eDRAM too expensive

By: Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org), January 14, 2019 10:38 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on January 13, 2019 2:34 pm wrote:
> anon³ (alt-0179.delete@this.test.example.test) on January 13, 2019 1:17 pm wrote:
> > JS (null.delete@this.null.com) on January 12, 2019 1:05 am wrote:
> > > > We could wait a little about power consumption.
> > > > The node shift is unable to halve the power consumption
> > > > on an high power cpu, moreover half the SKU is on 14nm.
> > > > More likely AMD demoed on a very light development motherboard unable of overclock. My bet
> > > > Intel was on a power hungry plataform thinked to allow more than 300W under overclocking.
> > > >
> > > > Better wait real products.
> > > > For now is only smart marketing.
> > >
> > > Correct me if I'm wrong but the IO die on 14nm shouldn't be a significant limiting factor
> > > for the chip. It's relative simplicity to the processor die should make it clock relatively
> > > well, or at least parallel silicon could be added to make up for any deficit?
> >
> > IO die on GF/IBM 14nm is going to be just fine. IO structures scale abysmally with
> > process (it's all about gate oxides and voltage rating), so once you've paid the
> > costs to go off-die, it doesn't matter much what process the IO die is on.
> >
> > It's interesting that the IO die is claimed to be "14nm", though, not "12nm". Zen+
> > is 12nm, so there's no reason the IO die wouldn't also be on 12nm. At least, that's
> > if the target process was GF 14LP/12LP (which are almost the same process).
> >
> > That implies the target is actually GF/IBM's 14HP. And that lines up perfectly, since by all accounts
> > 14HP is an excellent choice for IO-heavy designs. It also implies that there could be eDRAM on the IO
> > die, but that seems unlikely given the target die size and yields. Perhaps they've managed some clever
> > use of a small amount of eDRAM somewhere (it does seem the sort of thing that would be useful on an
> > all-IO die), or perhaps they've got a custom eDRAM-less process variant to save a bit of cost.
>
> eDRAM is incredibly expensive and SRAM is better for small
> arrays. I wouldn't worry too much about what they call it.

What does a statement like this ("eDRAM is incredibly expensive") actually mean, David?
I'm not being sarcastic here, there's a genuine disconnect between what you're saying and the way I would have conceptualized the issue.

One initial possibility might be on the IP/design side, that the IP required or design/verify man-hours are large compared to SRAM or logic. This seems unlikely, but of course maybe IBM is the only one who knows how to do it and they don't want to share?

A second possibility would be the manufacturing, but again I don't really see how. Once you're down at the level of masks and processes, isn't the price basically driven by how many iterations are required of how much area? eDRAM doesn't, as far as I know, require uniquely expensive chemical reagents, or uniquely expensive machinery, or more masks than usual.

A third possibility is that yield is substantially lower. This is certainly possible in principle, but if course normal DRAMs get made in huge volumes. Of course normal DRAMs happen in a specialized fab... So if I had to guess (and if the statement is true) this is where my money would be.

A fourth possibility is that testing (or characterization, somehow required for functioning) is a lot more expensive than for SRAMs, but again I can't see how.

One issue is what is meant by "incredibly expensive"? If we're talking say 10% higher cost than SRAMs (which is not what I would call "incredible"), any of these possibilities might be relevant. But if we're talking 2x, 3x or more, the only option I can see forcing that is terrible yields.

If there is NOT a sea of storage (huge L4 of SRAM or eDRAM, but to me, apart from the economics, eDRAM seems a better choice) it's hard to see why that 14nm die is quite as large as it is.

There is a longer term issue for how this plays out. To *me* the correct answer for everyone (from Apple to AMD to Intel) going forward is an IO die incorporating memory controller, and huge L4 (sans tags), with the logic sitting on top of that so that communication is via bumps or TSVs, high bandwidth low latency low power, and with L4 tags on the logic die. L4 could be SRAM, eDRAM, or MRAM depending on what tech gives the best balance of power vs latency vs capacity. So the primary interesting issue is how soon we get to that...


> Honestly, 12nm is mostly just 14nm with different libraries (for density) and transistor/contact
> optimization. I/O doesn't need logic libraries, ergo its 14nm.
>
> David

< Previous Post in ThreadNext Post in Thread >
TopicPosted ByDate
AMD CESsomeguy2019/01/10 01:06 PM
  AMD CESJeff S.2019/01/10 01:53 PM
    AMD CESDomaldel2019/01/11 05:37 PM
      AMD CESnoone2019/01/11 09:05 PM
        AMD CESDomaldel2019/01/12 12:20 AM
          AMD CESarifureta2019/01/12 06:09 AM
            AMD CESDomaldel2019/01/13 12:57 AM
              AMD CESMontaray Jack2019/01/17 09:00 AM
                AMD CESMontaray Jack2019/01/17 11:32 AM
  AMD CEShobold2019/01/10 02:17 PM
    AMD CESJan Olšan2019/01/10 02:30 PM
    AMD CESAdrian2019/01/10 08:37 PM
      AMD CESAlberto2019/01/11 10:13 AM
        AMD CESJS2019/01/12 01:05 AM
          AMD IO dieanon³2019/01/13 01:17 PM
            AMD IO dieanon2019/01/13 02:26 PM
            eDRAM too expensiveDavid Kanter2019/01/13 02:34 PM
              eDRAM too expensiveAdrian2019/01/13 08:51 PM
                eDRAM too expensiveAdrian2019/01/13 09:01 PM
                eDRAM too expensiveRicardo B2019/01/14 11:06 AM
                  Zen PHY speedsJeff S.2019/01/14 11:40 AM
                  eDRAM too expensiveAdrian2019/01/14 12:44 PM
                    Zen target process (was: eDRAM too expensive)hobold2019/01/14 02:42 PM
                      Zen target process (was: eDRAM too expensive)Adrian2019/01/14 09:13 PM
                        Zen target process (was: eDRAM too expensive)hobold2019/01/15 08:28 PM
                    eDRAM too expensiveRicardo B2019/01/15 03:40 AM
                    eDRAM too expensiveRicardo B2019/01/15 08:26 AM
              eDRAM too expensiveMaynard Handley2019/01/14 10:38 AM
                eDRAM too expensiveanon2019/01/14 01:00 PM
                  eDRAM too expensiveMaynard Handley2019/01/14 01:43 PM
                    eDRAM too expensiveDan Fay2019/01/14 02:16 PM
                      eDRAM too expensiveMaynard Handley2019/01/14 03:40 PM
                        eDRAM too expensiveDan Fay2019/01/14 04:58 PM
                    eDRAM too expensivesomeone2019/01/15 08:20 AM
                eDRAM too expensiveanon2019/01/14 03:34 PM
                  eDRAM too expensiveMaynard Handley2019/01/14 05:34 PM
                eDRAM too expensiveanon2019/01/15 01:06 AM
            AMD IO diejuanrga2019/01/14 03:04 AM
              AMD IO dieMaynard Handley2019/01/14 10:42 AM
                AMD IO dieAlberto2019/01/14 02:00 PM
                AMD IO diejuanrga2019/01/15 02:54 AM
                AMD IO die size & functionalityWes Felter2019/01/15 11:12 AM
                  AMD IO die size & functionalityjuanrga2019/01/15 11:43 AM
                  AMD IO die size & functionalityAlberto2019/01/15 12:57 PM
                    AMD CPU die size & functionalityWes Felter2019/01/15 04:35 PM
                      AMD CPU die size & functionalityanon2019/01/16 01:32 AM
                        AMD CPU die size & functionalityAlberto2019/01/16 05:40 AM
                      AMD CPU die size & functionalityJan Olšan2019/01/16 07:11 AM
                  AMD IO die size & functionalityMaynard Handley2019/01/16 09:17 AM
Reply to this Topic
Name:
Email:
Topic:
Body: No Text
How do you spell green?