah oh. it meant to reply Jack, not endyen. sorry 4 that.
I knew that, and I'm sure Jack did as well. No problem.
It is nice that you included the correction though. We could use more manners around here sometimes.
(not always though. If you are a corporate fanboy, dont expect me to be polite, the only fanboy I like are performance or price/performance)
Either It's IBM (the people wo Invented the Computer itself) or it might be the (Peek'a'boo) company VIA
I'd be REALLY surprised if VIA made it
Quote :
Quantum Mechanical Tunneling
Interesting....if you have any links (specially Quantum Mechanical Tunneling for Dummies) it would be nice if you posted it (or at least pm me with that )
NOW: Check back and I will give a less mathematical, less abstract explanation of the phenomena after I have had some coffee, kissed the wife, and watched some news. ....
Jack
Ty jack, BTW, do you know what is total pupm4g3?
Coffee + Red Bull + Coke + Lotsa sugar (after 8 big mugs of coffee or so in 3-4 hours)
I drank that broth of 3vil to complete a research project (very ambitious indeed, 25 measured spots, about 10 parameters, measured for two hours with 1 minute gaps, the analysis of that huge amount of data was made by only 3 people in a weekend + 2 additional days of WORTHLESS 3dmodelling a "1:1" model of 20+ blocks with every building in a P-I 233mhz 64Mb EDOSIMM...), man, lemme tellya, pure power, like:
:x 8) 8O
Use it only when is absolutely necessary
If someone could make an electronic equivalent, 20Thz speeds would seem like 20Mhz right now xD
Well, I read the links and more or less got the idea (except for shroedinger...) but now I "understand"
That's part of the Unified Field Theory, try to relate gravity, electromagnetism, nuclear forces, newtonian physics and quantum physics into one giant block of nifty things, related one with another
The problem is, as you said, that stuff behaves differently at different scales, the most obvious example is if the electric force that tries to break away an atom's core is greater than the gravitational force that attracts them, how is it possible that the atom stays stable instead of collapsing? The answer: Quantum Chromodynamics, in which the "color charges" act in the phemtometer (¿?) scale and the quarks that make a proton are attracted to each other with such an intensity that it counters the repulsive electric force between protons (bout 30x proton-proton gravity pull)
Another interesting phenomena is time "expansion" the problem is that the object necessary to measure that would be so big that it coudn't achieve a speed close enough to lightspeed to experience it
Now as Intel has introduced its 45nm chip, what are the main differences as compared with 65nm chip, as they've increased the numbers of transistors... > 1B wot are the real inner changes they've made to the 45 nm chip?
Now as Intel has introduced its 45nm chip, what are the main differences as compared with 65nm chip, as they've increased the numbers of transistors... > 1B wot are the real inner changes they've made to the 45 nm chip?
45 nm technology is hard to call right now. Let's take details of Intel's current 65 nm technology then speculate on the 45 nm technology. The 65 nm technology has some interesting features that are second generation from the 90 nm technology. Single layer stress liner, NiSi, embedded SiGe stressor, 1.2 nm gate thickness.
In 45 nm, Intel has been extraordinarily hush hush other than to demonstrate functional SRAM, and specify SRAM bit-cell size, we do not know much about what is going into it. You can bet that SiGe is going to be in it's 3rd generation, stress liner will likely not be a factor after 65 nm as this stress methodology will run out of steam. There has been some hubbub about fully silicided gate electrode (FUSI)
This is needed to get better gate electrode properties, the current poly gate electrode used by both Intel and AMD will not be feasable at the 45 nm node.
Now the advantage from going to 90 nm to 65 nm in the industry is driven more by size than by performance. The performance curve is flattening out using conventional CMOS techniques, however, looking at the FUSI data the 65 nm to 45 nm transition may actually see a leap to 5, 6 or even 10 GHz transistors -- this would be cool ....
Jack
SOI rules all Intel is stupid for waiting till 0.032u before useing it.
SOI rules all Intel is stupid for waiting till 0.032u before useing it.
Well, I doubt they're stupid at all.
Anyway, this Professor Krishna Saraswat (from Stanford University) has a wonderful collection of slide presentations, in a non-exhaustive, non-purely technical fashion on techniques, materials, processes, you name it, which I particularly like. Here's one regarding not-so-futuristic approaches to computing processes:
http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee31 [...] evices.pdf
As a side note, both Intel & IBM are more buried in these papers than the oxide itself...
.
. Oh well.
)
