Re:5/3nm Wars Begin
by SethTro on Saturday January 25, 2020 @02:11PM
(#22147994)
> Today, the node names are little more than marketing terms. 'The node designation is becoming more misleading and meaningless," said Samuel Wang, an analyst at Gartner. "For example, at 5nm or 3nm, there is no single geometry that is actually 5nm or 3nm."
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Why is this not considered misleading and regulated?
Re:5/3nm Wars Begin
by AnimalMuppet on Saturday January 25, 2020 @07:12PM
(#22149509)
This is considered misleading. But why would it be regulated? Nobody buys a chip based on the advertised feature size. They buy on power use, MIPS, number of cores, and cost.
So what is 5nm or 3nm?
The process marketed as 5nm has roughly twice the density as the process marketed as 7nm and so on up and down the line; that's how they justify it.
Re:5/3nm Wars Begin
by AlexCoventry on Saturday January 25, 2020 @09:43PM
(#22150055)
How can they double the density without decreasing the feature size?
The feature side usually does decrease every generation; it's just that the feature size for, say, a "7nm" process is not exactly 7nm.
The power of recursive reasoning. Induction tells us that Intel's 10nm process probably wasn't 10nm features...
I am wildly speculating here, but maybe going 3rd dimension?
Re:5/3nm Wars Begin
by aarongolliver on Saturday January 25, 2020 @05:54PM
(#22149145)
It has about the same meaning as the 5 or 3 in "core i5" or "core i3". It's all marketing.