|
|
|
|
|
by variaga
533 days ago
|
|
It's true that die-to-die IO is lower power than package-to-package IO because of the lower capacitive load (which comes mostly because you don't need ESD protection inside the pkg) and shorter trace length, but it's still much, much higher power than the "No IO at all" case of a monolithic IC. I've worked on the "MCM or monolithic" decision making process and the only way MCM ends up lower power is if it lets you optimize the silicon-process selection of the different chiplets and the savings from _that_ outweighs the power cost of the die-to-die IO. OP is right - "reduced power consumption" is not an automatic benefit of chiplets. it only happens in select circumstances, which are (a) low enough bandwidth interface between the chiplets that the extra IO power cost isn't too onerous and (b) chiplets allow you to move enough of the logic to a better process node than you could use for a monolithic chip (why not move the whole monolithic chip to the better node? because you've got some critical function that is 'stuck' at an old node) to more than offset the power cost. |
|
It was a throw-away at the end there. I’d assume a whole chiplet could have its power cut completely. But I don’t know if anybody actually does that.