Intel 45nm Fab Process Launched And Penryn Preview

NinjaKicks writes "Intel has decided to make public details of their new 45nm manufacturing process and also has broken news that next-gen Penryn core processors are running various versions of Windows and Vista successfully. Penryn will offer a host of core tweaks over Conroe, larger cache sizes, and SSE4 support. Also, although clock speeds will be increased, processors based on Penryn should fall within the same thermal power range as Conroe. Word is Penryn will also be compatible with some of the existing motherboards on the market while others will need either a BIOS update or perhaps other board-level changes."

Is this a major breakthrough?

• ~2x improvement in transistor density, for either smaller chip size or increased transistor count
• ~30% reduction in transistor switching power
• >20%improvement in transistor switching speed or >5x reduction in source-drain leakage power
• >10x reduction in gate oxide leakage power

As a layman this sounds like a pretty massive improvement. Is this a major breakthrough or is this progress as usual?

Re:

I'd classify it as a minor breaktrough, such things happen every few years but are a huge gain at once.

But feature size isn't everything.

Re:Is this a major breakthrough?

This is the first time since 1969 that a major modification to the MOSFET gate stack occured. In fact it is fairly major. I should remind you that this is a structure that is replicated around 1e19 times each year and is responsible for the biggest part of the 270 Billion US$ semiconductor market.

At least ten years of work in academia and industry and billions of dollars were poured into this. Intel is the first company to make the move and introduce high-k.

(Yes, there were a few minor modifications to the SiO2/Poly stack in between: Plasma nitridation and numerous improvements on SiO2 growth)

FTFA

This is a show of strength if you will, and an impressive one at that. How impressive? We'll wrap-up here with a few quotes from Gordon Moore (Intel), Professor Dimitri Antoniadis (MIT), and Yoshio Nishi (Stanford) telling you what they think of Intel's achievements.

"The implementation of high-k and metal gate materials marks the biggest change in transistor technology since the introduction of polysilicongate MOS transistors in the late 1960s" - Gordon Moore

"The Intel 45-nm CMOS technology marks a historic milestone for the semiconductor industry. Similar to the transition from single metal (Al) gate to polysilicon gate that has allowed optimal nFET and pFET design, the introduction of dual metal with high-k-insulator gate-stack opens the path for optimal design of both types of FETs, at insulator thicknesses necessary for continuing device scaling that are impossible to reach with the industry-standard silicon-dioxide-based insulators. Many options of high-k gate-stacks have been the target of intense industry and academic research for many years now, but Intel's demonstration of a manufacturable dual-metal/high-k solution is a remarkable first." - Prof. Dimitri Antoniadis

"It is a huge break through to replace more than three decade's long successful polysilicon gate technology with a new high-k+metal gate technology. Though the combination of high-k dielectrics and metal gate electrode for advanced CMOS has been extensively studied by many researchers around the world as the ideal MOS gate structure, the technical hurdle to bring the technology to manufacturing floor has been believed still too high for the 45nm node. As a researcher in this field, I am pleasantly surprised by the announcement and would like to congratulate Intel researchers for their success that Intel has demonstrated 45nm microprocessors with their high-k and metal gate technology. Even though specific metal and high-k material have not been disclosed at this moment, this is a revolutionary step toward the world of sub-50nm CMOS integrated circuits, as this new technology will drastically improve transistor performance in all fronts of electrical specifications, resulting in significant improvement of IC performance." - Yoshio Nishi

Re:FTFA

"The implementation of high-k and metal gate materials marks the biggest change in transistor technology since the introduction of polysilicon MOS transistors in the late 1960s" - Gordon Moore

I don't know, I may have to disagree with his eminence on this one... but, parsing his statement a little more finely, he does specifically mention transistor technology. I still view this as an evolutionary refinement of CMOS, and not as big as the transition from bipolar to CMOS for mainstream processors. It is a bigger deal than strained silicon. And by specifying "transistor" he of course sidesteps the comparision to the similar chemical reengineering of the back-end metal stack that came with the introduction of copper and low-k dielectrics. I speculate that like those changes, though, the implementation of the process changes will be relatively transparent to the circuit designers. Yes, the models change, hopefully the subthreshold leakage goes way down, but you've still got the G,D,S,B paradigm... right?

Re:

Yes, the models change, hopefully the subthreshold leakage goes way down, but you've still got the G,D,S,B paradigm... right?
riiiiight!

Re:

I think this is just a lot of Intel FUD. There are other semiconductor companies that will have similar improvements in their designs as well. One that I think is most interesting that Intel will not have is called HOT - Hybrid Orientation Technology. T

Re:

I can tell you this is not FUD. If you follow the literature about this subject closely you will notice that there is no report about a metal usable for a pMOS transistosr. Many companies are not significantly ahead of that. I expect some pretty interestin

Re:

also: HOT and SOI are quite expensive, it saves a lot of money (at least now) to engineer around those solutions.

Re:

The cost of a 12-inch bulk wafer is about $400, an SOI wafer $600. The back-end processing for each is $2000+ ( slightly more for bulk for additional junction engineering to get the additional performance ). The cost difference is about a wash. I guess

Re:

AFAIR Intel presented some interesting technologies studies on SOI a couple of years ago.

Your wafer cost figures are off, but I will rather not comment due to lack of public sources. Still, in most parts of the semiconductor business 10% cost difference is

Re:

If they can build a high-end chip that produces less waste heat than the 386, _that_ would be a breakthrough.

Re:Is this a major breakthrough?

Yes and No.
There are two improvements here which are happening at the same time. Process shrink (which happens all the time) and the use of High-K dielectric (which is something reather new in the mass manufacture feild anyway)

These 2 are just due to process shrink and nothing special:
  * ~2x improvement in transistor density, for either smaller chip size or increased transistor count
  * ~30% reduction in transistor switching power

This one is interesting and the OR should be regaded as an XOR.
  * >20%improvement in transistor switching speed or >5x reduction in source-drain leakage power
Basicly the individual transistors become tunable to decide if they should be fast or low power. Critical path ones will be fast and others will be low power.

And this one is a breakthrough:
  * >10x reduction in gate oxide leakage power
With static power now accounting for up to 50% of all power this is excelent.

Re:

That is not entirely correct. Intel had basically maxed out SiON previously, I doubt they could have gained that much in performance without high-k.

Both

Moore's Law says that massive improvements ARE progress as usual, but people have been so pessimistic about the future of Moore's Law that giving it a new lease on life counts as a major breakthrough.

Re:

* ~2x improvement in transistor density, for either smaller chip size or increased transistor count
* ~30% reduction in transistor switching power
* >20%improvement in transistor switching speed or >5x reduction in source-drain leakage power
* >10x r

Re:Is this a major breakthrough?

If one has a penny and doubles it one has $.02. If one has a million dollars and doubles it one has 2 million dollars. Most people would consider the latter to be a more important improvement. It is the same for microprocessors, doubling now is that much greater than it was 30 years ago.

Re:

Slow down, cowboy, although you are spot on with the L1 cache size, Intel's Pentium 4 never had a cache size of less than 262,144 bytes, and from the more efficient Northwood on (January 2002), cache size ranged from 524,288 to 2,049,152 bytes (trying to a

More (Better?) Coverage

http://dailytech.com/Life+With+Penryn/article5869. htm [dailytech.com]
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16839253/ [msn.com]
http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/27/technology/bc.micr ochips.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes [cnn.com]
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/27/technology/27chi p.html?em&ex=1170046800&en=59a4d10473c4a8c8&ei=508 7%0A [nytimes.com]
http://news.com.com/Chip+companies+entering+their+ metal+period/2100-1006_3-6153962.html [com.com]
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=29 15 [anandtech.com]

Still on the FSB

If you are going to the make the chips smaller how hard is it to come out with a true quad-core?
Havening 2 duel-cores linked by a fsb bus will get in the way even faster as the speed of the cpu gets higher.
And a 4 cpu quad-core sever will likely choke up at the chipset to ram link as well as the chipset to chipset link.

Also if your duel quad-core workstation only have has the pci-e lanes for 1 x16 slot and the 8 other ones are used for the chipset to chipset link amd based ones will blow it away even more so with KL8 cpus. Right now an 2 cpu amd board has 4 pci-e x16 slots running at x16 x8 x16 x8 with 2 x4 lanes left over + each cpu can have a HTX slot or other HT based chip hook up to it.

Re:

Unfortunately (for your point) this has been proven wrong. The FSB works fine up to 2P machines. Intel will soon be quad FSB machines which should work very well for machines up to and including 4P/16Core. The proof is in the pudding, benchmarks show th

Re:Still on the FSB

2 duel-cores

Spelling Nazi time: It's dual! Dual! It's only "duel" if your processors are firing pistols at each other from 10 paces at dawn!

Re:

If you are going to the make the chips smaller how hard is it to come out with a true quad-core?

Not very. It just takes time to go through all the design -> verification -> layout -> production steps that all new processors require. Yes, the

Re:

Actually, IBM and AMD, as partners, will also be using this new 0.45 process in their new chips, but it may take them longer to get there than Intel.

As an AMD fanboy, I was actually very happy to see the release of the Core and Core 2 chips - Intel was wil

Windows and Vista?

news that next-gen Penryn core processors are running various versions of Windows and Vista successfully

I know Microsoft told us that Vista was new and all, but I didn't know it was this new!

Re:

Wish I had modpoints. +1 funny for you.

I mainly find it funny because I usually don't run Windows. If I did, I would feel something a little bitter added to the funny mix, kind of a Dilbert strip.

So how many GHz?

So does this mean that the "future improvements will be on number of cores, not on individual core speeds" state of things in CPUs isn't true anymore? Anyone have any quotes on how much raw performance these 45nm CPUs will attain?

Re:

It's still mostly true. Going from a 3.0 GHz Conroe to ~3.7 GHz Penryn is only a 30-40% performance increase, but we want a 100% increase. So we can expect that the number of cores and frequency will both increase.

IBM and Intel both a anounced major breakthrough

You are missing the point here. IBM and intel, on the same day (Friday), independently announced [washingtonpost.com] a breakthrough in transistor design. Now isn't this strange? The biggest advance in transistors in the last 40 years or so - and two different companies announ

Re:

I posted links to similar articles as a reply to the FP (an anonymous troll), but I hadn't read your article.

Initially I interpreted it as Intel and IBM cooperating on researching the new hafnium-based technology (this is the interpretation that Wikipedia'

Re:

AMD will have a process with the low k thingy one year after Intel. I suspect IBM delibrately made their announcement on the same day to take the wind out of Intels sails, even though they're a year behind.

Re:

Can I see the clock speed boosted? Not everything can be parallelized and besides I don't think anyone at Microsoft knows how to.

Who knows, maybe we're looking at the days of assembly programming again... you know, the days of well-written, optimized sof

I have been convinced...

I have been convinced for a long time that software bloat is not a problem. You touch on the reason. For the last decade, it has been cheaper to throw more hardware at a problem than it has been to optimize code. At some point in time, there will likely be a stall in speeding up hardware. When that happens we have a many years of continuing our computer speed ups via software optimizations. Heck, I know that I write inefficient code all the time. It is a simple cost/benefit choice. My clients do not want to pay tens of thousands of dollars to solve a problem that can be solved with $1000 worth of hardware. It's not that I couldn't optimize my code, and it's not that I wouldn't love to optimize my code. It's just the most companies don't want to pay for it.

Re:

Most significant software projects already have a performance optimization phase. You run a profiler, find out where your application spends 90% of its time, and you fix that. The fact that software today in some cases seems slow mostly has to do with it

Re:

Can I see the clock speed boosted? Not everything can be parallelized and besides I don't think anyone at Microsoft knows how to.

Another blurb in TFA talks about this:
HK + MG Combined:

• Drive current increased >20%, (>20% higher performance) OR
• source-drain leakage reduced >5x

What this means is that you can get higher performance (~20%) at the cost of higher power con

Re:

In the sever market the power consumption of the FB-DIMM's are alot higher then ECC DDR 2

Re:

I hope you realize that clock speed is only one measure of the performance of a machine, and that increasing clock speed can trade off with other important factors.

Re:

While Intel's ridiculously inefficient Netburst core might be the impetus for your post, that's not Business as Usual.

When Intel moved from the 80386 to the 80486, the FPU was integrated for the first time, as was onboard cache, and instruction execution r

Re:

They may give us 8 cores at 4 Ghz instead .. but that's cheap crap, you can bet the compilers and apps for it will be donkey inefficient. I hope a competitor realizes the importance of instructions per second.

I hope you realize that there are some physical limits and constraints that cannot be broken, or can be broken at a massive disadvantage for other parameters. If I don't remember wrong, power consumption and therefore heat emission is proportional to the

Re:

It will when I get one.

Re:

But does it run linux?

Yes [intel.com]. (Just search for the "L" word.)

Re:

If you're a company or uni then overclocking your servers (definitely) or desktops (probably) really isn't an option. Even as a consumer, surely you'd be wondering if it's worth the potential warranty issues, especially if you've got to stump up for "highe

Re:Who cares about clock speed, just overclock

A production E4300 running at 1.8 GHz can be run at 3 GHz on stock air cooling.

Didn't you get the news? The clock speed race is sooooo 2005. For everything but the most CPU-bound number-crunching applications, increasing clock speed is no longer very desirable.

Today it's all about PERFORMANCE PER WATT (crucial for server farms and portables) and on-chip parallelism/SMP (useful for everything from desktop GUIs to web serving to RTOS embedded systems).

Re:

A production E4300 running at 1.8 GHz can be run at 3 GHz on stock air cooling

And if that's possible with a 65nm chip, even just the normal benefits of scaling suggest that 4GHz should be attainable from an equivalent 45nm chip. And it sounds like this ge

Re:

that "free speed" comes at the cost of a higher grade of memory (adding $100+)

To be fair, you probably get a greater performance improvement from increasing the FSB speed than you do from increasing the processor speed, so this may well be worth it.

Re:

I am not sure what you're trying to tell us? I don't think anyone is in doubt that newer CPU:s are typically for high-end users, but Intel is also targeting power efficiency among other things. Plus, some people also want to upgrade because using old hardw

Re:

In the article, they keep on talking about high capacitance as if it's a good thing, but I was under the impression that you want to minimize the capacitance to let the transistor switch faster. Am I wrong? Is the article wrong? Is this a different capaci

Re:

In a CMOS-like technology, you want overall capacitance as small as possible - because you have to charge and discharge that capacitor once per cycle. A first order approximation of power used is 0.5*Capacitance*(voltage squared). A first order approxima

Error in TFA

The article linked above refers to "Halfnium", with is both an element that does not exist and a gross misspelling of Hafnium [wikipedia.org] , which is the new High-K replacement for silicon dioxide. It's also worth pointing out that both IBM and Intel announced this breakthough [yahoo.com] almost simultaneously, and AMD will reap the windfall benefits through its own partnership with IBM (they will move to the 0.45 process some time in 2008). AMD has also announced a low-K breakthrough that they will be implementing in their 0.65 process as well.

To give Intel sole credit [betanews.com] for this breakthrough might be a little inaccurate.

Re:

Nope. The Macbook's proc, like most laptops, isn't socketed.