• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

R&D: 15 nm Circuits Have Wires Just 150 Atoms Apart

qubit

Overclocked quantum bit
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
17,866 (3.00/day)
Location
Quantum Well UK
System Name Quantumville™
Processor Intel Core i7-2700K @ 4GHz
Motherboard Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3
Cooling Noctua NH-D14
Memory 16GB (2 x 8GB Corsair Vengeance Black DDR3 PC3-12800 C9 1600MHz)
Video Card(s) MSI RTX 2080 SUPER Gaming X Trio
Storage Samsung 850 Pro 256GB | WD Black 4TB | WD Blue 6TB
Display(s) ASUS ROG Strix XG27UQR (4K, 144Hz, G-SYNC compatible) | Asus MG28UQ (4K, 60Hz, FreeSync compatible)
Case Cooler Master HAF 922
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Fatal1ty PCIe
Power Supply Corsair AX1600i
Mouse Microsoft Intellimouse Pro - Black Shadow
Keyboard Yes
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
The process of microchip miniaturization continues apace, with researchers at McGill University and Sandia National Laboratories having build a circuit that has two wires that are separated by a mere 150 atoms having built them at the incredibly tiny 15 nm (nanometres) level. Circuits of this size should bring all the usual benefits of reduced power and heat, along with greater functionality due to the larger transistor density. Of course, the challenges of working at this level are great. Dan Olds, an analyst at The Gabriel Consulting Group said of this research: "This kind of research also uncovers other potential problems arising from ever smaller shrinks. Getting to 15nm or 16nm will mean smaller and more powerful devices that are more energy efficient. But when we're talking about such a small scale, designing chips that can be mass-produced with decent yields is quite a challenge. There will also be challenges for the design of devices that will use these processors." Of course, the benefits are significant and therefore well worth the challenge: "Devices based on 15nm processes will pack more performance and functionality into much smaller form factors. Functions that used to take two or more chips will be accomplished by one transistor-jammed processor." Of course, Intel, the world leader in chip manufacturing is also researching manufacturing at this process node, but there isn't much information available about it at this time.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
3,145 (0.69/day)
Processor 8700k Intel
Motherboard z370 MSI Godlike Gaming
Cooling Triple Aquacomputer AMS Copper 840 with D5
Memory TridentZ RGB G.Skill C16 3600MHz
Video Card(s) GTX 1080 Ti
Storage Crucial MX SSDs
Display(s) Dell U3011 2560x1600 + Dell 2408WFP 1200x1920 (Portrait)
Case Core P5 Thermaltake
Audio Device(s) Essence STX
Power Supply AX 1500i
Mouse Logitech
Keyboard Corsair
Software Win10
Now THIS is small o_O just think about the benefits of such fab node applied to CPUs... We can already reach insane frequencies on air with the 32nm, 22nm is almost ready to show us new rooftops! Exciting times are ahead for sure :)
 

Benetanegia

New Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
2,680 (0.50/day)
Location
Reaching your left retina.
Its 2011. I want my damn 10GHz air-cooled CPU.

Wow, that article is hilarious in 2011. And the comments? Bwahahahahaha.

My favourite comment is the first one:

If 10 GHz is the best that Intel can do by 2011, AMD or somebody else is going to eat their lunch. Intel better pick up the pace if they want to remain dominant.

:roll:

BTW you want your 10 Ghz CPU? I want my 128 Ghz one! Or whatever Rob had taken, he damn sure was high when he wrote that.
 
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
343 (0.08/day)
Location
Ft Stewart
System Name Queen Bee
Processor 3570k @ 4.0GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte UD3 Z77
Cooling Water Loop by EK
Memory 8GB Corsair 1600 DDR3
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 970 Gaming WaterCooled
Storage 1x Western Digital 500GB Black 1x Intel 20GB 311 SSD
Display(s) BenQ XL2420G
Case CoolTek W2
Power Supply Corsair 650Watt
Software Windows 7 Pro
Its 2011. I want my damn 10GHz air-cooled CPU.

If you think about it though a Intel 3960X with 3.3GHZ across all 6 cores is a combined 19.8GHZ. So maybe they were thinking along the lines of a single core. Which became outdated with 64bit processing and the limitations of silicon.
 

Trackr

New Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
265 (0.06/day)
System Name White Phoenix
Processor Intel Core-i7 2600k @ 5.0Ghz 1.45v 24/7
Motherboard Gigabyte 'P67'-UD7
Cooling Dual-Fan TRUE (Lapped)
Memory G.Skill 16GB (4x4GB) 2000Mhz CL9
Video Card(s) nVidia GTX 480 SLi
Storage Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB
Display(s) Dell 'PLP' - 2007FP | 3007WFP-HC | 2007FP
Case Antec p190 (Modded)
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium PCIe
Power Supply Silverstone 1000w (Single-Rail)
Software Windows 7 SP1 Ultimate 64-bit
Its 2011. I want my damn 10GHz air-cooled CPU.

That was before Dual-Cores existed.

You should have compared an i7-3960x to a Pentium 4 1.0Ghz.

With architecture, cache size, etc etc. improvements, plus 6 cores and 3.3x core clock..

It should be equivalent to a 150Ghz Pentium 4, in terms of performance.

I'd say Moore's Law is being proven correct.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
1,757 (0.31/day)
System Name Lailalo
Processor Ryzen 9 5900X Boosts to 4.95Ghz
Motherboard Asus TUF Gaming X570-Plus (WIFI
Cooling Noctua
Memory 32GB DDR4 3200 Corsair Vengeance
Video Card(s) XFX 7900XT 20GB
Storage Samsung 970 Pro Plus 1TB, Crucial 1TB MX500 SSD, Segate 3TB
Display(s) LG Ultrawide 29in @ 2560x1080
Case Coolermaster Storm Sniper
Power Supply XPG 1000W
Mouse G602
Keyboard G510s
Software Windows 10 Pro / Windows 10 Home
Not necessarily before dual cores existed. GPUs were going multicore back then. But on the CPU front, yeah, we had dual CPU machines but that was it.

If they never hit the wall on speed, literally we prolly wouldn't have multicore in CPUs. Multicore systems would possibly exist in servers and even then it would be mostly multi sockets. 64bit, may or may not have happened as fast. Without AMD I'd say it would have happened later. Intel slapped 64 together in a hurry to confront AMD after it was clear things were moving to 64bit. If there is no pressure I don't see Intel in a hurry to innovate.

Same with any company. We saw the same with nVidia till ATI got their act together. They sat on the G92 for years. Same with DX10.1 and Tesselators. ATI did it, NV pressured devs not to use it and then finally when ATI starts coming back, they whip out the tech with DX11.
 

Fx

Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
1,332 (0.24/day)
Location
Portland, OR
Processor Ryzen 2600x
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix X470-F Gaming
Cooling Noctua
Memory G.SKILL Flare X Series 16GB DDR4 3466
Video Card(s) EVGA 980ti FTW
Storage (OS)Samsung 950 Pro (512GB), (Data) WD Reds
Display(s) 24" Dell UltraSharp U2412M
Case Fractal Design Define R5
Audio Device(s) Sennheiser GAME ONE
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA 650 P2
Mouse Mionix Castor
Keyboard Deck Hassium Pro
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
If you think about it though a Intel 3960X with 3.3GHZ across all 6 cores is a combined 19.8GHZ. So maybe they were thinking along the lines of a single core. Which became outdated with 64bit processing and the limitations of silicon.

except that no one knows how to write code that is optimized to proficiently use the cores to perform at anywhere near that combined level of performance
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
9,762 (1.91/day)
Location
Jakarta, Indonesia
System Name micropage7
Processor Intel Xeon X3470
Motherboard Gigabyte Technology Co. Ltd. P55A-UD3R (Socket 1156)
Cooling Enermax ETS-T40F
Memory Samsung 8.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3
Video Card(s) NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800
Storage V-GEN03AS18EU120GB, Seagate 2 x 1TB and Seagate 4TB
Display(s) Samsung 21 inch LCD Wide Screen
Case Icute Super 18
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte
Power Supply Silverstone 600 Watt
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Sades Excalibur + Taihao keycaps
Software Win 7 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Classified
15nm = more complicated
more complicated could mean more fail percentages
15nm could mean better performance with lower power consumption
its kinda hard to imagine. we just had 32nm just few years ago then we hit 15nm (although maybe it need time before wide applied)
 

de.das.dude

Pro Indian Modder
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
8,757 (1.74/day)
Location
Stuck in a PC. halp.
System Name Monke | Work Thinkpad| Old Monke
Processor Ryzen 5600X | Ryzen 5500U | FX8320
Motherboard ASRock B550 Extreme4 | ? | Asrock 990FX Extreme 4
Cooling 240mm Rad | Not needed | hyper 212 EVO
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 Corsair RGB | 16 GB DDR4 3600 | 16GB DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse RX6700XT 12GB | Vega 8 | Sapphire Pulse RX580 8GB
Storage Samsung 980 nvme (Primary) | some samsung SSD
Display(s) Dell 2723DS | Some 14" 1080p 98%sRGB IPS | Dell 2240L
Case Ant Esports Tempered case | Thinkpad | Antec
Audio Device(s) Logitech Z333 | Jabra corpo stuff
Power Supply Corsair RM750e | not needed | Corsair GS 600
Mouse Logitech G400 | nipple
Keyboard Logitech G213 | stock kb is awesome | Logitech K230
VR HMD ;_;
Software Windows 10 Professional x3
Benchmark Scores There are no marks on my bench
Wow, that article is hilarious in 2011. And the comments? Bwahahahahaha.

My favourite comment is the first one:



:roll:

BTW you want your 10 Ghz CPU? I want my 128 Ghz one! Or whatever Rob had taken, he damn sure was high when he wrote that.

intel more fail than meets the eye.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
3,145 (0.69/day)
Processor 8700k Intel
Motherboard z370 MSI Godlike Gaming
Cooling Triple Aquacomputer AMS Copper 840 with D5
Memory TridentZ RGB G.Skill C16 3600MHz
Video Card(s) GTX 1080 Ti
Storage Crucial MX SSDs
Display(s) Dell U3011 2560x1600 + Dell 2408WFP 1200x1920 (Portrait)
Case Core P5 Thermaltake
Audio Device(s) Essence STX
Power Supply AX 1500i
Mouse Logitech
Keyboard Corsair
Software Win10
I don't think we will see this lithography soon because Intel will probably dominate the x86 market without a strong AMD that forces them to innovate... Unless ARM proves itself a threat if it enters this business seriously or Intel itself will focus more on developing a SoC to challenge ARM on its field.
Of course Ivy Bridge is at the door and as I said exciting times are ahead, even though the situation of the desktop CPUs will probably hit a slowdown
 

XoR

New Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
27 (0.01/day)
my crappy i3 (from beginning of 2010) is 15x faster than processors the had in 2000 (~PIII 1GHz) and more than 6x faster in single core perfrormance. Intels 10GHz figure is because they had high hopes for NetBurst and it is understandable because they were able to double clock speed with this arch.
 
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
3,455 (0.68/day)
Location
Portugal
System Name LenovoⓇ ThinkPad™ T430
Processor IntelⓇ Core™ i5-3210M processor (2 cores, 2.50GHz, 3MB cache), Intel Turbo Boost™ 2.0 (3.10GHz), HT™
Motherboard Lenovo 2344 (Mobile Intel QM77 Express Chipset)
Cooling Single-pipe heatsink + Delta fan
Memory 2x 8GB KingstonⓇ HyperX™ Impact 2133MHz DDR3L SO-DIMM
Video Card(s) Intel HD Graphics™ 4000 (GPU clk: 1100MHz, vRAM clk: 1066MHz)
Storage SamsungⓇ 860 EVO mSATA (250GB) + 850 EVO (500GB) SATA
Display(s) 14.0" (355mm) HD (1366x768) color, anti-glare, LED backlight, 200 nits, 16:9 aspect ratio, 300:1 co
Case ThinkPad Roll Cage (one-piece magnesium frame)
Audio Device(s) HD Audio, RealtekⓇ ALC3202 codec, DolbyⓇ Advanced Audio™ v2 / stereo speakers, 1W x 2
Power Supply ThinkPad 65W AC Adapter + ThinkPad Battery 70++ (9-cell)
Mouse TrackPointⓇ pointing device + UltraNav™, wide touchpad below keyboard + ThinkLight™
Keyboard 6-row, 84-key, ThinkVantage button, spill-resistant, multimedia Fn keys, LED backlight (PT Layout)
Software MicrosoftⓇ WindowsⓇ 10 x86-64 (22H2)
If you think about it though a Intel 3960X with 3.3GHZ across all 6 cores is a combined 19.8GHZ. So maybe they were thinking along the lines of a single core. Which became outdated with 64bit processing and the limitations of silicon.
I remember stores here trying to sell HT chips and early dual-cores with that line of thought. A dual-core at 2.2GHz doesn't equal a single-core at 4.4GHz. It never worked that way.
That was before Dual-Cores existed.

You should have compared an i7-3960x to a Pentium 4 1.0Ghz.

With architecture, cache size, etc etc. improvements, plus 6 cores and 3.3x core clock..

It should be equivalent to a 150Ghz Pentium 4, in terms of performance.

I'd say Moore's Law is being proven correct.
First of all, there is no such thing as a 1GHz Pentium 4. :slap: Unless you downclock it. :ohwell:
Second, clock-by-clock comparison, with a difference of generations that big, is a dumb thing to do in terms of application performance. Of course there will be a huge difference, but it only makes sense to compare it with same generation processors. It makes much more sense to compare processing performance using a standard benchmark to evaluate a single unit of measurement. LINPACK/LAPACK are good methods. It will still show a huge difference, but it's a measurement.
except that no one knows how to write code that is optimized to profeciently use the cores to perform at anywhere near that combined level of performance
Since a 19.8GHz processor doesn't exist (with x86 architecture) we can only guess. But there are programs written for multi-core processors.
intel more fail than meets the eye.
You're becoming an annoying fanboi as each day goes by.
my crappy i3 (from beginning of 2010) is 15x faster than processors the had in 2000 (~PIII 1GHz) and more than 6x faster in single core perfrormance. Intels 10GHz figure is because they had high hopes for NetBurst and it is understandable because they were able to double clock speed with this arch.
That doesn't make sense. Off the top of head assumption is off the top of head.
They can be faster overall to complete a task, but that's related to more stuff (architecture, cache, RAM-CPU bus speed, NB improvements) rather than just clock speed. I think even single core performance is higher than only six times that of a Pentium 3 at 1GHz. Like all manufacturers, high hopes for a new product is a completely normal behavior.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
68 (0.01/day)

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.65/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
I remember stores here trying to sell HT chips and early dual-cores with that line of thought. A dual-core at 2.2GHz doesn't equal a single-core at 4.4GHz. It never worked that way.
With symmetrical multithreading, it can get pretty close (maybe a 10% overhead cost). Problem is, there aren't many workloads substantial enough to bother.
 
Top