this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2024
219 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

59578 readers
3015 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FrankFrankson@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

It's important to note that 1.6nm is just a marketing naming scheme and has nothing to do with the actual size of the transistors.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_nm_process

Look at the 3nm process and how the gate pitch is 48nm and the metal pitch is 24nm. The names of the processes stopped having to do with the size of the transistors over a decade ago. It is stupid.

[–] sum_yung_gai@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That is ridiculous. Does 3nm mean anything or it is purely marketing?

[–] FrankFrankson@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Every process name is basically a marketing a gimmick. You could sort of use the previous names as a ratio to get a general idea of uplift but that isn't really accurate either. To further confuse things Intel's naming scheme had bigger nm values but is a similar size to lower numbered names from TSMC.