AMD Piledriver

Isotropic je 12. jan 2014 ob 00:02 izjavil:

pri minanju recimo primecoinov se elektrika orenk pozna, pri recimo gamingu 2h dnevno pa ne.
vseeno je pa bolje manj kot vec, sploh pri streznikih in hpc. tut na racun par % hitrosti (ce je amd res boljsi pri streznikih)

I'll repeat some useful numbers I've given before at our events. As can be seen for SRAM the Intel 22nm is almost but not quite twice as dense as their 32nm process, whilst TSMC and GF processes fit in roughly to the Intel densities as given by the names of their nodes.

Once upon a time half the metal M1 pitch defined the node but in recent years metal pitch reduction has not kept pace with other features so fabs have tended to reference the node as the ratio to the density of SRAM at 65 or 90nm.
Certainly there is a LOT of market BS taking place as well (Intel included) but in reality Intel does lead the way in density at least.

Of course SRAM density isn't everything but with BEOL limited by the desire to stay with single patterning, for logic the metal routing now begins to dominate over transistor size.

The drawn gate length is not really a relevant measure any more and in any case has never been the official definition of the node. It is generally used to set the performance of the transistor, shorter is faster whilst longer is slower but less leakage. The move to FinFETs allowed the performance and density of the next node to be achieved without going to shorter gate lengths which would have excessive leakage.

The additional complication of FD-SOI as a competing process technology will prove interesting. Despite the hype, FD-SOI SRAM densities won't match the densest FinFET SRAMs at the same node, but leakage will be noticeably better, causing a definite process branch applicable to numerous applications.


The stats are :

SRAMs
(HP and special low power versions are larger for all fabs)

Intel 45nm SRAM cell - 0.346um^2
Intel 32nm SRAM cell - 0.171um^2
Intel 22nm SRAM cell - 0.092um^2

TSMC 40nm SRAM cell - 0.290um^2
TSMC 28nm SRAM cell - 0.127um^2
TSMC 20nm SRAM cell - 0.090um^2

GF 28nm SRAM cell - 0.120um^2

ST 28nm FD-SOI SRAM cell - 0.120um^2 (this is believed to be the version with no back-gate and uncompetitive leakage - 0.152um^2 for back-gate and lowest power/leakage but of course LP versions of other processes are also larger)


Metal pitch
(once upon a time half this was the node size but as can be seen the transistors have shrunk a lot more than the metal)

Intel 22nm metal pitch - 64nm
Intel 14nm metal pitch - 48nm

TSMC 28nm metal pitch - 64nm
TSMC 20nm metal pitch - 64nm

GF 14nm metal pitch - 48nm (predicted)


Contacted gate pitch
(this is a key dimension in that it is no point making transistor gates shorter unless you can reduce this number to match)

Intel 32nm contacted gate pitch - 112nm
Intel 22nm contacted gate pitch - 90nm (80nm with special processing)
Intel 14nm contacted gate pitch - unknown

TSMC 40nm contacted gate pitch - 160nm
TSMC 28nm contacted gate pitch - 118nm
TSMC 20nm contacted gate pitch - unknown
TSMC 14nm contacted gate pitch - unknown

GF 28nm contacted gate pitch - 113nm
GF 20nm contacted gate pitch - 80nm
GF 14nm contacted gate pitch - not relevant as BEOL is stated as being the same as 20nm. However this may change in due course. - See more at: http://www.electronicsweekly.com/manner...

D3m je 12. jan 2014 ob 11:56 izjavil:

Zdaj se morajo izjasniti tako eni kot drugi kaj bo "standard" ali Intelov zasnova ali druga, če se bojo sploh zjasnili.

Ker potem je vse samo marketing.

D3m je 12. jan 2014 ob 11:58 izjavil:

Se strinjam. Kaveri je 12 core BTW.

hojnikb je 12. jan 2014 ob 12:56 izjavil:

bu-bu-but AMD has 12 cores

boolsheat je 12. jan 2014 ob 13:07 izjavil:

Kakšna pa pride potem poraba (Intel + GPU), da pride recimo podoben performance kot AMD A10? Je potem boljši AMD ali ima še vedno Intel manjšo porabo?

hojnikb je 12. jan 2014 ob 13:51 izjavil:

4670T+7750 je najbol efficient combo, kar jo lahko kupiš. 100W maximalne porabe, praktično pa precej manj, saj i5 nima aktivnega gpuja. Torej zadeva porabi manj kot topend kaveri in je hitrejša overall.

klkkkkkkkkkk je 12. jan 2014 ob 13:55 izjavil:

hojnikb je 12. jan 2014 ob 13:51 izjavil:

4670T+7750 je najbol efficient combo, kar jo lahko kupiš. 100W maximalne porabe, praktično pa precej manj, saj i5 nima aktivnega gpuja. Torej zadeva porabi manj kot topend kaveri in je hitrejša overall.

zelo težko... moral bi narediti test glede nato, da ima A10 6700 CPU porabo enako kot i5....

D3m je 12. jan 2014 ob 13:54 izjavil:

hojnikb je 12. jan 2014 ob 13:51 izjavil:

4670T+7750 je najbol efficient combo, kar jo lahko kupiš. 100W maximalne porabe, praktično pa precej manj, saj i5 nima aktivnega gpuja. Torej zadeva porabi manj kot topend kaveri in je hitrejša overall.

Cena? Aja tukaj se ustavi. Thx anyway.

klkkkkkkkkkk je 12. jan 2014 ob 13:23 izjavil:

Najdi GPu ki, bo uporabljala samo 40-50W

klkkkkkkkkkk je 12. jan 2014 ob 14:20 izjavil:

Že overclockan A10 6800K dobi 30-40% boosta tako, da je že na ravni 7750 DDR3

klkkkkkkkkkk je 12. jan 2014 ob 14:22 izjavil:

Amm to se še neve... kolk bo dejansko povzročil "bottlenecka"...

klkkkkkkkkkk je 12. jan 2014 ob 14:26 izjavil:

kaveri naj bi imeš še 2 jedra več.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/rad...