Technology Node Normalization

[BrownieHaHa]

Hello everyone, I have a question regarding process node normalization that may seem a bit peculiar (I don't know which Forum suits my topic so I post it here).

Firstly, let me explain the origin of this question. In recent chip designs, particularly in AI chip design such as NPUs, there's been an increasing emphasis on energy efficiency. This metric characterizes the comprehensive performance of a chip in terms of energy utilization, computing speed, and overall performance. Of course, there's a lot of discussion and even controversy online about this metric, but let's set that aside for now.

Clearly, efficiency is influenced by many factors, among which process node is one. From articles of different companies, universities, and research institutions, it's evident that there's a wide variety of process nodes being used, ranging from 40 nm to the most advanced 3 nm nodes.

However, to showcase the advantages of one's own design, it's necessary to compare energy efficiency metric through a process called "normalization," which is used quite broadly and somewhat imprecisely in numerous articles and journals.

I've been preparing related content recently, but upon deeper analysis and statistics, I've found it's not as straightforward as I imagined. Firstly, there isn't a complete data source; IRDS provides a roadmap from 2016 to the present, but data on the changes in energy efficiency (scaling) seems to be available only from 2022 onwards (unless I missed something). ITRS (the predecessor of IRDS) also doesn't seem to have statistical data on this metric (since it's a relatively new concept). Therefore, from a data source perspective, I'm stuck.

Another issue is that we know chip process nodes have undergone significant evolution from planar to finFET technologies. Planar processes could potentially be normalized using simple methods (but still confusing for me), but in advanced nodes, especially those named through equivalent methods, normalization to the same process node becomes even more challenging.

In conclusion, I would like to solicit opinions and help from everyone on this matter. Thank you very much.

 

[aliarifat794]

IRDS provides some data on process nodes and related technologies. ITRS also didn't focus heavily on energy efficiency. you may need to rely on academic papers, industry reports, and benchmarks from specific companies.

 

[dick_freebird]

Even within a "node" there is much sub-variation -
like IBM would offer "LP" and "HP" variants to a "node"
(say IBM7) which despite top-line lithography call-out
differ widely in the CMOS VT-portfolio, "accessories"
and maybe presence or absence of "rule cheats" /
bifurcation.

Comparing yourself to "wouldacouldashoulda" armchair
BS is not good for the designer. Your role is to find
your way through all the chaff to the goal (after you
above all else, "vet" the goal and the realism and the
relevance and the trustworthiness of the "competition"
as it's expressed in the tasking).

I think these efforts to draw comparisons between
nodes is just buying into a bullshit horserace POV.
Maybe useful for a moment when you have to pick
a horse. But before that, be sure you know how to
ride and have the right map. Plenty of folks waiting
to sell you theirs.

 

[BrownieHaHa]

Even within a "node" there is much sub-variation -
like IBM would offer "LP" and "HP" variants to a "node"
(say IBM7) which despite top-line lithography call-out
differ widely in the CMOS VT-portfolio, "accessories"
and maybe presence or absence of "rule cheats" /
bifurcation.

Comparing yourself to "wouldacouldashoulda" armchair
BS is not good for the designer. Your role is to find
your way through all the chaff to the goal (after you
above all else, "vet" the goal and the realism and the
relevance and the trustworthiness of the "competition"
as it's expressed in the tasking).

I think these efforts to draw comparisons between
nodes is just buying into a bullshit horserace POV.
Maybe useful for a moment when you have to pick
a horse. But before that, be sure you know how to
ride and have the right map. Plenty of folks waiting
to sell you theirs.

Sir, first of all, thank you for your response. Secondly, I completely understand what you're saying, otherwise I wouldn't have felt the controversy in my question when asking it (I feel a bit conflicted myself). Regarding your mention of "child nodes," I simply wanted to understand the average level of variation between different nodes (although I understand this isn't easy). I also completely agree with your point that the goal should be to continually overcome some challenges. In fact, "making comparisons" wasn't my intention originally; perhaps going about it this way is somewhat going with the flow, but it's just a compromise I've made.