Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
  • Like
Reactions: no_idea
will the come up with something better in 2121?

just wondering... (my time machine is in the shop, so I can't go to 2121 to find out)
 
will the come up with something better in 2121?

just wondering... (my time machine is in the shop, so I can't go to 2121 to find out)
I heard that if things keep going as they have been, the world as we know it will not exist in 2121. So, I'd have to say there will not be something better. :)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: fahlman
The same ones using TSMC’s 3nm process.
Praising IBM for this is bizarre considering they don't have any chip fabrication plants and just publish papers for technology that nobody adopts. Meanwhile, TSMC already announced in 2020 that they were actively constructing their 2nm plant in one city and setting up another site in a different city for overflow. So TSMC is ramping up to build millions of these and has been for a year, and IBM built one in a lab. Cool? Its like how IBM announced a 5nm technology years ago too, but who makes them? Nobody. Meanwhile, TSMC makes millions of their own 5nm process for Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: liberte1776
I wish they would just stop with the marketing hype.
3nm does not mean every or even most features are that size. It literally means nothing these days.

What is the gate density?
A 5nm design with 10 metal layers will have higher density than 3nm with half the metal layers.
 
Praising IBM for this is bizarre considering they don't have any chip fabrication plants and just publish papers for technology that nobody adopts. Meanwhile, TSMC already announced in 2020 that they were actively constructing their 2nm plant in one city and setting up another site in a different city for overflow. So TSMC is ramping up to build millions of these and has been for a year, and IBM built one in a lab. Cool? Its like how IBM announced a 5nm technology years ago too, but who makes them? Nobody. Meanwhile, TSMC makes millions of their own 5nm process for Apple.
actually, IBM research often ends up getting implemented by GlobalFoundries.
 
Intel 7nm is more dense than TSMC 5nm.
Routed gate density matters more than anything.

Routed gate density doesn’t matter more than anything, actually.

In fact, having designed many CPUs, including K6, Opteron, PowerPC x704, Sun UltraSparc V, etc., I never once heard the term “routed gate density,” nor ever worried about. What I did worry about was transistor min width/length, spacing, wire aspect ratio, wire pitch, spice models, leakage currents, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aknabi
Nobody is seeing CPU instability. And since the size of the transistor has nothing to do with the node size, we aren’t particularly close yet to their being an insurmountable issue with quantum tunneling. Right now, we’ve switched to 3D transistor gate structures to allow an more consistent electric field to enable the transistors to fully turn off (thus preventing static leakage current). There are new gate structures on the roadmap over the next few years that will prevent leakage even as the transistors get smaller.

And once we reach the threshold where the size is such that the transistors cannot be turned off, there are multiple other solutions (for example, compound semiconductors with heterojunctions, different transistor types such as HBTs that rely on vertical distances instead of horizontal, etc.)
Are HBTs the limit then? When we switch to that, chips will get progressively thicker vertically until they no longer fit into our devices? If so, how many years would you put on that until it’s no longer viable?
 
actually, IBM research often ends up getting implemented by GlobalFoundries.
You think that will still happen given their current dispute?
But I agree that research, IBM and in general is driving us forward
 
You think that will still happen given their current dispute?
But I agree that research, IBM and in general is driving us forward
Dunno.

Look, I’m not at all claiming that IBM doing something in a lab is equivalent to TSMC doing it in production. Just saying that IBM doing stuff in a lab is a good thing and helps drive the technology forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: liberte1776
Do you think it is possible that the iPhone 13 will have A15 and iPhone 13 Pro the M1?
A15 will be faster than M1 on single core performance. So there's no reason to put a M1 on a iPhone.
M1 isn't anything special. M1 is just a double sized A14. It's not like M1 is that much far away from a A14 that Apple market team is trying to let you believe.
 
Intel 7nm is more dense than TSMC 5nm.
Routed gate density matters more than anything.
That's what Intel claimed.
We all know how Intel's "more dense than TSMC N7" 10nm end up much less dense as first generation TSMC N7 chips.
Icelake/Tigerlake is even less dense than AMD Zen3 which use 6T libs for cost saving.
 

Intel Readies 7nm Chip Production for Second Half of 2022​

This is problem with using arbitrary numbers for process sizes... technically Intel 7nm only has a 4nm pitch; so they aren't that behind if at all. People only see the 7 vs 4, so latter must be better.
 
Technical jargon is interesting and all but when you step back and think about it we take for granted the amazing tech that goes into modern smart phones. Most users will never come close to tapping into the full power these phones have as it is and the processes keep getting more and more refined.

Earlier today I was sitting outside on my deck with my iPhone 12 clipping and editing some videos I took of my daughter running around in the yard and playing on the swings and whatnot. I had a moment where it just dawned on me the kinds of things my phone can do and it makes it all look so easy. In the span of like 5 minutes I was shooting super high FPS slow-mo video, then clipping it down in length, adjusting when the slow motion effect started and stopped, and then after mere seconds of rendering time I was iMessaging it to my wife and relatives. Just using basic built in apps on a smartphone in my back yard. It was a little thing that millions of people probably do every day but never think about what these amazing little chips are doing under the hood to make it all happen so effortlessly.

What a time to be alive.
 
This is problem with using arbitrary numbers for process sizes... technically Intel 7nm only has a 4nm pitch; so they aren't that behind if at all. People only see the 7 vs 4, so latter must be better.
Since when did pitch become the important metric?
 
I heard that if things keep going as they have been, the world as we know it will not exist in 2121. So, I'd have to say there will not be something better. :)


ok... humans will have almost 100 years to figure out how to leave the planet... at least that's not all bad news? (well, for a very select humans anyway)
 
The room for big jumps in performance is getting smaller and smaller for Apple silicon...
who knows if X86 could reach ARM in some years (if they find the way tonreduce size also)
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: fahlman
GREAT! 3nm perfect chip for the new Mac mini.

Thats all I wanna buy from Apple in the future.

A green Energy efficient Mac mini.

I'll use Windows 11 along with an AMD PC I build myself for the PRO Stuff.
 
Now if we can CURE CANCER and other diseases as fast as CPU upgrades we would be in HEAVEN.

It's amazing how everyone wants a faster computer or iPhone over being SAVED from CANCER or DEATH.

We are still greedy ignorant human beings in the long run always looking for a war instead of PEACE.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.