Re:The Race to 10/7nm
by Animats on Wednesday May 31, 2017 @03:56PM
(#14455411)
It's a terrible article on an important subject.
He completely ignores the extreme ultraviolet "light source" problem. As the features get smaller, light wavelengths are too big, and higher frequency light has to be used to get the wavelength down. Current technologies use ultraviolet light. The next step down in size is "extreme ultraviolet", which is actually soft X-rays. The "light source" can be either a synchrotron or an an incredibly expensive kludge where droplets of tin are vaporized by lasers.[1] 30KW of laser power goes in to produce maybe 100 watts of useful illumination. Two floors, tons of equipment. All this just to expose a photosensitive resist on the wafer.
At 14nm, the UV light source is a modest device. Getting to 7nm is enormously more complicated. 7nm may not be cheaper per gate.
He completely ignores the extreme ultraviolet "light source" problem. As the features get smaller, light wavelengths are too big, and higher frequency light has to be used to get the wavelength down. Current technologies use ultraviolet light. The next step down in size is "extreme ultraviolet", which is actually soft X-rays. The "light source" can be either a synchrotron or an an incredibly expensive kludge where droplets of tin are vaporized by lasers.[1] 30KW of laser power goes in to produce maybe 100 watts of useful illumination. Two floors, tons of equipment. All this just to expose a photosensitive resist on the wafer.
At 14nm, the UV light source is a modest device. Getting to 7nm is enormously more complicated. 7nm may not be cheaper per gate.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xJEs3a-1QU