TSMC Unveils 6-nanometer Process

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Apr 16, 2019.

  1. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,049
    Likes Received:
    6,116
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    There's always something smaller. TSMC today announced its 6-nanometer (N6) process, which provides a enhancement of its 7nm technology and offers customers a highly competitive performance-to-cost ...

    TSMC Unveils 6-nanometer Process
     
    Embra likes this.
  2. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,579
    Likes Received:
    1,799
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    The industry needs a new naming scheme for these processes.. it's misleading at this point and basically tells us nothing about the density itself. For example Intel's 10nm process is nearly equivalent to Samsung's 5nm DUV process, Intel's 7nm process is 35% more dense than TSMC's 5nm DUV. So where exactly does TSMCs 6nm fall? Who knows because the number is completely arbitrary.
     
  3. Memorian

    Memorian Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,991
    Likes Received:
    191
    GPU:
    Strix 2080 Ti OC
    Ampere@6nm, bring it on !
     
  4. robintson

    robintson Master Guru

    Messages:
    419
    Likes Received:
    112
    GPU:
    Asus_Strix2080Ti_OC
    Completely agree about misleading Information about the chip production technology processes from TMSC. Intel has setup the standard here in chip production where numbers in "nm" process are real, everyone else are just cheating on this matter, just to "sound" better for the people and to sell more of the chips when they're out
     

  5. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,940
    Likes Received:
    2,293
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    What matters is price per transistor of small/medium/large/jumbo chips. Power efficiency. Max clock. Density itself is not really important if you are not building 20B transistor chips.
    That's why I like way Samsung described their new process... "20 percent lower power consumption or 10 percent higher performance" They included: "up to a 25 percent increase in logic area efficiency" for "density"
    That means you take old design and it will eat only 0.8x of original power (no Clock bump). In same area, you can place 1.25x more transistors => 1.25 x 0.8 = 1 (No increase in power consumption.) But since chip now has 25% more transistors, it potentially has 25% higher performance at same power.
    Those values can clearly tell what new process can do without knowing exact density.
    = = = =
    I do not care about nm written on the product box, I care about what it does.10/7/6/5nm, who cares about intel/TSMC/Samsung numerical scheme when 7 proves better than 10 and is cheaper.

    A: "Intel's 7nm transistors are smaller than Samsung's!!!"
    B: "But Samsung's 7nm transistors work."
     
    Noisiv and moo100times like this.
  6. angelgraves13

    angelgraves13 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,680
    Likes Received:
    414
    GPU:
    RTX 2080 Ti FE
    Intel's fabs aren't open to anyone else...so, who cares? They don't even have anything working on anything smaller than 14nm+++++

    I hope we see a new Nvidia card on this or Samsung.
     
  7. sunnyp_343

    sunnyp_343 Master Guru

    Messages:
    503
    Likes Received:
    25
    GPU:
    Asus ROG GTX 1080
    So now they are gonna spend next 50 years like this (7nm,6nm,6.5nm,6nm,5.5nm)...Show us next revolution
     
  8. angelgraves13

    angelgraves13 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,680
    Likes Received:
    414
    GPU:
    RTX 2080 Ti FE
    Probably more like 10 years...
     
  9. devastator

    devastator Member Guru

    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    24
    GPU:
    rtx 2070
    do u think we reach 1000pm or picometer?? we not to far away from it
     
  10. Clawedge

    Clawedge Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes Received:
    695
    GPU:
    Radeon 570
    If it is achieved, it will probably be called 0.x nm cos most people are just too stupid.

    Just like phone batteries where people say 3thousand milliamp hour instead of 3amp hour.
     

  11. Andy Watson

    Andy Watson Member Guru

    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    31
    GPU:
    960

    Surely it simply tells you the EUV process and how that compares to that company's previous EUV process density as TSMC have done here, how is that misleading?

    You mention Intel 7nm process but that is irrelevant at the moment as nobody yet knows whether that will be running anytime in 2021 and at what capacity.
     
  12. fantaskarsef

    fantaskarsef Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,277
    Likes Received:
    3,327
    GPU:
    2080Ti @h2o
    It's called qunatum computing, and they are already working on / with it.
     
  13. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,579
    Likes Received:
    1,799
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    That's kind of why I said its misleading? Not only does the nm number not tell us anything about the density of the process but it doesn't even tell us how it compares to previous processes or a competitors process in any way shape or form. My argument is is merely that the "x nm" label is pointless and needs to go. I don't really care what you replace it with - want to factor in switching speed, fine, want to factor in power consumption - go ahead. Don't care. Stop using x nm. It basically means nothing and yet I constantly see people compare the x nm numbers directly to other vendors.
     
    sykozis, Fox2232 and fantaskarsef like this.
  14. JamesSneed

    JamesSneed Master Guru

    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    226
    GPU:
    GTX 1070
    Is it just me or are the foundries starting to have a reverse e-peen contest? Mine is smaller than yours its says right in the name, 6nm!
     
  15. JamesSneed

    JamesSneed Master Guru

    Messages:
    671
    Likes Received:
    226
    GPU:
    GTX 1070
    We are a long ways off from quantum computing becoming mainstream and frankly it's not even considered a good replacement due to inherent error rates but I wouldn't go as far to say never. There will be a lot of things happen before you and I are typing on quantum computers if that ever occurs. We should eventually see pure silicon replaced by some other substance say silicon nanosheets, graphene, gallium nitride or whatever they come up with but I suspect that may only take us as far as 1nm. I expect us to hit a wall on shrinking CPU process nodes around 1-3nm. We may get smaller for things like flash and DRAM but logic circuits that need to run at high frequencies will hit some real physical limits.
     

  16. fantaskarsef

    fantaskarsef Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,277
    Likes Received:
    3,327
    GPU:
    2080Ti @h2o
    Sunny was asking about revolution. I thought that quantum computing, with it's above binary logic would be such a revolution, changing interposers or shrinking down to 1nm essentially is "only" evolution.
    You are right though, we won't put our hands on a quantum computer anytime soon, except if one of us works with science / IBM / Intel / whoever works on it first hand. Although, 50 years in the future was meant... think back 50 years and see what we got now, it's a revolution by itself if we look at that.
     

Share This Page