TSMC to Initiate 1.4nm Process Technology R&D

At processor manufacturers, fundamental and applied research and development work never stops, so now that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Has outlined a timeline for its N2 (2 nm-class) fabrication process that will enter high-volume manufacturing (HVM) in 2025, it is time for the company to start thinking about a succeeding node. If a new rumor is to be believed, TSMC is set to formally announce its 1.4 nm-class technology in June. 

TSMC plans to reassign the team that developed its N3 (3 nm-class) node to development of its 1.4 nm-class fabrication process in June, reports Business Korea. Typically, foundries and chip designers never formally announce R&D milestones, so we are unlikely going to see a TSMC press release saying that development of its 1.4 nm technology had been started. Meanwhile, TSMC is set to host its Technology Symposium in mid-June and there the company may outline some brief details about the node that will succeed its N2 manufacturing process.  

Article continues below
Anton Shilov
Contributing Writer
  • tennis2
    I feel like fractions of nm is so much harder to garner a relative % difference from compared to integers. 2nm to 1.4nm is the same % as 7nm to 5nm, yet is seems so much less significant.
    Reply
  • peachpuff
    Intel: pfffft our 10nm is just as good...
    Reply
  • gfg
    tennis2 said:
    I feel like fractions of nm is so much harder to garner a relative % difference from compared to integers. 2nm to 1.4nm is the same % as 7nm to 5nm, yet is seems so much less significant.

    Are ~logarithmic equivalents, not linear scales

    proceso (nm)note i vs i-1nodo i vs nodo 45 nm4511280,62x1,61x220,79x2,05x140,64x3,21x70,50x6,43x50,71x9,00x30,60x15,00x1,40,47x32,14x
    Reply
  • AtrociKitty
    peachpuff said:
    Intel: pfffft our 10nm is just as good...
    I'm glad Intel rebranded, because too many people misunderstood the actual ranking of nodes when you compared them based on half-pitch scaling of an equivalent (in transistor density) planar transistor node:

    15. 32nm Intel 14. 28nm TSMC / 28nm UMC / 28nm Samsung/GlobalFoundries/IMB 13. 22nm Intel /22nm IBM 12. 20nm TSMC /20nm Samsung/20nm Intel (marketed as “22FFL) 11. 18nm TSMC (marketed as “16nm”) / 18nm Samsung/GF (marketed as “14nm”) 10. 17nm GF (marketed as “12nm” (12LP) by GF) 09. 16nm TSMC (marketed as “12nm” (12FFC) by TSMC) 08. 14nm Intel / 14nm Samsung (marketed as “10nm” by Samsung) 07. 13nm Samsung (marketed as “8nm” by Samsung) 06. 10nm TSMC (marketed as “7nm” (N7/N7P))/ 10nm Samsung (marketed as “7nm”) 05. 9nm Intel (marketed as “10nm”)/ 9nm TSMC (marketed as 7nm (N7+)) 04. 6.7nm TSMC (marketed as “5nm”) 03. 6.4nm Intel (marketed as “7nm”) 02. 5nm TSMC (marketed as “3nm”) 01. 4.5nm Intel (marketed as “5nm”)
    Reply
  • gfg
    is logarithmic...
    65 vs 45 = ~ - 30% area...
    7 vs 5 = ~ -30% area...
    2 vs 1.4 = ~ -30% area

    65-45= 20 nm and 2 vs 1.4 = just 0.6 oooo noooo.... By -30% node by node....
    Reply
  • tennis2
    peachpuff said:
    Intel: pfffft our 10nm is just as good...
    "But is it REALLY 1.4nm???
    Reply
  • derekullo
    TSMC to Initiate Quark Process Technology R&D.

    Physicists puzzled.
    Reply
  • Kamen Rider Blade
    If you're going to use decimal points, shouldn't we just migrate to Angstroms at that point?
    Reply
  • tennis2
    Kamen Rider Blade said:
    If you're going to use decimal points, shouldn't we just migrate to Angstroms at that point?
    IIRC that's what Intel is doing.
    Reply
  • Kamen Rider Blade
    tennis2 said:
    IIRC that's what Intel is doing.
    True, Intel is going to do that. What about the rest of the foundaries, when are they going to start using Angstroms?
    Reply