Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ajross 3924 days ago
That's... sort of exactly wrong. The process design rules (and transistor models) define the envelope within which the design must exist. The days of simple scalable design rules that port between fabs are long gone. Every process has its own crazy rules about how to draw a transistor.

Now... it's true that all the media reporting so far seems to treat TSMC's 14nm and Samsung/GlobalFoundries's 16nm processes as "essentially the same from a design perspective" (though both seem to lag Intel's 14nm in density). But until parts reach the market we won't actually know.

1 comments

I didn't say that the fabrication process doesn't influence the characteristics of the final chip, I was stating that the design itself takes the bigger role of the chip's optimization and that from the end user's point of view, it doesn't matter if the A9 is fabricated in TSMC or in Samsung's fabs.

Actually, if they are dual sourcing the same chip from a 14nm process and from a 16nm process as well, it's very likely that they had to use different analog designs, so the 14nm chip probably has advantages that the 16nm chip has and vice-versa.

It's pointless for the end user to nitpick differences of the same chip in 2 equivalent processes when the software is going to mask everything out.

And I'm not saying this because I read it in the media, I affirm this from experience in the semiconductor industry.