Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/transistor-performance-for-3nm-class-nodes-in-2023-and-early-2024.17405/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021370
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Transistor performance for "3nm" class nodes in 2023 and early 2024.

nghanayem

Well-known member
IDEM and the VLSI symposium have given us a good amount of data to pour over for the node landscape from TSMC and intel in 2023/early 2024. Samsung having declined to give any details on the "in production" 3GAE that has "perfect yields" (their words not mine). I thought it might be nice if that data was complied into one place where everybody could see it.

N3B ARM A7 frequency vs voltage passes/fails for 32 different dies:
(no confirmation of fin count was given but presumably this is the 2 fin device)
https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Faa881ab5-86cb-41ab-9687-b55f8e503f5c_1238x528.png

i4 vs i7 normalized power vs frequency curves at varying voltages:
(Since intel has only talked about a 3 fin device, it is assumed that this data is for a 3 fin device vs the 4 fin intel 7 UHP device at 60nm pp)
Intel-PPW-Curve_575px.png


Voltage (V) ------------------------ GHz on N3B------------------------ GHz on i4 with 6VT
0.65 --------------------------------- 2.0 ----------------------------------- 2.1
0.85 --------------------------------- 2.8 ---------------------------------- ~3.0
1.10 --------------------------------- 3.4 ---------------------------------- ~3.5
(edit sorry for the janky table. I just noticed that the insert table option was only displaying the table as plain text, so I had to manually type up a table)

Across the voltage ranges tested i4 had between a 3% and 7% frequency advantage. This is about in line with Scotten Jones's expectations, and it is highly likely that N3E will catch up to or surpass i4's 6VT version. However it seems like the 8VT version might still be a bit stronger. One observation is that it seems like there is still a good bit of gas in the tank for both flavors of i4 to scale frequency before running up against the same heat output that i7 hits around 3.1 to 3.3 GHz. Additionally TSMC didn't specify which logic libs were being used for this test. So I will assume they were using the mainstream 2-2 fin config. If so then it is probable that the N3 3 fin cells could best intel 4.

Unfortunately we don't have power consumption numbers to compare for these nodes. But from this data performance is definitely competitive. This also means we get to check how AMD and Intel's CPU design teams have been motoring along. The last time we had this opportunity was tigerlake vs Renoir/Cezane, and to a lesser extent Alderlake vs Cezane. With N3E and i4 being so close, Meteorlake and Strix Point will be decided by who has the better architecture and who has the better STCO. Exciting times!

One final tidbit of information is that after having done some digging around it seems like N3B is the first TSMC node to have self aligned contacts. This is odd when one considers that intel has had them since 22nm. It does add some process complexity, but I can't imagine that the extra cost outweighs the extra error margin you get. But who am I tell tell TSMC engineers how to do their jobs. It kind of reminds me of when I learned that the 10LPP family had SDB only to ditch it for 7LPP and bring it back for 5LPE. Of course at the end of the day this doesn't effect how customers will use the end product, but I did find it kind of funky.

As N3E/P/X, 3GAE/GAP, and intel 3 get comparable information revealed I can update these tables.
 
Last edited:
Pretty awesome analysis and info!

Only comment I have is AMD’s N3 product will probably end up facing Meteor Lake’s successor. Meteorlake should launch this year, and I don’t think we’ll see any Zen 5 until at least summer 2024. Zen 5 appears to have some products on TSMC N4 and others on N3, and if they follow the usual pattern, the N3 products will follow 1-2 quarters later after the N4.. around the time Intel claims to have something out on 3/20A/18A.

(Yes skepticism warranted on Intel’s nodes, especially with recently de-energized talent).
 
So Intel(or whatever IFS customer) has an ARM designed on Intel 7 as well? Never thought this kind of comparison is possible. Anyway, I kinda think that Intel is the one who can benefit from TSMC's FinFlex-like approach since they pack up high-density cores and high-performance cores in the same die.
 
Never thought this kind of comparison is possible.
What do you mean by that? It can't be that hard to port an ARM core. Unless you mean the Schmoo diagram vs the freq power curves?

Anyway, I kinda think that Intel is the one who can benefit from TSMC's FinFlex-like approach since they pack up high-density cores and high-performance cores in the same die.
Yes and no. Yes E cores are more power efficient, but just as (if not more) importantly they are also more efficient at scaling MT performance. For ADL they are like 30% the performance at like 25% the size. Something like finflex is nice to have for the extra flexibility it offers, but not required. There is nothing stopping intel from using i7 HD or HP for the E-cores and UHP for the P-core portions of the die, after all they (and just about everyone else) will mix and match libraries for different parts of the die. Finflex just gives more granularity when designers are tuning for the best PPA combo.
 
What do you mean by that? It can't be that hard to port an ARM core. Unless you mean the Schmoo diagram vs the freq power curves?
Oh sorry for the confusion. I meant Intel 7 on the second graph. I somehow thought that Intel's going to run IFS starting with i3(thus no information of curve with i7 node), but thinking back why not. Old architectures will work OK with Intel's last non-EUV nodes. Thank you for the great comparison!
 
Back
Top