GlobalFoundries Updates Roadmap: 7 nm in 2H 2018, EUV Sooner Than Later? [Anandtech]

[Bacon1]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10704/globalfoundries-updates-roadmap-7-nm-in-2h-2018

 

[Headfoot]

I'll believe it when I see it - maybe if "7 nm" is really something else entirely more comparable to Intel's 10nm I could believe it. The only wildcard that gives me the faintest sliver of hope is that they've got IBM's folks in house for this one.

It all rests so much on EUV getting to market readiness which has taken longer than Duke Nukem Forever.

 

[Phynaz]

7nm my behind. It's 10nm named 7nm.

 

[Arachnotronic]

7nm my behind. It's 10nm named 7nm.

yep, it's a ~50% shrink from their (Samsung's) "14nm," which means it's a 10nm process. Naming it 7nm is just GloFo trying to pretend that it's caught up with the real players in this industry (Samsung, Intel, TSMC).

 

[96Firebird]

As much as I hope GloFo's Malta location does well (bring more high-end technology to upstate NY!), my faith in GloFo has dwindled. Maybe they'll surprise us.

 

[ShintaiDK]

A foundry roadmap is one thing, product realization another. I think people should know this by now.

Not to mention we talk about a foundry who haven't been able to develop a node since 28nm.

 

[Arachnotronic]

A foundry roadmap is one thing, product realization another. I think people should know this by now.

Not to mention we talk about a foundry who haven't been able to develop a node since 28nm.

yep, two dead nodes in a row doesn't bode well for GloFo's current plans...

 

[Det0x]

7nm my behind. It's 10nm named 7nm.

Setting aside the reality that it probably can’t actually draw anything <40nm, it does still get worse. Why? Because the 14nm base process they are comparing it to is really 20nm by any sane technical measure. Their 14nm was just a mature 20nm process with a new transistor, maybe a hair smaller but not close to what a real 14nm process should have been or even a half node from 20nm. What GF is saying is that their 7nm process is a real, true, honest shrink but not from a real, honest, true 14nm process, it is from a real, honest, and true 20nm process. What do we know that as? 14nm.

In the end the industry is slinging the BS harder and harder, it is not just Globalfoundries doing it, everyone has joined in the game. 14/16nm was not a shrink from 20 for anyone bar Intel but they all called it one anyway. 10nm is barely a half node from that but 7nm looks like a true full node. The only think they won’t point out is from what, 14nm ~= 20nm so 7nm = a real 14nm process for the engineers. I would complain about the BS marketing but the bad guys have won and now they are dragging the good guys into the mud. Sad times.

Globalfoundries 7nm process isn’t even close to the name @ http://semiaccurate.com/2016/09/26/globalfoundries-7nm-process-isnt-even-close-name/

 

[Keysplayr]

Wow. And the OP looked so full of hope.
It sucks that they cant just call it what it is. And its not 7 nm.

 

[nurturedhate]

Wow. And the OP looked so full of hope.
It sucks that they cant just call it what it is. And its not 7 nm.

The OP looked so full of hope? By not typing anything and just providing a link? Any reason you are purposely trying to throw a member under a bus? What do you gain by your anti-OP statement?

 

[AtenRa]

Wow. And the OP looked so full of hope.
It sucks that they cant just call it what it is. And its not 7 nm.

Either you are drunk and you see Phantoms in OPs post or you are Trolling.

 

[raghu78]

Either you are drunk and you see Phantoms in OPs post or you are Trolling.

Well said. For few people if anything is associated with AMD they have to say something negative. Anyway GF 7 nm is just as bad as TSMC 7nm when it comes to naming. Both these processes will be comparable to Intel 10nm for transistor density and transistor performance. Btw this is IBM's tech and will power both AMD and IBM high performance CPUs.

 

[Mopetar]

And if you believe that I've got a bridge to sell you.

Global Flounderies puts the no in node. It'd be funny if it weren't so sad. They can't even get borrowed tech right, so anyone expecting this to pan out is off their meds.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Both these processes will be comparable to Intel 10nm for transistor density and transistor performance.

proof, particularly of the latter, please?

 

[raghu78]

proof, particularly of the latter, please?

IBM's tech has been extremely competitive against Intel in terms of transistor performance. The proof is evidenced by IBM's Power CPUs which run at blistering speeds of 4+ Ghz. IBM's transistors are right up there with Intel's in terms of electrical characteristics.

http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1330467&page_number=2

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/07/ibm-unveils-industrys-first-7nm-chip-moving-beyond-silicon/

https://www.ibm.com/blogs/research/2016/06/material-innovation-key-7nm-beyond/

This process is basically IBM 7nm tech. Gate pitch - 30nm range, self aligned quadruple patterning on critical layers, 17 layers of metal, 80-84 mask steps, silicon germanium channel, EUV compatible. This is basically a high performance process designed for IBM and AMD's high performance CPU requirements.

 

[96Firebird]

Guys, you do realize "OP" can also mean original post, right?

So many angry souls here, yall need some Jesus.

 

[nurturedhate]

Guys, you do realize "OP" can also mean original post, right?

So many angry souls here, yall need some Jesus.

Yes, as in Bacon1's post. Or are you implying that Keys was taking a stab at Anandtech.com itself and everyone involved with the site?

 

[ShintaiDK]

IBM's tech has been extremely competitive against Intel in terms of transistor performance. The proof is evidenced by IBM's Power CPUs which run at blistering speeds of 4+ Ghz. IBM's transistors are right up there with Intel's in terms of electrical characteristics.

http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1330467&page_number=2

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/07/ibm-unveils-industrys-first-7nm-chip-moving-beyond-silicon/

https://www.ibm.com/blogs/research/2016/06/material-innovation-key-7nm-beyond/

This process is basically IBM 7nm tech. Gate pitch - 30nm range, self aligned quadruple patterning on critical layers, 17 layers of metal, 80-84 mask steps, silicon germanium channel, EUV compatible. This is basically a high performance process designed for IBM and AMD's high performance CPU requirements.

By the same POWER CPUs that completely lost? And FX CPUs also run at a "blistering 4Ghz+".

Also I dont see anything in your link stating anything you claim.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Well its nice to see this forum devolving back into its seemingly natural hyper fanatical partisan state.

Guys, you do realize "OP" can also mean original post, right?

So many angry souls here, yall need some Jesus.

How does that change things at all? Not to mention it makes no sense to try to frame it like that as the article is pretty straightforward and is hardly an optimistic piece since it regularly mentions a lot of issues (including the things he seems to be surprised at, so if he was actually surprised by the post prior to his or felt that article was "full of hope", he shouldn't have been as it was all but outright said in the article or "OP").

Yes and bringing religion into it will certainly improve things... Also, uh what's they say about casting the first stone? You are hardly innocent of the thing you're criticizing others for.

By the same POWER CPUs that completely lost? And FX CPUs also run at a "blistering 4Ghz+".

Also I dont see anything in your link stating anything you claim.

Completely lost what? The reason POWER isn't popular has little to nothing to do with process.

His "blistering" might be outdated as IIRC Power was doing that about 10 years ago and has been doing over 5GHz for several years now (in server, where Intel and AMD have tended toward ~3GHz; I believe POWER chips also have tended towards lots of threads per core and other things we don't see from other architectures). And hey, if we're going to play willfully obtuse, maybe he meant it literally as both those processors tend toward being known for being quite literally hot, one could even say blisteringly so?

You don't see anything that states anything he claimed? Either you're being ridiculously hyperbolic just be argumentative and/or you either didn't read his post or click the links, because he said:

This process is basically IBM 7nm tech. Gate pitch - 30nm range, self aligned quadruple patterning on critical layers, 17 layers of metal, 80-84 mask steps, silicon germanium channel, EUV compatible. This is basically a high performance process designed for IBM and AMD's high performance CPU requirements.

and in one of the links:

The process supports 17 layers of metal and could require 80-84 masks steps to handle up to quad patterning on some critical layers.

Call it pedantic, but I regularly see people with similar posting history as yourself making posts that are refuted with very simple checks or basic logic because they're intentionally trying to just be a nuisance and have no real interest in discussing the actual topic or post they're aimed at. And it is absolutely an issue as it regularly drag threads into multiple pages of arguing very basic "you said exactly this, but your link didn't support exactly that!" so that you can argue about phrasing versus actual arguments, which just makes this place a ridiculously irritating place to visit. So either live up to your own criteria or cut this BS way of trying to argue.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Well its nice to see this forum devolving back into its seemingly natural hyper fanatical partisan state.



How does that change things at all? Not to mention it makes no sense to try to frame it like that as the article is pretty straightforward and is hardly an optimistic piece since it regularly mentions a lot of issues (including the things he seems to be surprised at, so if he was actually surprised by the post prior to his or felt that article was "full of hope", he shouldn't have been as it was all but outright said in the article or "OP").

Yes and bringing religion into it will certainly improve things... Also, uh what's they say about casting the first stone? You are hardly innocent of the thing you're criticizing others for.



Completely lost what? The reason POWER isn't popular has little to nothing to do with process.

His "blistering" might be outdated as IIRC Power was doing that about 10 years ago and has been doing over 5GHz for several years now (in server, where Intel and AMD have tended toward ~3GHz; I believe POWER chips also have tended towards lots of threads per core and other things we don't see from other architectures). And hey, if we're going to play willfully obtuse, maybe he meant it literally as both those processors tend toward being known for being quite literally hot, one could even say blisteringly so?

You don't see anything that states anything he claimed? Either you're being ridiculously hyperbolic just be argumentative and/or you either didn't read his post or click the links, because he said:

and in one of the links:


Call it pedantic, but I regularly see people with similar posting history as yourself making posts that are refuted with very simple checks or basic logic because they're intentionally trying to just be a nuisance and have no real interest in discussing the actual topic or post they're aimed at. And it is absolutely an issue as it regularly drag threads into multiple pages of arguing very basic "you said exactly this, but your link didn't support exactly that!" so that you can argue about phrasing versus actual arguments, which just makes this place a ridiculously irritating place to visit. So either live up to your own criteria or cut this BS way of trying to argue.

In what way does anything you quote or write fit into this:

IBM's transistors are right up there with Intel's in terms of electrical characteristics.

That's right, it doesn't.

 

[Keysplayr]

Guys, you do realize "OP" can also mean original post, right?

So many angry souls here, yall need some Jesus.

Thats exactly the context I intended "OP" to be used. Original post. Not original poster.
I hope everyone is clear on that. I know its important.

 

[raghu78]

By the same POWER CPUs that completely lost? And FX CPUs also run at a "blistering 4Ghz+".

Also I dont see anything in your link stating anything you claim.

I am talking about the process node here and not about the microarchitecture here. Power CPUs are still popular in high end servers and IBM Power CPUs with Nvidia Tesla GPU servers still are top of the hill in supercomputers. btw please read the links properly before posting.

Call it pedantic, but I regularly see people with similar posting history as yourself making posts that are refuted with very simple checks or basic logic because they're intentionally trying to just be a nuisance and have no real interest in discussing the actual topic or post they're aimed at. And it is absolutely an issue as it regularly drag threads into multiple pages of arguing very basic "you said exactly this, but your link didn't support exactly that!" so that you can argue about phrasing versus actual arguments, which just makes this place a ridiculously irritating place to visit. So either live up to your own criteria or cut this BS way of trying to argue.

thats the sad state of these forums .the same culprits keep causing the same problems over and over.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I am talking about the process node here and not about the microarchitecture here. Power CPUs are still popular in high end servers and IBM Power CPUs with Nvidia Tesla GPU servers still are top of the hill in supercomputers. btw please read the links properly before posting.

I read your links and I didn't see the electrical properties you claimed. Your proof was supposed to be POWER CPUs?

Popular? Its on a fast track out.

 

[96Firebird]

Yes, as in Bacon1's post. Or are you implying that Keys was taking a stab at Anandtech.com itself and everyone involved with the site?

I'm not sure why you think what Keys said about the article is "taking a stab at Anandtech.com itself and everyone involved with the site". Maybe you just have really thin skin, but saying the article is full of hope and then seeing from another post that 7nm is not really 7nm is hardly anything to get this excited over.

Yes and bringing religion into it will certainly improve things... Also, uh what's they say about casting the first stone? You are hardly innocent of the thing you're criticizing others for.

Well that joke just flew completely over your head. Its ok, some people just don't understand things.

 

[nurturedhate]

I'm not sure why you think what Keys said about the article is "taking a stab at Anandtech.com itself and everyone involved with the site". Maybe you just have really thin skin, but saying the article is full of hope and then seeing from another post that 7nm is not really 7nm is hardly anything to get this excited over.



Well that joke just flew completely over your head. Its ok, some people just don't understand things.

Nice backtracking and attacking the messenger. It's so nice of you to call people stupid in your posts.