# Intel Reinvents Transistors Using New 3-D Structure



## btarunr (May 4, 2011)

Intel Corporation today announced a significant breakthrough in the evolution of the transistor, the microscopic building block of modern electronics. For the first time since the invention of silicon transistors over 50 years ago, transistors using a three-dimensional structure will be put into high-volume manufacturing. Intel will introduce a revolutionary 3-D transistor design called Tri-Gate, first disclosed by Intel in 2002, into high-volume manufacturing at the 22-nanometer (nm) node in an Intel chip codenamed "Ivy Bridge." A nanometer is one-billionth of a meter.

The three-dimensional Tri-Gate transistors represent a fundamental departure from the two-dimensional planar transistor structure that has powered not only all computers, mobile phones and consumer electronics to-date, but also the electronic controls within cars, spacecraft, household appliances, medical devices and virtually thousands of other everyday devices for decades.



 

 




"Intel's scientists and engineers have once again reinvented the transistor, this time utilizing the third dimension," said Intel President and CEO Paul Otellini. "Amazing, world-shaping devices will be created from this capability as we advance Moore's Law into new realms."

Scientists have long recognized the benefits of a 3-D structure for sustaining the pace of Moore's Law as device dimensions become so small that physical laws become barriers to advancement. The key to today's breakthrough is Intel's ability to deploy its novel 3-D Tri-Gate transistor design into high-volume manufacturing, ushering in the next era of Moore's Law and opening the door to a new generation of innovations across a broad spectrum of devices.

Moore's Law is a forecast for the pace of silicon technology development that states that roughly every 2 years transistor density will double, while increasing functionality and performance and decreasing costs. It has become the basic business model for the semiconductor industry for more than 40 years.

*Unprecedented Power Savings and Performance Gains*
Intel's 3-D Tri-Gate transistors enable chips to operate at lower voltage with lower leakage, providing an unprecedented combination of improved performance and energy efficiency compared to previous state-of-the-art transistors. The capabilities give chip designers the flexibility to choose transistors targeted for low power or high performance, depending on the application.

The 22nm 3-D Tri-Gate transistors provide up to 37 percent performance increase at low voltage versus Intel's 32nm planar transistors. This incredible gain means that they are ideal for use in small handheld devices, which operate using less energy to "switch" back and forth. Alternatively, the new transistors consume less than half the power when at the same performance as 2-D planar transistors on 32nm chips.

"The performance gains and power savings of Intel's unique 3-D Tri-Gate transistors are like nothing we've seen before," said Mark Bohr, Intel Senior Fellow. "This milestone is going further than simply keeping up with Moore's Law. The low-voltage and low-power benefits far exceed what we typically see from one process generation to the next. It will give product designers the flexibility to make current devices smarter and wholly new ones possible. We believe this breakthrough will extend Intel's lead even further over the rest of the semiconductor industry."

*Continuing the Pace of Innovation - Moore's Law*
Transistors continue to get smaller, cheaper and more energy efficient in accordance with Moore's Law - named for Intel co-founder Gordon Moore. Because of this, Intel has been able to innovate and integrate, adding more features and computing cores to each chip, increasing performance, and decreasing manufacturing cost per transistor.

Sustaining the progress of Moore's Law becomes even more complex with the 22nm generation. Anticipating this, Intel research scientists in 2002 invented what they called a Tri-Gate transistor, named for the three sides of the gate. Today's announcement follows further years of development in Intel's highly coordinated research-development-manufacturing pipeline, and marks the implementation of this work for high-volume manufacturing.

The 3-D Tri-Gate transistors are a reinvention of the transistor. The traditional "flat" two-dimensional planar gate is replaced with an incredibly thin three-dimensional silicon fin that rises up vertically from the silicon substrate. Control of current is accomplished by implementing a gate on each of the three sides of the fin - two on each side and one across the top -- rather than just one on top, as is the case with the 2-D planar transistor. The additional control enables as much transistor current flowing as possible when the transistor is in the "on" state (for performance), and as close to zero as possible when it is in the "off" state (to minimize power), and enables the transistor to switch very quickly between the two states (again, for performance).

Just as skyscrapers let urban planners optimize available space by building upward, Intel's 3-D Tri-Gate transistor structure provides a way to manage density. Since these fins are vertical in nature, transistors can be packed closer together, a critical component to the technological and economic benefits of Moore's Law. For future generations, designers also have the ability to continue growing the height of the fins to get even more performance and energy-efficiency gains.

"For years we have seen limits to how small transistors can get," said Moore. "This change in the basic structure is a truly revolutionary approach, and one that should allow Moore's Law, and the historic pace of innovation, to continue."

*World's First Demonstration of 22nm 3-D Tri-Gate Transistors*
The 3-D Tri-Gate transistor will be implemented in the company's upcoming manufacturing process, called the 22nm node, in reference to the size of individual transistor features. More than 6 million 22nm Tri-Gate transistors could fit in the period at the end of this sentence.

Today, Intel demonstrated the world's first 22nm microprocessor, codenamed "Ivy Bridge," working in a laptop, server and desktop computer. Ivy Bridge-based Intel Core family processors will be the first high-volume chips to use 3-D Tri-Gate transistors. Ivy Bridge is slated for high-volume production readiness by the end of this year.










This silicon technology breakthrough will also aid in the delivery of more highly integrated Intel Atom processor-based products that scale the performance, functionality and software compatibility of Intel architecture while meeting the overall power, cost and size requirements for a range of market segment needs.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

Look like AMD bulldozer is going to have some real competition ! 
SWEEEEEEEEEEEET News !


----------



## douglatins (May 4, 2011)

When can I buy this?


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

douglatins said:


> When can I buy this?



There next CPU that is coming out should have them . Ivy bridge .


----------



## DannibusX (May 4, 2011)

douglatins said:


> When can I buy this?





			
				btarunr said:
			
		

> Today, Intel demonstrated the world's first 22nm microprocessor, codenamed "Ivy Bridge," working in a laptop, server and desktop computer. Ivy Bridge-based Intel Core family processors will be the first high-volume chips to use 3-D Tri-Gate transistors. Ivy Bridge is slated for high-volume production readiness by the end of this year.



Next year probably.


----------



## btarunr (May 4, 2011)

douglatins said:


> When can I buy this?



January 2012.


----------



## cheesy999 (May 4, 2011)

btarunr said:


> January 2012.



i can't wait that long


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

cheesy999 said:


> i can't wait that long



Well get the bulldozer !


----------



## devguy (May 4, 2011)

Cool video.  This is still quite different than what I remember reading a few years ago about companies trying to build a 3D die rather than the planar ones we have now.  While that would be amazing, and could exponentially increase the number of transistors allowed, cooling such a thing would be the problem.

Either way, this is a neat breakthrough, and I'm surprised to see it'll already be put into effect on Ivy Bridge.  Should make for some impressive power consumption benefits over Sandy Bridge with similar (if not better) performance!


----------



## cheesy999 (May 4, 2011)

trickson said:


> Well get the bulldozer !



no i always wait 2 gens before upgrading

also i feel happy, my awesome speed means i beat BTR by 12 mins

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145197


----------



## Frick (May 4, 2011)

This is pretty cool, and pretty soon too. I wonder how it will affect the industry though, as this is an Intel piece of work. Will others be able to license it/use it or would they have to do it some other ways if they want in on it? There are other methods for doing it, but how far have they come?


----------



## erocker (May 4, 2011)

trickson said:


> Look like AMD bulldozer is going to have some real competition !
> SWEEEEEEEEEEEET News !



The way things are looking, Intel's current lineup will be competing with Bulldozer.


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

erocker said:


> The way things are looking, Intel's current lineup will be competing with Bulldozer.



But don't you think with this advantage in computing power it will be a landslide for Intel ? I mean a 3D transistor ! This is a true break through .


----------



## cheesy999 (May 4, 2011)

erocker said:


> The way things are looking, Intel's current lineup will be competing with Bulldozer.



well considering i've heard rumors bulldozer struggles to beat sandy bridge thats not all good news

also:bring back spock or kitt


----------



## 20mmrain (May 4, 2011)

Well cya later AMD.... Like I said before Intel is not the Microsoft of the Computing world. Cheaper to make sure.... but prices will now sore in terms of no competition.

But really cool tech though.... that will be awesome to be able to overclock a CPU to 5 or 6 ghz on air hit only 45c/50c and and also be only drawing 80 watts. 

This should definitely be fun... as long as they don't take the OC option away in the future.

Of course I am totally making up numbers here.... but it's were my head first goes.


----------



## erocker (May 4, 2011)

trickson said:


> But don't you think with this advantage in computing power it will be a landslide for Intel ? I mean a 3D transistor ! This is a true break through .



Isn't that kind of what I just said?


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

cheesy999 said:


> well considering i've heard rumors bulldozer struggles to beat sandy bridge thats not all good news
> 
> also:bring back spock or kitt



WOW this indeed is a crushing blow for AMD then . May even put them out for another 5 years or MORE ! WOW I know what I am sticking with . Intel FTW


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

erocker said:


> Isn't that kind of what I just said?



Yeah I was reading it wrong till now .


----------



## digibucc (May 4, 2011)

erocker said:


> Isn't that kind of what I just said?



yes - do i have to explain everything to you?
if the current gen competes with bulldozer, then ivy bridge should be leagues ahead.

now do you understand what you said?


----------



## 20mmrain (May 4, 2011)

trickson said:


> WOW this indeed is a crushing blow for AMD then . May even put them out for another 5 years or MORE ! WOW I know what I am sticking with . Intel FTW



I would agree as long as they don't rape you for the cost. I mean their hole point is to make it more efficient and cheaper! If it's cheaper then it should cost an arm and a leg either. 

Also as long as they don't try to play god with it and take all the fun out of messing with this technology. Example lock the multiplier too.


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

digibucc said:


> yes - do i have to explain everything to you?
> if the current gen competes with bulldozer, then ivy bridge should be leagues ahead.
> 
> now do you understand what you said?



Yes I get it now  
Man AMD is sure in a world of hurt !  All the AMD heads out there are  there eyes out .


----------



## digibucc (May 4, 2011)

trickson said:


> Yes I get it now
> Man AMD is sure in a world of hurt !  All the AMD heads out there are  there eyes out .


im sorry... i can't resist sometimes 

shut your mouth ! , my main is i7 but i still have amds 

i do agree though, unless they have just been quiet and are almost ready for their own, this will change things.  especially if intel can at least not be tons more expensive than they already are. and by that i just mean most buyers will still choose the cheaper one, unless it's crazy technology for not that much more...


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

digibucc said:


> shut your mouth !



I guess I was being a bit over the top . I will shut my mouth now .


----------



## sy5tem (May 4, 2011)

well intel invented something all over again . so when AMD did that? i can't remember 

finally something really exciting and new  can't wait to see what will come up from this, 

also i wonder can they just build like more bridge on same transistor? like 2 bridge that have control over 3 flow of current each? hehe that would be 9x 1 transistor!


----------



## HalfAHertz (May 4, 2011)

When I heard 3d i thought they were stacking the transistors on top of each other but what they're planning to do also sounds awesome. Give me my 10 Jugahurtz CPU nau Intel!


----------



## sy5tem (May 4, 2011)

HalfAHertz said:


> When I heard 3d i thought they were stacking the transistors on top of each other but what they're planning to do also sounds awesome. Give me my 10 Jugahurtz CPU nau Intel!



i read somewhere that there is a PHYSIC limit on how much mhz they can get ,,, can't remember exactly but the current can't go any faster then X .... lol no Jugahurtz for you in your lifetime sowy!


----------



## mk_ln (May 4, 2011)

20mmrain said:


> Well cya later AMD.... Like I said before Intel is not the Microsoft of the Computing world. Cheaper to make sure.... but prices will now *sore *in terms of no competition.
> 
> But really cool tech though.... that will be awesome to be able to overclock a CPU to 5 or 6 ghz on air hit only 45c/50c and and also be only drawing 80 watts.
> 
> ...





20mmrain said:


> I would agree as long as they don't rape you for the cost. I mean their *hole *point is to make it more efficient and cheaper! If it's cheaper then it should cost an arm and a leg either.
> 
> Also as long as they don't try to play god with it and take all the fun out of messing with this technology. Example lock the multiplier too.



just a friendly fyi - the bolded words should've been 'soar' and 'whole', respectively.


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (May 4, 2011)

Yay; this is a puff piece about technologies and how they perform in the lab...

Now that I've given people time to think, consider this:
1) The PS3 with 9 cores will be the most powerful processor on the market for years to come.  -Sony
2) The speeds I get (at best) on my 10/100/1000 network are probably in the high 800s.  Theoretical and practical are two completely different things.
3) Less losses mean less heat.  3d means less surface area per heat generating volume.  Yes heat will decrease, but removing heat from the transistors at the bottom middle of a chip will become much more difficult.
4) PRESS RELEASE.  They are carefully worded and optimistic.  While I would like to believe in Unicorns and world peace I know that there is something fishy if the Onion reports on them...
5) What did Intel really suggest, high overclocking or low energy performance; I would posit that they are pushing more for low energy performance given AMD is actually competing with their APUs.

Negativity aside, I hope this works out.  Intel moving this far ahead will force AMD to compete in other ways.  I would love to see them give Intel a boot in the head, because AMD found an entirely new way to optimize their processors.  The bulldozer is a step towards something unique, and I think Intel's PR might actually push AMD faster.  Only time will tell on both sides.  It will be an interesting 2012.


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (May 4, 2011)

sy5tem said:


> i read somewhere that there is a PHYSIC limit on how much mhz they can get ,,, can't remember exactly but the current can't go any faster then X .... lol no Jugahurtz for you in your lifetime sowy!



Wow; I'd say that you really know about sarcasm, but I would be afraid that you wouldn't get the joke.

The comment was obviously hyperbole, and not an actual request.  I say this completely disregarding that juga isn't a prefix and hurtz is not a unit.


Depending upon the semi-conductor, materials will start to breakdown at extremely high frequencies.  Transistor breakdown limits overclocking, but there is research into pushing that limit higher.  Realistically, the limiting factor in your PC is heat induced by leakage.  High heating promotes thermal breakdown, which also destroys transistors.  You should, theoretically, be able to push a processor that runs cooler to higher frequencies.  If you've done even cursory reasearch into over clocking you would find even a layman understands this. 

_Physics_ does not determine this.  Material properties determine this.  If you want to use the caps lock have a good reason.  You will find that older processors (think Pentium 4) do not over clock well.  This is because they have higher leakages-> higher heat-> transistor breakdown.  The same material was used on early core 2 processors (switching to hi-k later on), but they overclocked better because of structural differences and less leakage.


----------



## D4S4 (May 4, 2011)

i only wonder what changes will this bring to overclocking...


----------



## Frick (May 4, 2011)

lilhasselhoffer said:


> Yay; this is a puff piece about technologies and how they perform in the lab...
> 
> Now that I've given people time to think, consider this:
> 1) The PS3 with 9 cores will be the most powerful processor on the market for years to come.  -Sony
> ...



I hear ya, but it is a step in the right direction. Lots of folks have been working on designs like this for some years now and from my understanding Intel is simply first with it in mass production. I'm confident it will be a bit of a game changer, but how much is still unsure.


----------



## 15th Warlock (May 4, 2011)

sy5tem said:


> well intel invented something all over again . so when AMD did that? i can't remember



How about the first available 1Ghz desktop processor and the first available desktop 64 bit processor?

Those two just out of my head now, but I'm sure there's more innovative ideas to be mentioned, I'm an Intel user but you have to give credit where it's due 

Now this is truly revolutionary, Ivy Bridge will be compatible with P67 boards so looks like another hit yet for Intel. 

Now if only they can produce the 3D water cooled processor IBM was just developing a few years ago it would be awesome!


----------



## TheMailMan78 (May 4, 2011)

You guys better hope AMD destroys Sandy if you ever dream of affording this thing.


----------



## 15th Warlock (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> You guys better hope AMD destroys Sandy if you ever dream of affording this thing.



I'm pretty sure this technology will trickle down to all Intel next gen CPUs, I mean, 22nm is the next node all their processors will be fabed at, so I expect this process to be used on everything from entry level to high performance CPUs.


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> You guys better hope AMD destroys Sandy if you ever dream of affording this thing.



I have to keep my mouth shut


----------



## TheMailMan78 (May 4, 2011)

15th Warlock said:


> I'm pretty sure this technology will trickle down to all Intel next gen CPUs, I mean, 22nm is the next node all their processors will be fabed at, so I expect this process to be used on everything from entry level to high performance CPUs.



Again not if AMD is running on old tech. Intel will reign supreme and we will pay for it.


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 4, 2011)

AMD is no match for the R&D department at Intel. AMD unfortunately will always be two steps behind.


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Again not if AMD is running on old tech. Intel will reign supreme and we will pay for it.



Not likely . Intel will keep costs low as to keep you from going with the cheaper line of the comp . It is not like they will cut there heads off despite there face . I do not see this as bad I do see this as moving forward in a positive way . If AMD fails to keep up what is Intel to do ? Stop making new and improved things while AMD tries to keep up ? You did not see this when AMD was killing Intel during the P4 days . 
But hey I have to keep my mouth SHUT . 



Easy Rhino said:


> AMD is no match for the R&D department at Intel. AMD unfortunately will always be two steps behind.


Funny AMD bought out ATI and have a real lead in the video department maybe they need to reallocate some of them funds to the R&D of there CPU's ???


----------



## Sasqui (May 4, 2011)

Here's the 2002 announcement by Intel about the "Tri-Gate" 3D Transistor:

http://news.cnet.com/Intel-unfurls-experimental-3D-transistors/2100-1001_3-958149.html

"It's still in the early phase. The device performance is very good," he said. "*This is a second-half-of-the-decade kind of thing*. It will depend on how much progress we made with it."  

Apparently, a lot.  This is HUGE, for devices small and large!!!


----------



## TheMailMan78 (May 4, 2011)

trickson said:


> Not likely . Intel will keep costs low as to keep you from going with the cheaper line of the comp . It is not like they will cut there heads off despite there face . I do not see this as bad I do see this as moving forward in a positive way . If AMD fails to keep up what is Intel to do ? Stop making new and improved things while AMD tries to keep up ? You did not see this when AMD was killing Intel during the P4 days .
> But hey I have to keep my mouth SHUT .



Um no. If these 3-D Structure transistors are half as fast as Intel claims them to be then AMD will not be able to keep up. Not even remotely. They will try and drop the prices to stay competitive but the performance will be night and day. Intel will price accordingly. You WILL have $1000+ cpus from Intel and AMD will fade into the GPU market.


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Um no. If these 3-D Structure transistors are half as fast as Intel claims them to be then AMD will not be able to keep up. Not even remotely. They will try and drop the prices to stay competitive but the performance will be night and day. Intel will price accordingly. You WILL have $1000+ cpus from Intel and AMD will fade into the GPU market.



LOL I doubt that there is no one on this planet that could afford them especially at this day and age with the economy in the toilet as it is LOL . They would have a lot of CPU's sitting on shelves and no one buying them up .


----------



## TheMailMan78 (May 4, 2011)

trickson said:


> LOL I doubt that there is no one on this planet that could afford them especially at this day and age with the economy in the toilet as it is LOL . They would have a lot of CPU's sitting on shelves and no one buying them up .



Well its not like they didn't do it before when they had the monopoly. The market will demand it. You act as if this hasn't happen before. Competition is good.

Anyway check this out...



> Intel made one its most significant technology announcements ever today by stating it will base upcoming processors on 3D transistors. So, what is a 3D transistor exactly and why is it important? Here are some answers.
> 
> What is 3D exactly?
> It can get confusing very quickly because there are a few technical terms being bandied about to describe the new transistor structure. Intel calls it generically 3D but technically it's a Tri-Gate transistor (see image below). The traditional flat two-dimensional "planar" gate is replaced with a thin three-dimensional silicon fin that rises up vertically from the silicon substrate.
> ...


----------



## NC37 (May 4, 2011)

Sure this looks bad for AMD, but all I see it as is Intel trying to get more out of x86 like they always have. Personally until we get that new substance which allows 30+Ghz speeds (I know there was an article I read on here about it), the real advances should be in getting GPU tech to run more processes. We've been doing it in the scientific area. Heck NV made special servers to do it. 

The point is, AMD has been advancing towards APU. While Intel's x86 tech is great, they cannot match AMD on the graphics core front. Until AMD reveals what is coming, post Bulldozer, can't declare the race finished. I wouldn't be surprised if AMD leverages it's GPU tech more and more to make up the difference.


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Well its not like they didn't do it before when they had the monopoly. The market will demand it. You act as if this hasn't happen before. Competition is good.



But they still do it . So what is the difference now ? I see Intel selling 1 thousand Dollar + CPU's Now . So is AMD . What they will make them so expensive that NO ONE can buy them but the rich ? I do not think so .


----------



## TheMailMan78 (May 4, 2011)

trickson said:


> But they still do it . So what is the difference now ? I see Intel selling 1 thousand Dollar + CPU's Now . So is AMD . What they will make them so expensive that NO ONE can buy them but the rich ? I do not think so .



AMD's top desktop CPU when I bought it this current gen. was 299 bucks. Thats a 1090T. I think your confused about CPU history or even how economics work.....and no. Intel doesn't have anywhere close to the monopoly of the Pentium days.


----------



## 15th Warlock (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Well its not like they didn't do it before when they had the monopoly. The market will demand it. You act as if this hasn't happen before. Competition is good.
> 
> Anyway check this out...



I don't think Intel would be so stupid, the PC market is shrinking already, what you suggest here is akin to Intel giving the coup de grace to their main source of revenue. 

Yes, there was a time when CPUs were very expensive, but as stated before, these are other times, if Intel releases $1,000 only CPUs based on these process, someone else will rise to fill the gap, be it AMD or ARM (Win 8 already runs on ARM) so, no, I just don't see this doomsday scenario playing out.


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

And every one starts to quickly demonize Intel while they  for AMD . Who cares ? this is HOT new TECH ! I am excited for Intel and can hardly wait to see them in action ! Stop  about this and get excited . Man they are telling us more than AMD .


----------



## TheMailMan78 (May 4, 2011)

trickson said:


> And every one starts to quickly demonize Intel while they  for AMD . Who cares ? this is HOT new TECH ! I am excited for Intel and can hardly wait to see them in action ! Stop  about this and get excited . Man they are telling us more than AMD .



Who's demonizing? I'm being realistic and not a blind lil fanboy. I just don't wanna see any tears when Intel is a monopoly again and you can't afford their top tier CPU's. Because their will be weeping and gnashing of the teeth. And oh I will laugh. I mean you have to be an idiot to think Intel will keep the same current price point if they have no competition.


----------



## CAT-THE-FIFTH (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Who's demonizing? I'm being realistic and not a blind lil fanboy. I just don't wanna see any tears when Intel is a monopoly again and you can't afford their top tier CPU's. Because their will be weeping and gnashing of the teeth. And oh I will laugh. I mean you have to be an idiot to think Intel will keep the same price point if they have no competition.



What I find funny is that in the first posts in this thread were making digs at AMD rather than actually talking about this interesting new technology.


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Who's demonizing? I'm being realistic and not a blind lil fanboy. I just don't wanna see any tears when Intel is a monopoly again and you can't afford their top tier CPU's. Because their will be weeping and gnashing of the teeth. And of I will laugh.



Well then you better prey that AMD steps up the program . As it is they are doing really well in the core area just not as good in the other areas . The strong will prosper the weak will fade away into nothingness . It is a fact of life get over it . If they do sell them at a price no one can afford then they will be shooting themselves in the foot . This is not doomsday here just some great new tech to be given to the consumer . I love this it is just great !


----------



## stereotype (May 4, 2011)

AMD has been working with IBM on similar tech for a few years as 22nm and beyond present a lot of technical difficulties impossible to overcome with current tech...


----------



## TheMailMan78 (May 4, 2011)

trickson said:


> Well then you better prey that AMD steps up the program . As it is they are doing really well in the core area just not as good in the other areas . The strong will prosper the weak will fade away into nothingness . It is a fact of life get over it . If they do sell them at a price no one can afford then they will be shooting themselves in the foot . This is not doomsday here just some great new tech to be given to the consumer . I love this it is just great !



I wont have to get over the high price of no competition. I already know what exclusive technology brings a company. Record profits. You will have the issue as you don't seem to understand the principle of supply and demand.


----------



## trickson (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I wont have to get over the high price of no competition. I already know what exclusive technology brings a company. Record profits. You will have the issue as you don't seem to understand the principle of supply and demand.



Yeah like I don't know how high gas prices are .? Doomsday is upon us all ! 
I can hardly wait to see these new resistor at work . I wounder how much cooler they will be , How much faster and just how this will play out for the CPU industry as a whole .


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (May 4, 2011)

Well it's no BDT but it's nice to see one of these pipe-dream techs finally applied to a real product.

I don't really imagine intel cpus breaking with the $1000/$600/$300 thing for the beef cakes. They might add in a $1500 again but I think they're rightly fond of those price points.


----------



## 15th Warlock (May 4, 2011)

stereotype said:


> AMD has been working with IBM on similar tech for a few years as 22nm and beyond present a lot of technical difficulties impossible to overcome with current tech...



I remember  IBM showcasing some cool (no pun intended) internal 3D water-cooled processors a few years ago, it was supposed to revolutionize the processor industry, as CPUs already reach core power densities higher than nuclear reactors 

These processors had microscopic water pipes runing through them thus enabling the stacking of multiple transistors in a 3D space, boy wouldn't it be cool if that technology was available for use on these new Intel process? Boy, that would be the bee's knees I tell you


----------



## Frick (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Who's demonizing? I'm being realistic and not a blind lil fanboy. I just don't wanna see any tears when Intel is a monopoly again and you can't afford their top tier CPU's. Because their will be weeping and gnashing of the teeth. And oh I will laugh. I mean you have to be an idiot to think Intel will keep the same current price point if they have no competition.



I asked that earlier in the thread, are Intel the only ones with this stuff? There have been different solutions to multigate transistors that have also been in the works for quite some time. I'm interested to see how those fare. I mean it's not like Intel are the only ones that works on these things.


----------



## CDdude55 (May 4, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Who's demonizing? I'm being realistic and not a blind lil fanboy. I just don't wanna see any tears when Intel is a monopoly again and you can't afford their top tier CPU's. Because their will be weeping and gnashing of the teeth. And oh I will laugh. I mean you have to be an idiot to think Intel will keep the same current price point if they have no competition.



I don't get it, AMD will always be in the market, the top tier enthusiast market is only a tiny portion of what companies really care about. If Bulldozer can offer a good price for performance ratio, what makes you think Intel will be running a monopoly?, if Intel innovates what makes you think every other company will suddenly die off and be left behind?.

Looks like a great advancement in CPU manufacturing.


----------



## trickson (May 5, 2011)

CDdude55 said:


> I don't get it, AMD will always be in the market, the top tier enthusiast market is only a tiny portion of what companies really care about. If Bulldozer can offer a good price for performance ratio, what makes you think Intel will be running a monopoly?, if Intel innovates what makes you think every other company will suddenly die off and be left behind?.
> 
> Looks like a great advancement in CPU manufacturing.



Maybe he like to think of Intel as the Evil Chip Maker in the room and AMD as the Poor little man getting stomped on ? I do not know , I do think this is a great advancement for every one . 
I hope .


----------



## ensabrenoir (May 5, 2011)

*And the winner is.... Us!*

Interesting to see how this plays out and its everyday impact.  As far as the whole Intel vs Amd thing ... Extra large order of popcorn please!!!  Its actually fun to watch the whole one up battle.  Love intel cpu s love Amd gpus cant loose no matter who wins. Bring on the bulldozers, bridges, a.p. u.s  and what ever.  As long as there is a tpu....I'll  work ,find burried treasure, collect cans and save to get the rest!


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 5, 2011)

Ivy Bridge just got a little more interesting...


----------



## trickson (May 5, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Ivy Bridge just got a little more interesting...



More than a little for me .


----------



## DannibusX (May 5, 2011)

Sweet, new technology.

I just won't be able to use it for the next few years of Call of Duty releases and Source games.  I don't benchmark so I'm happy where I'm at for now.


----------



## AsRock (May 5, 2011)

erocker said:


> The way things are looking, Intel's current lineup will be competing with Bulldozer.



Really thinking more

The way things are looking, Intel's current lineup will be crushing Bulldozer


----------



## trickson (May 5, 2011)

AsRock said:


> Really thinking more
> 
> The way things are looking, Intel's current lineup will be crushing Bulldozer



I think Intel should call them Killdozer LOL .


----------



## Jonap_1st (May 5, 2011)

every side had the pieces of its own, 

AMD will never be one step a head from intel but they already had a place on low-mid range market.

CPU : intel 80% amd 20%
GPU : amd 50% nvidia 50%

i'm just make up that number (reality maybe not really far from there) but if someone still bitchying about who's the real winner or where's AMD CPU positions in the future. maybe they forgot AMD still had a profit from their Radeon's

for us its performance that matter, but for them it's all about profit.. 

by the way, nice vids. 
i think i'm in love with mark


----------



## theJesus (May 5, 2011)

Jonap_1st said:


> by the way, nice vids.
> i think i'm in love with mark


You wanna play with that shrink-ray, don't you?


----------



## btarunr (May 5, 2011)

cheesy999 said:


> i can't wait that long



Get Core i7-970 when it becomes sub-$400 soon.


----------



## HalfAHertz (May 5, 2011)

Something of notice is that Intel is opening up their 22nm factories to other manufacturers like ARM and Apple. The A5 will be produced by intel on 22nm. This is a first for Intel because they have always held off sharing their advanced production process before because they wanted to have a competitive edge. So this either means that: a)the new process costs way too much and they can't cover the costs by themselves ( most likely); b) They can't saturate the factories by themselves. (less likely); c) a combination of a) and b)


----------



## bear jesus (May 5, 2011)

When i read the title i honestly expected something much more complex or advanced than making the conductive part taller causing the gate to surround it more.

I'm sure it will be great and everything but i really thought this was to do with a way to be able to put transistors in a 3D circuit as in the current travels vertically through the chip as well as horizontally.... yes i know they say this is 3D but really everything on a silicone chip has always been 3D this is just a taller 3D so the current still just travels horizontally.

Just to be sure, I'm not saying anything bad about this new transistor, i just expected more from the title.


----------



## mastrdrver (May 5, 2011)

Notice the quote:

"......37 percent performance increase at low voltage versus Intel's 32nm......."

This 37% increase is _only_ at low voltage. I.E. Atom will be a lot more efficient. 

What it does not say: You get 37% performance increase _with_ less volts.

Intel did not just figure out how to defy the laws of physics. I don't care how many times they talk about Moore's Law.


----------



## chvostoskok (May 5, 2011)

*real invention ? NO*

it just seems like an invention - but in fact it is not. ok, transistors shrunk and work 37% more effective, but -it was in fact the same in past generations.  All is just nicely said.


----------



## 15th Warlock (May 5, 2011)

For all of you guys interested in this new development, here's a nice little article posted at ars technica that explains it in more detail and in a way that's very easy to understand:

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2011/05/intel-re-invents-the-microchip.ars/

Hope you find it as enlightening as I did


----------



## rem82 (May 5, 2011)

*Global-foundries fab 8. * (2012)

*28nm & 20(-)nm perhaps ,14nm ??? for ΑΜD* cpu, gpu & chip.

http://fab2construction.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Izea72ojj3s
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/04/19/globalfoundries_fab_8_construction_tour

Do you believe that AMD will close? 

AMD  is the unique company that she has exclusively her own platform of claims ! 
CPU + MOBO CHIP + GPU

If up totoday the AMD had the units of production in the 45nm and 32nm ready the correct moment, intel  would have big problem now.
Perhaps you can remember:
-First 64bit cpu
- SOI (IBM)
-First Native Dual core
-First NATIVE Quad core
-First modern designing cpu with L1, L2 & L3 cache
-First cpu with IMC ( integrated memory controler)
-First cpu with HyperTransport technology
-first 512bit gpu
-First dx10.1 gpu
-First dx11 gp
-Better Performance per Watt gpu
-Better multi gpu & (scaling crossfire X)
-First hybrid cross with on board IGP
-First Native sata III (south-bridge)
-First Native usb III (south-bridge)


----------



## pantherx12 (May 5, 2011)

"Intel's 22nm 3D transistors provide up to a 37 percent performance increase at low voltage versus Intel's 32nm planar transistors."

Wait wait wait, that's like 7% more than the usual right?

naughty intel, making it seem like it's better than it is.

Not to say it won;t give them an advantage. But no where near as much as people think I'd wager. The tech may develop some more. But for now it's only slightly better than a change in fab size.


----------



## mastrdrver (May 5, 2011)

Yea their power "improvement" numbers (from reading around) are less then 10% above what they would normally get from just moving to 22nm from 32nm. I think the real improvement comes at the low voltage (Atom) and low leakage end.


----------



## Jonap_1st (May 5, 2011)

theJesus said:


> You wanna play with that shrink-ray, don't you?



if it could transformed into ray gun, then yes


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 5, 2011)

pantherx12 said:


> "Intel's 22nm 3D transistors provide up to a 37 percent performance increase at low voltage versus Intel's 32nm planar transistors."
> 
> Wait wait wait, that's like 7% more than the usual right?
> 
> ...


The difference between 22 and 32 is 31.25%.  37% - 31.25%=5.75%

I don't think performance is necessarily the main benefit from Tri-Gate.  I think it's reduced leakage which means greater efficiency (less having to recycle pipelines) and theoretically also be less friction which means higher clockspeeds for the same 140w TDP max.  I think Intel has set themselves up for a 4+ GHz processor--about 10 years overdue.


----------



## HalfAHertz (May 5, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> The difference between 22 and 32 is 31.25%.  37% - 31.25%=5.75%
> 
> I don't think performance is necessarily the main benefit from Tri-Gate.  I think it's reduced leakage which means greater efficiency (less having to recycle pipelines) and theoretically also be less friction which means higher clockspeeds for the same 140w TDP max.  I think Intel has set themselves up for a 4+ GHz processor--about 10 years overdue.



The difference between 32 and 22nm is much greater 

32^2/22^2=1 024/484 =2,115 ~ 212% shrinkage so a 22nm transistor should be less than half the size of a 32nm transistor


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 5, 2011)

Assuming it is perfectly square and reduced to the same square dimensions, the difference is 52.734375%.

The 7% figure most likely has nothing to do with 32nm -> 22nm though.  They probably compared tri-gate to planar on the same manufacture process (most likely 22nm but it could have been on any).  "Performance" is vague though.  In any event, it allows them to scale down even smaller because the height of an electron is no longer a limiting factor (well, at least not as much so).  This discovery allows for 10nm and beyond to be feasible.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (May 5, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Assuming it is perfectly square and reduced to the same square dimensions, the difference is 52.734375%.
> 
> The 7% figure most likely has nothing to do with 32nm -> 22nm though.  They probably compared tri-gate to planar on the same manufacture process (most likely 22nm but it could have been on any).  "Performance" is vague though.  In any event, it allows them to scale down even smaller because the height of an electron is no longer a limiting factor (well, at least not as much so).  This discovery allows for 10nm and beyond to be feasible.



Numbers........mind.......burning!


----------



## pantherx12 (May 5, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Assuming it is perfectly square and reduced to the same square dimensions, the difference is 52.734375%.
> 
> The 7% figure most likely has nothing to do with 32nm -> 22nm though.  They probably compared tri-gate to planar on the same manufacture process (most likely 22nm but it could have been on any).  "Performance" is vague though.  In any event, it allows them to scale down even smaller because the height of an electron is no longer a limiting factor (well, at least not as much so).  This discovery allows for 10nm and beyond to be feasible.



Certainly in this press release it's comparing 32 to 22 nm.

But I'm hopeful 3d transistors become the norm regardless as it can only get better.


----------



## yogurt_21 (May 5, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> AMD is no match for the R&D department at Intel. AMD unfortunately will always be two steps behind.



not necessarily, they still brough out the Athlon 64 back when intel was completely dominating and it was leagues ahead of what intel was doing with the P4.


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 5, 2011)

yogurt_21 said:


> not necessarily, they still brough out the Athlon 64 back when intel was completely dominating and it was leagues ahead of what intel was doing with the P4.



yea and that was pre-ATI purchase.


----------



## AsRock (May 5, 2011)

trickson said:


> I think Intel should call them Killdozer LOL .



hehe,  well i hope this not hurt AMD as much as it sounds like it could do.

Like hell i just got a dual unlockable CPU a AMD 890 mobo and DDR3 ram for $250 which i cannot say i could of done with INTEL.

However, seeing how this new tech works is there not a issue with how much thicker the chip would have to be cooling wise ?.  Never mind cost so to me sounds like AMD are safe as there cheaper than INTEL now never mind when INTEL take advantage of this tech on a larger scale.

And would the tech be more prone to more issue's when making new stuff ?.


----------



## CAT-THE-FIFTH (May 5, 2011)

It looks like ARM is not too worried:

http://mobile-device.biz/content/item.php?item=30305

From the article:
"Drew also pointed out that ARM has already announced test chips at 22 and 20nm already, with foundry partners TSMC and GlobalFoundries also working on those processes, and that IBM is already working on 14nm."


----------



## HalfAHertz (May 5, 2011)

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:


> It looks like ARM is not too worried:
> 
> http://mobile-device.biz/content/item.php?item=30305
> 
> ...



Well look at it this way - the majority of arm cores were up to recently built at 65nm and were still kicking atom's arse(and anything else that was x86) in performance/power. The problem is that ARM isn't as scalable as x86 and is mostly 32 bit so that's why it's limited to small electronics devices. Half the SoC consists of fixed function hardware, so every one to two years, you need a new SoC with updated hardware just to be able to watch the latest movie format or browse the net. Once you scale things past small electronics devices, ARM quickly looses steam.


----------



## streetfighter 2 (May 5, 2011)

So would this herald a huge change to Cadence and Synopsys design/synthesis suites, or maybe just a significant modification of DRC?


----------



## CDdude55 (May 5, 2011)

streetfighter 2 said:


> So would this herald a huge change to Cadence and Synopsys design/synthesis suites, or maybe just a significant modification of DRC?



I always like your posts cause they always link to informative info.


----------



## D007 (May 5, 2011)

FFS! I just upgraded to an i7 build and now they mention this?! arrrgggg!!!!


----------



## TheMailMan78 (May 5, 2011)

I wish IBM would get back into the desktop arena.


----------



## mastrdrver (May 6, 2011)

*FinFET*



streetfighter 2 said:


> So would this herald a huge change to Cadence and Synopsys design/synthesis suites, or maybe just a significant modification of DRC?



I thought it was closer to a FinFET with multiple gates then anything else?


----------



## Mussels (May 6, 2011)

sy5tem said:


> well intel invented something all over again . so when AMD did that? i can't remember
> 
> finally something really exciting and new  can't wait to see what will come up from this,
> 
> also i wonder can they just build like more bridge on same transistor? like 2 bridge that have control over 3 flow of current each? hehe that would be 9x 1 transistor!



AMD hit 1GHz first, had 64 bit CPU's out first, had IMC's first, and probably a few other things i forgot already.


----------



## CDdude55 (May 6, 2011)

Mussels said:


> AMD hit 1GHz first, had 64 bit CPU's out first, had IMC's first, and probably a few other things i forgot already.



And Intel created x86 (which is where AMD laid their 64-bit chip out of) and Intel created the first commercial microprocessor chip.

They both have contributed, though i do think Intel tends lays out the significant advancements first and AMD tends to follow after.


----------



## Mussels (May 6, 2011)

CDdude55 said:


> And Intel created x86 (which is where AMD laid their 64-bit chip out of) and Intel created the first commercial microprocessor chip.
> 
> They both have contributed, though i do think Intel tends lays out the significant advancements first and AMD tends to follow after.



intel surely have the lead, but at times AMD has taken the performance and feature crowns. the point was merely to reinforce the fact that while AMD is the underdog most of the time, its not always true.


will this tech help intel take the lead? damn sure it will. but what if these CPU's cost twice what they do now? the wealthy among us will sing intels praises, and everyone else wont be able to afford the new ivy bridge 22nm 3D transistor chips extreme/K editions that let them OC...


----------



## theJesus (May 6, 2011)

Mussels said:


> intel surely have the lead, but at times AMD has taken the performance and feature crowns. the point was merely to reinforce the fact that while AMD is the underdog most of the time, its not always true.
> 
> 
> will this tech help intel take the lead? damn sure it will. but what if these CPU's cost twice what they do now? the wealthy among us will sing intels praises, and everyone else wont be able to afford the new ivy bridge 22nm 3D transistor chips extreme/K editions that let them OC...


And then AMD will catch up with Intel's tech and improve upon it and Intel will have to come up with something new again and the cycle will repeat.


----------



## bear jesus (May 6, 2011)

All this talk about who did what first makes me think about one thing, would many of these advances have come so early if Intel and AMD were not competing?

Yea i know its not much of a competition right now but in the past i think certain generations were all about trying to beat the other company thus giving us AMD cpu's that were the fastest at the time and Intel CPU's that were the fastest at the time.


*edit*


theJesus said:


> And then AMD will catch up with Intel's tech and improve upon it and Intel will have to come up with something new again and the cycle will repeat.



Pretty much beat me to it  its always one side or the other pushing things forward then the other tries to one up them, it's a beautiful cycle for us as it means more and more power


----------



## theJesus (May 6, 2011)

bear jesus said:


> All this talk about who did what first makes me think about one thing, would many of these advances have come so early if Intel and AMD were not competing?
> 
> Yea i know its not much of a competition right now but in the past i think certain generations were all about trying to beat the other company thus giving us AMD cpu's that were the fastest at the time and Intel CPU's that were the fastest at the time.


Well, yeah.  If a company has nobody to compete with, then they don't need to spend all that money on R&D.


----------



## Mussels (May 6, 2011)

thats exactly it. intel has new tech that dominates, so AMD goes for another route. better power efficiency, more cores, lower prices, etc.


intel then finds a way to make their tech more appealing, likely via the lower prices dealio.


everyone wins.


----------



## bear jesus (May 6, 2011)

theJesus said:


> Well, yeah.  If a company has nobody to compete with, then they don't need to spend all that money on R&D.



And then we would lose out big time. 

All of us will only be around for so long and competition in the tech industry helps us get to see and use more and more advanced tech while we still can.


----------



## Jonap_1st (May 6, 2011)

bear jesus said:


> And then we would lose out big time.
> 
> All of us will only be around for so long and competition in the tech industry helps us get to see and use more and more advanced tech while we still can.



competition brings new technology and... some price cuts


----------



## HalfAHertz (May 6, 2011)

If anyone doubts that intel will raise the prices once there is no competition, just look at the server market. The new SB 8/10-core chips cost an arm and a leg


----------



## bear jesus (May 6, 2011)

HalfAHertz said:


> If anyone doubts that intel will raise the prices once there is no competition, just look at the server market. The new SB 8/10-core chips cost an arm and a leg



Both AMD and Intel have pushed $1000 desktop CPU's in the past, either company would love the chance to pump up the profit margins again.

Server CPU's i find it harder to judge as both company's have been selling ones that cost well over a thousand each for a long as i can remember (I'm almost 25 so it's not a very long time ).


----------



## Jonap_1st (May 6, 2011)

HalfAHertz said:


> If anyone doubts that intel will raise the prices once there is no competition, just look at the server market. The new SB 8/10-core chips cost an arm and a leg



do you mean new Sandy Bridge 8/10-core Xeon chips?


----------



## TheGuruStud (May 7, 2011)

I'm still waiting for the 10 ghz pentium 4.

I see their marketing machine has been pulling over time.

Wait, better yet, I want a larrabee (or w/e the sp is)!


----------



## hellrazor (May 10, 2011)

So it turns out that Intel didn't (re)invent the transistor, they're just the first company to use it.

sauce​


----------



## mastrdrver (May 11, 2011)

Real World Tech on Intel's new transistors.


----------



## txsouthpaw (May 11, 2011)

For all that Sandy Bridge was hyped, I was pleasantly surprised by the 2500K & 2600K price points. I think if there is any increase in price on the 22nm Ivy Bridges, it will be minimal. Also, I'll be willing to pay a few dollars more for a CPU upgrade that doesn't require a new board and RAM. Basically, I would predict that the initial high end K offering of the Ivy Bridge will be between $300-350 and Microcenter will probably sell it for $279-299.


----------

