Semiwiki on LinkedIn Semiwiki on Facebook Semiwiki on Twitter Register / Log in 
Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/graphene-to-replace-silicon-is-it-viable.20431/
        )

    [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
)

Graphene to Replace Silicon? Is it viable?

Arthur Hanson said:

Any thoughts or comments on this would be appreciated
Click to expand...
This is interesting as a academic exercise - "Can we engineer a bandgap in graphene" - but I think misses the point. Graphene is special precisely because it doesn't have a bandgap and that it's just one element ('C'). The community needs to think about how to exploit this in unique and novel ways, rather than trying to fit Graphene into existing paradigms.

If we're talking core semis, 2D materials which do have bandgaps (especially from the TMD family, like MoS2 and WS2/WSe2) are now firmly on major roadmaps, especially for leading edge < 2nm. Graphene is better suited for displays, thermal management, and much longer term, twistronics (twisted bilayer Graphene). You might've seen the Black Semiconductor news, they are trying to do a Graphene photonics transceiver.
 
AChamarthy91 said:
Graphene is special precisely because it doesn't have a bandgap and that it's just one element ('C'). The community needs to think about how to exploit this in unique and novel ways, rather than trying to fit Graphene into existing paradigms.
Click to expand...
A material does not have to be special in just one way. Plenty of ideas - and actual uses - have been found for the conductive form of graphene. That does not invalidate looking for uses for an ultra-high mobility semiconductor variant epitaxial on SiC. We can walk and chew gum.
 
Tanj said:
A material does not have to be special in just one way. Plenty of ideas - and actual uses - have been found for the conductive form of graphene. That does not invalidate looking for uses for an ultra-high mobility semiconductor variant epitaxial on SiC. We can walk and chew gum.
Click to expand...
True. 2D is now a rich toolbox, Graphene, hBN, TMDs, MXenes etc!
 
Plenty of uses for graphene, but for it and for any material one considers for computing purposes (unless you go back to Shannon/Turing/.... and start anew) you need something to make a good switch and for that purpose graphene is pretty lousy. Mobility is important but can be useless if you do not have all the other parameters (subthreshold slope, effective mass, complementary devices, contact and sheet resistance,....) that are also good. People is so used to silicon , where current is just proportional to mobility and all the rest is already there, that forget the basics. It already happend with the III-V hype for CMOS a few years ago with plenty of people missing the low effective mass impact in highly scaled devices.
 
SPQR54 said:
Plenty of uses for graphene, but for it and for any material one considers for computing purposes (unless you go back to Shannon/Turing/.... and start anew) you need something to make a good switch and for that purpose graphene is pretty lousy. Mobility is important but can be useless if you do not have all the other parameters (subthreshold slope, effective mass, complementary devices, contact and sheet resistance,....) that are also good. People is so used to silicon , where current is just proportional to mobility and all the rest is already there, that forget the basics. It already happend with the III-V hype for CMOS a few years ago with plenty of people missing the low effective mass impact in highly scaled devices.
Click to expand...
Yep. And of course, we're only considering the technical aspects here (contact resistance etc). An entire supply chain has to come together as well, from precursors to process to OEM/metrology to foundry/EDA.

I've always liked this quote “In semiconductor space…in order to implement change, you have many boundary conditions. You have to solve the problem in a 6 dimensional equation..it has to work for the designer, it has to work on cost, it has to work with the materials…it has to be on time, it has to be free of defectivity.

The problem is heavily constrained by 6 or 10 different variables…so it’s very difficult to have a simultaneous solution that works for the business model , works for the device, works for the timing, works for the companies that need to collaborate to make it happen”
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top