TSMC 40nm is actually 45nm?

[thilanliyan]

http://blog.hackingcough.com/2...04/tsmcs-5nm-diffe.htm

 

[Nemesis 1]

Good read. Thats the reason Intel IBM and others are working on 3Dgates and finfet. Finfet is already inuse I believe . Can't recall memory maker.

 

[Idontcare]

From your earlier thread in Feb:

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I am more likely to believe this story as it's not another anti-Nvidia rant... I half expected them to say that only 40nm wasn't working for Nvidia after are I started reading the story.

You can believe the story insofar as it relates to TSMC's current debacle with 40nm...its the same debacle they were having a year ago when they were still calling it the 45nm node.

Then it (45nm) became so delayed that they re-labeled it as the 40nm node (hey look, we are now back on schedule!) but after spending the past 12 months frantically trying to tweak the processes to hit spice model targets without killing Iddq they are finally getting close but they are most definitely still facing challenges.

Mind you the other foundries are in even a worse of a pickle. UMC, Chartered, and IBM are all struggling to get 45nm (or 40nm for those that have re-labeled) off the ground and into volume production.

It just sounds sexier to say you are producing 40nm with slight delays versus saying you are still struggling to get a much delayed 45nm into volume production. And the 45nm -> 40nm relabel incurred the knock-on effect of shuffling all successive nodes down by one half-node increment.

What was going to be 40nm has been re-badged as the 32nm node and pushed out two years. What was going to be 32nm is now label 28nm and pushed out 2 yrs from the original 32nm delivery date. What was going to be the 28nm node has been re-badged as the 22nm node and pushed out another two years. (this is for TSMC)

It's all PR, TSMC could label the node the 10nm node for all they wanted, it would make for some sensational headlines for a brief period of time but the customers would still be dealing with the fact they were designing chips to use the same old crappy 40nm xtor parametrics and spice targets.

And from this earlier thread back in Nov'08:

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Idontcare
A side-note on recent activity with the foundry half-nodes, if I may, it would appear that the foundry's mis-stepped very badly with their 45nm plans and as such the focus shifted quite rapidly to 40nm. Now you hear the foundries discuss the half-node in ways that previously were reserved for the primary node. It is almost as if they couldn't stand to admit they delayed 45nm introduction and instead they just moved the labels around and what was originally going to be the 45nm has been relabelled (and finally introduced after much delay) as the 40nm half-node.

I say this because now the 32nm node is being downplayed, almost as if it were really the 40nm half-node in reality but slipped out a year and relabeled as the 32nm node and instead all the emphasis is on the 28nm half-node now being the "big node" to watch for from the foundries insofar as the introduction of HK/MG, etc. Pure marketing basically.

Just quoting myself to post this EEtimes link with some follow-up info on this line of thinking (for completeness sake should anyone read this thread and care):

TSMC moves 40-nm to mass production

Besides 40-nm, TSMC is leading in other processes. In September, the company rolled out its 32- and 28-nm processes. The 32-nm process is a cost-down version of its 40-nm technology, while 28-nm is considered by TSMC as a ''full-node'' offering.

http://www.eetimes.com/news/se...ml?articleID=212100139

In other words what was once upon a time going to be the 45nm has finally been released but to keep marketing happy and sexy they relabeled it the "40nm node"...which then required relabeling the 40nm half-node as the 32nm node...which then further pushed out the labeling sequence so what was going to be called the 32nm is now re-labeled as being the 28nm node.

Makes it sound like TSMC is always a half-node ahead of the competition. TFC could (pointlessly) one-up them and re-label their forthcoming 32nm node as the 16nm node...node labels become all the more meaningless when marketing crap like this takes precedence instead of admitting a slip in schedule has happened.