Bookmark and Share


At the Common Platform Technology Forum (CPTF) a vice president of Globalfoundries said that his company's approach to multiple gate field-effect transistor (MuGFET)-based process technologies is better optimized for next-generation mobile system-on-chips (SoCs) than that of Intel Corp.'s. It is expected that CPTF and Globalfoundries will implement FinFETs (double-gate transistors) into its 14nm process tech in three-four years from now.

“We believe we have a much better finFET, that is optimised for mobile SoCs,” said Subramani Kengeri, vice president of design solutions at Globalfoundries, reports ElectroIQ web-site.

Development of FinFETs was started around ten years ago by Advanced Micro Devices and then was continued by Globalfoundries. At present Globalfoundries claims that FinFETs will be utilized along with 14nm process technologies, which is likely enter mass production in 2015 - 2016 timeframe.

Intel itself does not refer to its 22nm process technology with tri-gate transistors as to FinFETs, therefore, Globalfoundries may have formal right at this point of time to call its approach more advanced as Intel's tri-gate is a somewhat simplified approach to MuGFET. What will be interesting to see actual yields and actual performance improvements from both approaches. Moreover, Intel can use different type of transistors with its 14nm process technology compared to 22nm fabrication tech.

Tags: Intel, Globalfoundries, IBM, Samsung, 22nm, 20nm, 14nm, Semiconductor, FinFET


Comments currently: 12
Discussion started: 03/21/12 08:53:57 AM
Latest comment: 03/22/12 01:27:28 PM
Expand all threads | Collapse all threads


Wow Global Foundaries designs 4 years from now will be better then current Intel designs by an unmentioned amount! I better wait for that .... /sarcasm

In other news Russians are bragging theyll get to the moon more fficiently then the US did 40 years ago, what an achievement!
4 2 [Posted by: cashkennedy  | Date: 03/21/12 08:53:57 AM]
- collapse thread

technology to primitive to had have launch people to the moon 40 years ago in a tin can,radiation would have fry their fragile bodies.
2 2 [Posted by: Urhu  | Date: 03/21/12 12:26:05 PM]
Comparison is not good, the Russians were first brought samples of the moon to Earth.Later comparison of Russian and American samples ,was the proof that the Americans were on the moon.Otherwise I think that Intel currently has a better process than Glo Fo.
2 0 [Posted by: Blackcode  | Date: 03/21/12 02:04:59 PM]
Heh, sorry I didnt mean it as a real life comparison, but more as a "It would be like if russia bragged they were doing it more efficiently then the US did 40-60 years ago", but it was on my mind because they just announced their plans to go to the moon in a few years.
0 0 [Posted by: cashkennedy  | Date: 03/22/12 09:47:34 AM]
did any body comeback alive.the moon landing video looks like it was done in a Hollywood studio. no light from the stars in it maybe the star decided they will take a break from reality
0 0 [Posted by: Urhu  | Date: 03/22/12 01:27:28 PM]

Someone is afraid of that Foundry that isn't even built yet in Arizona.
1 3 [Posted by: LedHed  | Date: 03/21/12 12:17:02 PM]

GF doesn't even have the capability of doing a 32->22 nm jump like Intel is doing. They're going to be lucky if they manage a 32->28 nm shrink before the end of the year. By the time they actually get around to 14 nm it'll be way past "3-4 years".
3 2 [Posted by: AnonymousGuy  | Date: 03/21/12 12:43:28 PM]
- collapse thread

GlobalFoundries can do 20 nm already [actual] production starts next year.

IBM, Samsung, and GlobalFoundries 20 nm -> 2013
14 nm is between 2014-2015 with plans to intercept Intel.
2 1 [Posted by: seronx  | Date: 03/21/12 01:38:16 PM]
And Intel can "do" 14 nm already. The only thing anyone cares about is production volume. Even when BD was released using the 32 nm process they were having yield issues while Intel was churning out 32 nm gulftown with ease.
1 0 [Posted by: AnonymousGuy  | Date: 03/21/12 08:11:28 PM]

Well considering Intel's 3D transistors combined with a smaller node has only given barely a barely passable improvement, I wouldn't think it would be that hard to make a better implementation.
1 1 [Posted by: daneren2005  | Date: 03/21/12 02:41:41 PM]
- collapse thread

I wouldn't call a 50% power reduction a "passable improvement".
1 1 [Posted by: AnonymousGuy  | Date: 03/21/12 08:12:19 PM]

but they can't make 32nm, 28nm or anything

and how do they know anything about intel's FinFETs

I wish any foundry is comparable to intel's

but 2015-2016 is too late

intel shoud have IVB 2012, HASWELL 2013 and somethingwell 2014 which should be 14 nm (in 2014 )
0 1 [Posted by: madooo12  | Date: 03/21/12 03:30:25 PM]


Add your Comment

Related news

Latest News

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

10:48 pm | LG’s Unique Ultra-Wide Curved 34” Display Finally Hits the Market. LG 34UC97 Available in the U.S. and the U.K.

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

12:52 pm | Lisa Su Appointed as New CEO of Advanced Micro Devices. Rory Read Steps Down, Lisa Su Becomes New CEO of AMD

Thursday, August 28, 2014

4:22 am | AMD Has No Plans to Reconsider Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Cards. AMD Will Not Lower Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Solutions

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

1:09 pm | Samsung Begins to Produce 2.13GHz 64GB DDR4 Memory Modules. Samsung Uses TSV DRAMs for 64GB DDR4 RDIMMs

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

10:41 am | AMD Quietly Reveals Third Iteration of GCN Architecture with Tonga GPU. AMD Unleashes Radeon R9 285 Graphics Cards, Tonga GPU, GCN 1.2 Architecture