Intel adding 2 layers to .13 cpus?

[formulav8]

They must be having a real hard time with the .09 process if it is true. Intel may be adding 2 new layers to its .13 chips. Don't know if its true. But it could make sense.


The Link

 

[InlineFive]

Intel's ship has some leaks in it...

 

[formulav8]

Dell has said that they are delaying shipment of Prescott computers till at least April.

 

[Mloot]

Maybe I'm just a newb, but what effect is adding two more layers supposed to accomplish?

 

[InlineFive]

More transistors on one chip. It can mean lots of things but in Intel's case I think they are having trouble ramping the clock speed because of possible .09 fabbing problems. For this reason they would add more silicon layers to the chip.

-Por

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: formulav8
Dell has said that they are delaying shipment of Prescott computers till at least April.

Do you remember where you saw that report (about Dell delaying the Prescott)? I'm curious to see that if you can find it.

 

[AIWGuru]

AMD did the same thing.
The difference between the T-bred A and T-bred B is layers. They did it to improve yields.
Basically it helps them to redisign some of the "wire" paths manually to remove high bleeding areas which equals higher speed yields.

 

[formulav8]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: formulav8
Dell has said that they are delaying shipment of Prescott computers till at least April.

Do you remember where you saw that report (about Dell delaying the Prescott)? I'm curious to see that if you can find it.

Here is where I read it. Of course Dell hasn't flat come out and said they are delaying it. So who know for a fact except for Dell.

The Link

 

[Adul]

I think the additional layers will also help with heat and powr usage a tad

 

[AIWGuru]

Originally posted by: Adul
I think the additional layers will also help with heat and powr usage a tad

A tad?

AMD adding only 2 layers to their T-bred (and subsequently barton) designs allowed them to stretch their .13u process from 1.83Ghz to 2.2Ghz with lower power usage on the latter.

Of course, intel is only doing this on its .13u processor P4s obviously since they need to get more life out of them. I suspect we'll see 3.6Ghz .13u P4s before too long since prescott isn't cutting it.

 

[aSnipingPenguin]

Maybe I'm just a newb, but what effect is adding two more layers supposed to accomplish?

For this reason they would add more silicon layers to the chip.

Multiple silicon layers would sure be pretty spiffy
But that's still real exotic, though I'm sure things of the sort have been done in research. ATM additional layers is just for the metal interconnects, which allows for better interconnect wiring since you'd get additional planes to run your wires in. This lets you space them out more to reduce parasitic effects, as well as find more direct--and thus generally shorter--routing paths, and like most people have said, it pretty much all results in higher clock speeds.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: AIWGuru

Originally posted by: Adul
I think the additional layers will also help with heat and powr usage a tad

A tad?

AMD adding only 2 layers to their T-bred (and subsequently barton) designs allowed them to stretch their .13u process from 1.83Ghz to 2.2Ghz with lower power usage on the latter.

Of course, intel is only doing this on its .13u processor P4s obviously since they need to get more life out of them. I suspect we'll see 3.6Ghz .13u P4s before too long since prescott isn't cutting it.

If/when we do see more .13u processors, it's going to be P4EE's; Intel is fixing the Prescott too, so it doesn't make much sense to extend the normal P4 .13u line.

 

[AIWGuru]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: AIWGuru

Originally posted by: Adul
I think the additional layers will also help with heat and powr usage a tad

A tad?

AMD adding only 2 layers to their T-bred (and subsequently barton) designs allowed them to stretch their .13u process from 1.83Ghz to 2.2Ghz with lower power usage on the latter.

Of course, intel is only doing this on its .13u processor P4s obviously since they need to get more life out of them. I suspect we'll see 3.6Ghz .13u P4s before too long since prescott isn't cutting it.

If/when we do see more .13u processors, it's going to be P4EE's; Intel is fixing the Prescott too, so it doesn't make much sense to extend the normal P4 .13u line.

There's been no indication that Intel is doing this with its Precott line. It's a completely different layout and is not recieving the same makeover.
Intel is doing this to their .13u P4s because the prescott is broken and they need to extend their .13u line until prescott can take over.
Yes, they are fixing prescott (differently) but this doesn't preclude the extension of the current p4 line, rather the fact that the Prescott needs fixing forces intel to extend .13u. The only processors that have been hinted at being worked on are the EE's and the Xeons, so yes, these are the ones who will be extended.

 

[zephyrprime]

Originally posted by: aSnipingPenguin

Maybe I'm just a newb, but what effect is adding two more layers supposed to accomplish?

For this reason they would add more silicon layers to the chip.

Multiple silicon layers would sure be pretty spiffy
But that's still real exotic, though I'm sure things of the sort have been done in research. ATM additional layers is just for the metal interconnects, which allows for better interconnect wiring since you'd get additional planes to run your wires in. This lets you space them out more to reduce parasitic effects, as well as find more direct--and thus generally shorter--routing paths, and like most people have said, it pretty much all results in higher clock speeds.

Yeah, no doubt it's just more metal layers. No additional transistors.

Adding more layers to a design is a big deal isn't it? Does a lot of the chip layout have to be moved around also?

 

[aSnipingPenguin]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime

Yeah, no doubt it's just more metal layers. No additional transistors.

Adding more layers to a design is a big deal isn't it? Does a lot of the chip layout have to be moved around also?

I'd imagine that the transitors themselves can stay pretty stationary, but adding layers of any kind is pretty involved. First off, you'd probably want to redesign each of the existing metal layers to be able to fully take advantage of the new real estate that you're afforded, which means pretty much a whole new mask set. Then, each new layer requires several additional steps in the processing, all of which contribute to problems like mask misalignment, over/underetching, planarization, and a whole bunch of other stuff.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: AIWGuru

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: AIWGuru

Originally posted by: Adul
I think the additional layers will also help with heat and powr usage a tad

A tad?

AMD adding only 2 layers to their T-bred (and subsequently barton) designs allowed them to stretch their .13u process from 1.83Ghz to 2.2Ghz with lower power usage on the latter.

Of course, intel is only doing this on its .13u processor P4s obviously since they need to get more life out of them. I suspect we'll see 3.6Ghz .13u P4s before too long since prescott isn't cutting it.

If/when we do see more .13u processors, it's going to be P4EE's; Intel is fixing the Prescott too, so it doesn't make much sense to extend the normal P4 .13u line.

There's been no indication that Intel is doing this with its Precott line. It's a completely different layout and is not recieving the same makeover.
Intel is doing this to their .13u P4s because the prescott is broken and they need to extend their .13u line until prescott can take over.
Yes, they are fixing prescott (differently) but this doesn't preclude the extension of the current p4 line, rather the fact that the Prescott needs fixing forces intel to extend .13u. The only processors that have been hinted at being worked on are the EE's and the Xeons, so yes, these are the ones who will be extended.

Granted, Intel has yet to confirm that they're doing the layer changes to the .09u line, but think about it. The "new" Prescotts are set to be delivered in May, and are supposed to run faster and cooler than the current Prescotts; considering Intel is adding layers to the .13u line, it's highly likely they're doing the exact same thing to the .09u line.

 

[AIWGuru]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: AIWGuru

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: AIWGuru

Originally posted by: Adul
I think the additional layers will also help with heat and powr usage a tad

A tad?

AMD adding only 2 layers to their T-bred (and subsequently barton) designs allowed them to stretch their .13u process from 1.83Ghz to 2.2Ghz with lower power usage on the latter.

Of course, intel is only doing this on its .13u processor P4s obviously since they need to get more life out of them. I suspect we'll see 3.6Ghz .13u P4s before too long since prescott isn't cutting it.

If/when we do see more .13u processors, it's going to be P4EE's; Intel is fixing the Prescott too, so it doesn't make much sense to extend the normal P4 .13u line.

There's been no indication that Intel is doing this with its Precott line. It's a completely different layout and is not recieving the same makeover.
Intel is doing this to their .13u P4s because the prescott is broken and they need to extend their .13u line until prescott can take over.
Yes, they are fixing prescott (differently) but this doesn't preclude the extension of the current p4 line, rather the fact that the Prescott needs fixing forces intel to extend .13u. The only processors that have been hinted at being worked on are the EE's and the Xeons, so yes, these are the ones who will be extended.

Granted, Intel has yet to confirm that they're doing the layer changes to the .09u line, but think about it. The "new" Prescotts are set to be delivered in May, and are supposed to run faster and cooler than the current Prescotts; considering Intel is adding layers to the .13u line, it's highly likely they're doing the exact same thing to the .09u line.

I don't follow your logic. Prescott has a completely different layout than northwoods and EE's. It may not need a layout redesign. It already has a fresh, fresh, fresh design (unlike the original T-bred A's which were using the palamino layout) Intel may simply need to improve their .09u process.