Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • Looking at this picture: https://filecache.mediaroom.com/mr5mr_ibmnewsroom/201436/IBM...

    I am just astonished at the quality of the structure. Not only that, but the quality of the "cut" to then be able to take this picture. I was closely involved in EM imaging more than 30 years ago, this is just wonderful to see such pictures now.

    by Loic
  • One of the images has "15 rows of Si atoms".

    Is there a limit to how small things can go? A single atom?

    Is there a physical/molecular limit to Moore's Law?

    by throw0101d
  • Remember that IBM paid Global Foundries $1.5 billion to take their fabs and design services group.

    GF did not pay IBM. IBM paid GF to take the fabs away.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/technology/ibm-to-pay-global...

    by lizknope
  • The most surprising part for me is that IBM still somehow owns silicon labs, I was sure it's effectively a consulting company by now
    by alexey-salmin
  • Two big problems 1) NOBODY knows what IBM's definition of "sub 1nm" means 2) IBM bullshits so much more than anyone including Intel (remember the "teleportation" ads years ago) that nobody is going to waste time researching what they mean in reality
    by monirmamoun
  • For what it's worth, here's my 7000+ word deep dive into the technology.

    https://morethanmoore.substack.com/p/ibms-announces-07nm-pro...

    by IanCutress
  • Just to be clear, this doesn't mean that anything on the die actually measures 0.7nm — it means that it's roughly double the density as the previous node generation. At some point the industry decided to keep talking about "nanometers" even though the actual transistor sizes have been decoupled from the node name for years.
    by jadar
  • > logic technology can extend for the first time below the 1 nm node, advancing the era of angstrom-level scaling, where dimensions approach the size of individual atoms. While transistor nodes now refer to a generation of manufacturing technology versus an exact physical dimension, IBM’s 0.7 nm technology—also referred to as 7 angstroms—demonstrates how continued scaling remains possible.

    Continuing the well established trend of making bold claims about physical dimensions that have nothing to do with any of the structures in the chip, and the name scales better than the tech.

    What they actually deliver is a "nanostack architecture" built with ~5nm features that according to them is comparable to a hypothetical real sub-1nm chip.

    It's an impressive achievement nonetheless but it looks like the industry has a few too many marketers.

    by buran77

Explore Birbla archives