1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Intel announces 3D Tri-Gate transistors

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Lizard, 4 May 2011.

  1. Boogle

    Boogle New Member

    Joined:
    8 Mar 2002
    Posts:
    282
    Likes Received:
    6
    I don't understand, surely if it's just a larger gate then the transistor would be bigger, not smaller and faster?
     
  2. Bakes

    Bakes New Member

    Joined:
    4 Jun 2010
    Posts:
    886
    Likes Received:
    17
    Larger in terms of thicker. Other news websites have better explanations of how the technology works -effectively it's in 3 dimensions. Probably not simply a marketing ploy though - we don't hear so many random useless low-level technologies from Intel nowadays so it would be out of the ordinary.
     
  3. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag New Member

    Joined:
    30 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    i'm pretty sure the prices are not going to drop much on this. just because its smaller it doesn't mean its cheaper. keep in mind the overall materials to create a cpu is extremely cheap. silicon is one of the most abundant non-gas elements in the world. cpu pins are gold plated and the dies as a whole aren't very big. from what i can tell, 90% of what you pay for in a cpu is the architecture, the research, the machines, and everyone who contributed. 5% would be advertisements, and the rest is the actual materials. i've seen brand new CPUs being sold for as little as $32. considering a certain percentage would go to the retailer, that shows how little a cpu is actually worth.

    considering this is new technology requiring more advanced machines, i'd expect the price to go up, not down.

    as for amd, sure it sucks for them but they'll get it eventually. for everything intel thought of first, amd has eventually released the same thing and improved upon the idea. typically the only reason their improvements don't surpass intel is because of other technical downsides such as fab size, amount of memory channels, instruction sets, and time for testing.
    for example, when intel first released quad core CPUs, it was really just 2 dual cores slapped next to each other with a few changes here and there. it worked as a quad core but it wasn't a "true" quad core. amd wanted to out-do intel by creating a true quad core with communication between all cores, but they rushed it so it wasn't as good and some models failed, hence the phenom x3. i'm sure because of this moment, this is why amd is taking so long to release bulldozer. i'm sure bulldozer was ready for release 5 months ago but they want to make sure it will get them where they want.
     
  4. ch424

    ch424 Design Warrior

    Joined:
    26 May 2004
    Posts:
    3,112
    Likes Received:
    41
    Sorry, I meant thicker relative to the other parts of the transistor - it's still smaller overall!
     
  5. Neogumbercules

    Neogumbercules New Member

    Joined:
    14 Aug 2004
    Posts:
    2,464
    Likes Received:
    29
    Glad i didn't upgrade to Sandy Bridge. I think I'll be looking at an upgrade come the end of the year...
     
  6. Dae314

    Dae314 New Member

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2010
    Posts:
    988
    Likes Received:
    61
    ack -_- just bought a sandy bridge based laptop yesterday T_T

    Ah well it'll probably take ivy bridge like 10 months from now to start really getting laptops out. Still this makes me sad =(. Oh well had to get a new system at some point. Useless to just keep putting it off because "something better is coming" since something better is always coming ^^;
     
  7. sinner666999

    sinner666999 New Member

    Joined:
    3 Jan 2011
    Posts:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the price of these chips will be determined more by how much Intel will have to spend to re-tool their factories along with how much they have actually spent on R&D. It will also be interesting to see what, if any, price drop there will in Sandy Bridge processors once Ivy is large on the market.
     
  8. flipman

    flipman New Member

    Joined:
    21 May 2010
    Posts:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nice Intel just hope they don't give this tech to any foundries then AMD will beg for help against there BD "come back" CPU's and left them in the dry to get there own stuff and not copy what IBM and Intel have made trough the years
     
  9. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,250
    Likes Received:
    88
    Is this "just" a FINFET?
     
  10. Snips

    Snips I can do dat, giz a job

    Joined:
    14 Sep 2010
    Posts:
    1,940
    Likes Received:
    66
    "Intel currently accounts for around 80% of global microprocessor sales, according to market analysts IDC.

    Its nearest rival, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) has a 19% share.

    AMD was the first to produce a prototype 22nm chip in 2008.

    It is widely expected to pursue a similar fin-based system to Intel, known as FinFET.

    However, the company has yet to announce its plans for a commercial product.

    AMD spun off its chip fabrication arm in 2009, creating GlobalFoundaries.

    Analyst Dan Hutcheson said that the separation of design and manufacture had damaged AMD's ability to innovate.

    "There is a huge competitor advantage to having your own fab [fabrication facility] and being able to tune the process.

    "This is Intel pulling away," he said"

    And who was it who said selling GF was a good thing for AMD?

    As for AMD clawing something back short term, where is the evidence for such a statement?

    Even with Intel's Sandy epic cock up, AMD still have not and cannot capitalise on it.

    Intel = Barcelona

    AMD = Tranmere Rovers

    On a very bad day for Barcelona, TRFC have a chance but even then it isn't a realistic one.
     
  11. sotu1

    sotu1 Ex-Modder

    Joined:
    24 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    2,877
    Likes Received:
    26
    Are Intel still using MS Paint for their artwork?
     
  12. Fizzban

    Fizzban Man of Many Typos

    Joined:
    10 Mar 2010
    Posts:
    3,339
    Likes Received:
    118
    Very nice. I'm impressed.
     
  13. wuyanxu

    wuyanxu still wants Homeworld 3

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    10,596
    Likes Received:
    233
    why as no one picked up on issues of this: heat density.

    with more tightly packed transistors, the heat per area has increased dramatically. this means it will be more difficult to overclock these chips due to heat generated. also, the narrow channel for those transistors could mean they will degrade faster due to electromigration.


    i will be holding my purchase decision on Ivy bridge until i've seen normal user's overclocking results, and seen whether extreme overclocker's chip can survive a month at very least.
     
  14. [USRF]Obiwan

    [USRF]Obiwan New Member

    Joined:
    9 Apr 2003
    Posts:
    1,721
    Likes Received:
    5
    Horizontal gates going vertical awesome!

    In other news: AMD strikes back with Quad gates :p
     
  15. dicobalt

    dicobalt New Member

    Joined:
    21 Mar 2009
    Posts:
    169
    Likes Received:
    2
    What was that noise? I hope it wasn't the sound of Bulldozer dropping dead.
     
  16. Valinor

    Valinor New Member

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2010
    Posts:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    No worries about bulldozer, AMD were using 4D gates in it...
     
  17. technogiant

    technogiant New Member

    Joined:
    2 May 2009
    Posts:
    323
    Likes Received:
    17
    Oh dear, how on earth is Amd goping to compete with this in the low end......Ivybridge will be DX11, 22nm and 50% power saving with this new trigate design.....this seems like the end of the road for Amd, they are a whole process generation behind and the addition of trigate is going to kill them....fantastic tech news but afraid this is hailing the end of any realistic hope of competition.
     
  18. CAT-THE-FIFTH

    CAT-THE-FIFTH New Member

    Joined:
    5 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    53
    Likes Received:
    0
    Looks pretty cool technology although it seems most of the improvements will be in low power devices. It would mean Intel is in a much better position against ARM based products.

    The following image is from the Anandtech article on the new transistors:

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/4313/...nm-3d-trigate-transistors-shipping-in-2h-2011

    [​IMG]

    At higher voltage the improvement over a 32NM planar transistor starts to diminish it seems. AFAIK,all the current Sandy Bridge processors have a VID over 1V. The planar transistors Intel use are produced on a 32NM bulk process.

    It would be interesting to see the advantage when compared to planar transistors produced on a 32NM SOI process and AFAIK this is what AMD is using.

    Anyway,hopefully the H67 chipset supports Ivy Bridge as it would mean a better upgrade path for my computer.
     
    Last edited: 6 May 2011
  19. Adnoctum

    Adnoctum Kill_All_Humans

    Joined:
    27 Apr 2008
    Posts:
    486
    Likes Received:
    31
    You go away for a week...

    FFS, the number of sheeple in this thread is incredible.

    You read an Intel press release about their amazing "breakthrough" and you swallow it hook, line and sinker without a single critical thought. It is not helped by a technology press industry largely ignorant of such technical matters (not directed towards Bit-tech in particular).

    IT IS A F*****G FINFET!!! They aren't anything special to Intel, they didn't invent them nor are they alone in developing them, Intel is just first to put it into production. I like that Bit-tech just regurgitates the Intel announcement. "Tri-gate" is just Intel's marketing name for a non-unique concept.

    "Tri-gate" is no more a "breakthrough" in transistor design than Intel's HKMG was. It is a small evolutionary step along the way. It especially won't make much of a user difference, so if you are holding off on Sandybridge for these fancy new FinFETs you are quite the fool. Now, the IB 22nm process shrink is more of a reason...

    As for the fabulous performance figures "50%!!"/"37%", did you even bother to notice that these were over Intel's 32nm process (once again, something Bit-tech failed to say)? What would the increases be over a traditional planar 22nm transistor? Much less, I guarantee. Also, did you notice that these figures were for low voltages (0.7V)? That's right, the performance advantages DECREASE as you raise the voltage to more normal desktop CPU levels of 1.3/1.4V. It means that power reductions will be better when the core is clocked down at idle, but not so much when at load.

    Meanwhile, the SOI consortium (AMD, GloFo, IBM, etc) will be fielding FD-SOI which delivers a similar performance advantage (perhaps even better) at low voltages while still using planar transistors. Why is this important? Because it is a tried design/manufacturing process that utilises existing tools and experience.
    If Intel thinks "Tri-gate" Atoms are going to kill off ARM, then they are going to find future FD-SOI ARM's a problem.
    See here (PDF) for more.
     
  20. sdfx

    sdfx New Member

    Joined:
    26 Jun 2011
    Posts:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay I was plannin on making a new build this summer, but apparently as Adnoctum and CAT said, the power reduction would only most likely benefit low powered devices below typical voltage.. so since my build wont be low powered this won't really affect it then would it..?

    Reminds me of LED and LCD and the like.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page