DDR3 Memory Scaling: Intel's Core 2 Quad Examined
This is our third RAM scaling story in a series that will conclude next week. In this piece, we're comparing a number of different DDR3 memory speeds using both tight and relaxed timings. Which memory setting is best for your Core 2 Quad setup? Read More
-
Core i7 Memory Scaling: From DDR3-800 to DDR3-1600
Do you want a quick Core i7 system, but don’t feel confident sticking to Intel's spec and using the DDR3-1066 memory supported by the processor? We benchmark the most relevant memory speed and timing combinations to check the benefit of going faster. Read More
-
Life At 2 GT/s: 6 GB DDR3-2000 Memory Kits Compared
Memory vendors put a lot of effort into drumming up excitement over high-end memory kits, but many of those products turn out to be vaporware. We test six DDR3-2000 kits that enthusiasts can actually buy today, and push them as far as they'll go. Read More
All performance charts
Partners
The Games selection
violent :
Friday the 24th
Exterminate Santa Claus's elves. Use the arrows to move, S to grab the elves, and A or W to attack them with your sword.
|
violent :
Interactive Buddy
Unwind on your interactive buddy: Do anything you want to him, it will earn you money, and you can buy other stuff to torture him with.
|
Sponsored links
AMD First to 22 Nm, Challenges Intel
Next news- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (37) |
- Share
Yorktown Heights (NY) - IBM and its chip development partners, including AMD, made a stunning announcement today, apparently beating Intel in the successful production of the first functional 22 nm SRAM cell. 22 nm processors are still three years out in the future, but IBM’s news is a good sign that chip manufacturer will be able to easily scale to this new level by the end of 2011. It appears that, for the first time in several decades, Intel may have to put some extra time into its research and development efforts to make sure it can keep its manufacturing lead at 22 nm and beyond.
SRAM chips are typically the first semiconductor devices to test a new manufacturing process as a precursor to actual microprocessors. The devices developed and manufactured by AMD, Freescale, IBM STMicroelectronics, Toshiba and the College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering (CNSE) were built in a traditional six-transistor design on a 300 mm wafer and had a memory cell size of just 0.1 μm2, which compares to Intel’s 45 nm SRAM cell size (the test chip that was used for today’s 45 nm processors) of 0.346 μm2.
A 22 nm chip is two generations out in the future and AMD even has to catch up with Intel’s 45 nm. Intel presented the first 32 nm SRAM cell wafer in September of last year and in fact is not expected to show 22 nm SRAM cells for at least another year, while first 32 nm CPU prototypes could be shown at IDF this week.
IBM said that it is on track with its 32 nm process and promises that it will use a "leading 32 nm high-K metal gate technology that no other company or consortium can match." IBM did not provide further details to substantiate this claim, however, Intel has been using its high-K metal gate technology since the introduction of the 45 nm Penryn processors in late 2007.
While we are far from actual 22 nm and 32 nm products, it is clear that IBM and its partners are turning up the heat on Intel. For the first time in decades, there could actually be an interesting race towards a new production node.
Source : Tom's Hardware US
Related news
- AMD market share if they could sell all they make? [CPU & Components]
- AMD to go 0.13u by Q1 2002. [CPU & Components]
- Core 2 Duo & Socket AM2/K8L Discussion [CPU & Components]
- The chance to break into Dell's supplier chain has passed. [CPU & Components]
- Intel fanboy's [CPU & Components]
Questions? Ask Tom's community!
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
- FCC Hinders IBM Dominance Over Intel/AMD
- Cyrix, IBM, AMD , intel
- A newbie’s guide to Overclocking an Athlon XP CPU
- ASUS is Awesome!
- Why AMD is better than Intel?
- Opteron 175 at 3.1ghz on stock vcore with stock HSF
- Intel Tells Customers It Will Slash Chip Prices 50%
- A 4.1 GHz Dual Core at $130 - Can it be True?
- Nvidia Goes For Four: Quad SLI Gaming Dissected
- Would You Buy A Core 2 Duo System Today?
- 939 Socket / DDR2 motherboard exists?
- System with more than 4 GB RAM
- Just For Fun: Your First Gaming PC?
- Need advice on building a Ubuntu PC
Cool nice article..
Major failure in the thread title, should be IBM not AMD reaches 22nm.
AMD needs to join up with IBM.
Major failure in the thread title, should be IBM not AMD reaches 22nm.
AMD needs to join up with IBM.
Lol,you guys are totally ignorant of the fact AMD works with IBM...
IBM is king
my dad works there
IBM and AMD made a deal ages ago for the production of 22nm chips, so this is the culmination of it. They made the achievement together.
I wonder what the overclocking margins on such a small chip will be...
I wonder what the overclocking margins on such a small chip will be...
depends on how good the actual process is...
I myself don't overclock,don't need more waste heat on my other parts
They should create 22nm processor next year ^_^
Im just wondering what kinda of clock speed increase can be expected from 22nm because we have seen very little average clock speed increases over the past 3 or 4 manurfacturing gereration (90-65-45) (although clock speed certainly is not everything when it comes to performance)
I guess this is the kinda manufacturing size that would be weel suited for the CPU/GPU intergrations that are on the horizons...
and..a few years down the track....
...maybe once CPU/GPU intergration kicks off, Physx(pun intended) will be once again sent back to the CPU for calculating allowing for single Vcard setups to make a comeback....
It always seems IBM anounces they made this or that break through... then its like 5 years before you can actually buy the tech.
Are they making 45nm Cell chips yet ?
Incorrect title! Nice to attract more traffic though.
Take a look at this:
I appears IBM also set the previous record for 32nm back in 2004. Have they released any 32nm processor? Not that I'm aware. I think the first 32nm CPU's will be shown at IDF.
I think the title is misleading on the major contributor and the implication of the finding.
(repost with good link)
Take a look at this:
I appears IBM also set the previous record for 32nm back in 2004. Have they released any 32nm processor? Not that I'm aware. I think the first 32nm CPU's will be shown at IDF.
I think the title is misleading on the major contributor and the implication of the finding.
Hell I would like to see AMD release a 45nm cpu........get your heads out of the future and into the present moment.
Well like Tom's said before IBM is a evil vampire that never die
Like Tom's said before IBM is vampire that never die.
Nice title. Credibility = lost
It's called planning ahead, it's kind of needed
Good to see some folks drinking the cool-aid. It is H2'2008, correct? Did I miss the 32nm node? Exactly when will 32nm go into production and then 22nm? 2011 seems a bit optimistic for IBM, yet alone AMD which hasn't even sold a SINGLE 45nm part yet! Help us out on this one... AMD 45nm end of the this year 2008... 32nm maybe mid-2010/late 2010... and then 22nm the following year?
"but IBM?s news is a good sign that chip manufacturer will be able to easily scale to this new level by the end of 2011"
If only we could fast forward 3 years! "EASILY SCALE"?!?!? Timeline?!? (are you trying to minimize the actual use of 45nm and 32nm capital equipment to throw it away as soon as possible?) This makes no economic or technical sense!
Finally consider READING the announcement - IBM demo'd/claimed a single SRAM cell (which is 6 transistors), not even an actual test chip (which is what you reference when discussing Intel). A 22nm SRAM cell does not mean a 22nm test chip, yet alone a yielding 22nm wafer. When you say Intel is not expected to show 22nm until next year you are no doubt referring to a TEST CHIP (containing 100's of millions, if not a billion transistors) as opposed to the IBM 6 transistor announcement... a wee bit (maybe 5 or 6 orders of magnitude?) different!
If you don't understand the technical details, which from the article it is clear that you don't, you shouldn't be making any analysis from it.
'According to IBM, the creation of the new cell was aided by factors including: "Band edge high-K metal gate stacks, transistors with less than 25nm gate lengths, thin spacers, novel co-implants, advanced activation techniques, extremely thin silicide, and damascene copper contacts".' (source - ZDNET)
A bit odd that they would say transistors less than 25nm gate lengths for a 22nm node (which by the way should have transistor gate lengths in the 19-20ish or smaller range)
I think what we have here is a typical IBM PR announcement which will be found to have several holes if the details are ever presented. Also of note, a working SRAM cell is not the same as a working SRAM chip, as Wolfgang somewhat implies in his commentary. From info on the web there is no IBM mention of an actual working SRAM test chip, just a 1 bit (byte?) cell.
The devices developed and manufactured by AMD, Freescale, IBM STMicroelectronics, Toshiba and the College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering (CNSE)Major failure in the thread title, should be IBM not AMD reaches 22nm. No you just fail at reading comprehension.
I "work" with alot of companies but I do the work and they dont get the credit. Seeing this title just pisses me off because it was purely IBM's R&D NOT AMD's. They could have put Sony is first to 22nm as well since Sony is a "partner" as well. AMD is bleeding to death and folks need to realize that. AMD still cant produce a above economic CPU to compete with Intel and this is after 2 YEARS since Core 2 came out. Intel isnt backing down, Core I7 is and will smash what AMD has out or even coming out in the next 2 years. Yes Intel was down with P4s but the original Bartons that AMD put out to compete with the P4 didnt exactly beat them.
The A64 beat the P4s in games but office it was the P4s domain. AMD puts out good chips, but they need to get back on track for competing or we all lose to 90's Intel pricing again.
.... Good job AMD........
I'm beginning to think some guys around here are paid to write good things about AMD.
Wow, misleading title.
um, overclocking margins isn't a magic word that gets more magical when you microsize... they up the speeds accordingly when manufacturing the new parts see, or they'll just be the old parts made smaller (and indeed better for overclocking)..
the margin for overclocking remains forever the same
My Money is on Intel... Unfortunately
AMD will be lucky if there producing processors come 2011
My Money is on Intel... UnfortunatelyAMD will be lucky if there producing processors come 2011
That's your mistake. ntel does not require your support; not do they care about you. They have hurt you and now you reward them? Additionally you do not need ntel. The other company is much more innovative - keep watching. Intel is following AMD.
Question the marketing machine - talk, misleading talk - you speak like you know because they have told you what to say. It is called training parrots. Wait for the releases and see the truth - beyond the biased carefully selected tests - one of the biggest bias areas is test conditions that can be easily adapted to illustrate through slight of hand. Anadtech is the worst for making ntel look good, and especially for making AMD look bad. The 2 are closer than you think. Not that 2, the other 2.
Dudes chill ... consortium's always make announcements like this. Just be glad it is actually happening. Christ look at what competition recently yielded within the graphics segment, I can not if I choose to buy a 9800GTX for less than 200$ easy. I have even seen a few @ 150. Intel C2D's slowly track downward in price ... why is that? For the same reason NVIDIA never saw fit to grace us with a steep early discounts until the 4850 was released... lack of competition.
I am not sure why all the hate springs forth at any positive message towards AMD ... when in the end it is your and mine best interests to have healthy competition.
That's your mistake. ntel does not require your support; not do they care about you. They have hurt you and now you reward them? Additionally you do not need ntel. The other company is much more innovative - keep watching. Intel is following AMD. Question the marketing machine - talk, misleading talk - you speak like you know because they have told you what to say. It is called training parrots. Wait for the releases and see the truth - beyond the biased carefully selected tests - one of the biggest bias areas is test conditions that can be easily adapted to illustrate through slight of hand. Anadtech is the worst for making ntel look good, and especially for making AMD look bad. The 2 are closer than you think. Not that 2, the other 2.
...While innovating,their CPU's themselves aren't changing.Research and development please???
I'm tired of your spam of AMD fanboyism,it's really getting old,besides.Prove AMD is literally(NOT THEORITICALLY) better(right now,and when the new processors are released from both sides).I could give you a loan,perhaps