Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Jos L. Huertas
IMSEIMSE-CNM
Acknowledgement for the RTD material to J.M. Quintana and M.J. Avedillo, IMSEM J Avedillo, IMSE-CNM
1
Goal
Through an overview of problems and p potential solutions solutions Motivate a discussion on how future devices, devices, beyond MOS might be accepted MOS, by the designer community. community.
Outline
Microelectronics today: needs and trends
Limitations Predictions
Extending MOS beyond its limits New Paradigms Challenges to enable new devices Conclusions
3
Introduction
Feature size approaching th physical f ti F t i hi the h i l frontiers Fabrication process reaching limits Power cons mption Po er consumption a main concern Quantum effects need to be accounted for Solution? Nanotechnology? A diversity of solutions are emerging Is any of the new devices feasible for being incorporated into the design flow? What is needed?
All-inAll-in-One:
One device. One Operating System One human interface
Ultra Low Power Power. Very High Speed Very Reliable Performance Low Cost
5
??
1-billion transistors Pentium III Xeon
100-billion transistors
Pentium III
Moore s Law referred to Gate Length Moores In the future More Moore??
Downscaling vs Lithography
10 um Motivation:
Modern CMOS Beginning of Submicron CMOS
10 nm
Every generation Feature size shrinks by 70% Transistor density doubles Wafer cost increases by 20% Chip cost comes down by 40% Generations occur regularly On average every 2 9 years over 2.9 the past 34 years Recently every 2 years
1 nm 1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
8
Convergence: Nano/Tera
10
12
A typical System
13
Future Roadmap: 2D
MOS Transistor
in the future? i th f t ?
14
2014 MOS
15
WellWell-tailored to the Electronics needs Backed by an extensive know-how at device, knowcircuit and system levels Approaching important botlenecks Interconnects are becoming another problem Is there a limit for its supremacy?
16
Hierarchy of Limits
System Circuit Device D i Material Fundamental
17
NanoNano-Scale MOSFET
Ph hoto Courte esy: Fujitsu Labs u
NanoNano-Scale MOSFETs
UltraUltra-thin Body SOI MOS Band- g Band-Engineered Transistor Vertical Transistor FINFET DoubleDouble-gate Transistor ...
19
2010
hp45
2012
2013
hp32
2015
2016
hp22
2018
18
14
13
10
Nominal gate leakage current 1.9E+03 2.4E+03 7.7E+03 1.0E+04 1.9E+04 2.4E+04 density limit (at 25 C) (A/cm2) 25C) Nominal power supply voltage 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 (Vdd) (V) Nominal high-performance NMOS sub-threshold leakage 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 current, Isd,leak (at 25C) (mA/m) Nominal high-performance high performance NMOS drive current, Id,sat (at 1900 1790 2050 2110 2400 2190 Vdd, at 25C) (mA/m) High-performance NMOS 0.39 0.30 0.26 0.18 0.15 0.11 intrinsic delay, = Cgate * Vdd / Id,sat (ps) NMOSFET static power dissipation due to drain and gate 1 10E-06 9 90E-07 2 97E-06 2 64E-06 4 40E-06 3 85E-06 1.10E-06 9.90E-07 2.97E-06 2.64E-06 4.40E-06 3.85E-06 leakage (W/m)
20
Device Summary
21
Challenges
Difficulties
High l t i fi ld Hi h electric fields Power supply vs. threshold voltage Heat dissipation Interconnect delays Vanishing bulk properties Shrinkage of gate oxide layer Too many problems to continue miniaturization as physical limits approach Proposed solutions are short term
Open Problems
Improve lithographic precision (eBeam) Explore new materials (GaAs, SiGe, etc.) As a long term goal explore new devices
22
23
24
25
26
Technology
Variability Lithography
Hierarchy of Limits
System Circuit Device D i Material Fundamental
28
Fundamental Limits
29
90 nm
30
32
33
34
A System Example
35
Summary of Limits
36
Oxide variations
0.13
90-nm
65-nm
ICCAD 2003
Discrete dopants
2 of 86
37
38
39
Watts/cm2
155
171 530
178 552
-----
205 635
-----
NO!!
2020 MOS
41
Perhaps Nanoelectronics
43
CMOS Devices
Quantum Devices
Nano CMOS
CNFET
SpinT
Quantum Dot
RTD
SET
Quantum
Electromechanical
Photoactive
Electrochemical
45
CNT can be used as the conducting channel of a MOSFET. b d th d ti h l f MOSFET These new devices are very similar to the CMOS FETs. All CNFETs are pFETs by nature. nFETs can be made through Annealing Doping p g Very low current and power consumption Although tubes are 3nm thick CNFETs are still the size of the contacts, about 20nm. ,
46
CNT Transistor
Questions for CNT FETs
1) Can CNT FET be smaller, faster and dissipate less energy than Si FET? 2) Is it possible t integrate individual CNT I ibl to i t t i di id l components in a complex circuit (billions of components per cm2)? 3) Is Ballistic Transport a big advantage?
j = env
S. J. Wind,J. Appenzeller, R. Martel, V. Derycke, and Ph. Avouris, Appl. Phys. Lett 80 (2002) 3817
vdrift = F
ndrift>nbal
e vb = t F m
For long channels, is ballistic transport possible in the high-current regime? 47 7th ICCDCS
Bar rrier
Source S
Island I l d
Drain D i
Distance
Types of devices
Resonant Tunneling Diode (RTD) Single Electron Transistor (SET) Quantum Dot (QD)
Drain Conductance changes in spurts as energy levels are discrete g p gy To go from conducting to non-conducting stage, it requires voltage nonsufficient for one electron to cross This is achieved by applying gate bias enough for just one electron charge -- hence the name SET Bias required for conduction is coulomb gap voltage Same device can act as pFET or nFET based on the barrier strength Applications: Extra sensitive charge meters CMOS style conducting devices
50
Single Electron Single-Electron Transistor has all problems of charge-based devices The Fan Out requirement is not satisfied? Fan-Out
source
drain
High error rate? Low speed? What about FET in single electron mode? single-electron
(FET will be 32-electron transistor by 2018)
51
1.00E 07 1.00E+07 1.00E+05 Jpeak, A/c cm2 1.00E+03 1.00E+01 1.00E-01 1.00E-03 1.00E-05 1.00E-07 1 10
FET
Jpeak Jvalley
100000 1000000
Operation principle: control of spinpolarized flow of electrons Spin-valve (GMR) Magnetic tunnel junction M ti t lj ti Spin Transport in 2DEG
53
3-dimensional island tunneling barrier State determined by presence of electron and not by conduction. Quantum cell array (QCA) is a lattice of these cells with 2 electrons confined. Occupied electrons are furthest from each other due to repulsive forces.
54
2 states 1 and 0. Electrostatic interaction of nearby cells makes the bits y flip. Input to the cell is by manipulating the Inter-dot barriers. InterLogic gates can be constructed. constructed
55
Challenges
Background charge may offset states (noise sensitivity) Sensitivity of tunneling current to barrier width (lithographic accuracy) Sensitivity to barrier widths Cryogenic operation
Open Problems
Lithographic methods with guaranteed accuracy g p g y Self assembly of systems Background charge elimination Synthesis and verification techniques needed Testing of these devices as stuck-at models may be inadequate. stuck56
Molecular Electronics
Incentives
Molecules are nano-scale M l l nanol Self assembly is achievable Very low-power operation lowHighly uniform devices
Electromechanical Devices
Using mechanical switching of atoms or molecules
Electrochemical Devices
Chemical interactions to change shape or orientation
Photoactive Devices Ph t ti D i
Light frequency changes shape and orientation.
57
Molecular Electronics
Thiol Thi l
Mechanical synthesis
Molecules aligned using a scanning tunneling microscope (STM) Fabrication done molecule by molecule using STM
Chemical synthesis
Molecules aligned in place by chemical interactions Self assembly Parallel fabrication
58
59
Challenges
Signal restoration and gain Finding non-interacting chemicals nonChemical reactions stochastic with by-products bySlow operating speeds
Open Problems
Self assembling of devices Increased speed of operation Guaranteed switching of molecules (HP- UCLA devices) (HPSimulation models and CAD
60
61
LongLong-term Electronics
63
Representation Levels
Multicore Von Neuman Analog Digital Scaled MOS Silicon Electric Charge
65
66
QCA
Spintronics
FILTER
Molecular M l l Electronics 1D-devices 1D d i
???
NEW SWITCH
RTD RSFQ
Single Electronics
ANSWER: ANSWER
NONE YET!
67
Nanoelectronics Evolution
RTD Single Electronics
RTD
RTD
Molecular Switch
Bulk CMOS
SOI
Nanotubes N b
Today
2020
2040
68
Why i Wh is so diffi lt t fi d a difficult to find successful substitute to traditional MOS? traditional Because size, speed & power are j t parts of the problem just t f th bl
69
Handling continuous and discrete-time signals discreteAdded value compared to scaled MOS in terms of density
70
Complementary Criteria
SystemSystem-ability CoCo-hosting memory, logic, communication g y g Handling device variability Handling analog and digital signals Combining More Moore with More than Moore Complementing the other platforms (sensors, actuators, antennas, special functions) Efficient interconnect
71
Main conclusion:
Embeddability in the design flow y g Reasonable Design Productivity y Viability for basic circuits Use of basic circuits in systems
Are systems beneffitting somehow from the new device? D i titi d t ? Does it give any competitive advantage?
73
I/O pads CPU core I/O pads DSP core DSP book
Analog & RF
Digital
Simulation Simulation
Simulation
Simulation
Lay-Out
75
Simulation Strategy
QmQm-Effects in MOS devices QuantumQuantum-mechanical modeling a d u e ca s u at o and numerical simulation Spice circuit models Circuit Simulation
76
Simulation Strategy
QmQm-Effects in MOS devices QuantumQuantum-mechanical modeling a d u e ca s u at o and numerical simulation Spice circuit models Circuit Simulation
77
Simulation Strategy
QmQm-Effects in MOS devices QuantumQuantum-mechanical modeling a d u e ca s u at o and numerical simulation Spice circuit models Circuit Simulation
78
Simulation Strategy
QmQm-Effects in MOS devices QuantumQuantum-mechanical modeling a d u e ca s u at o and numerical simulation Spice circuit models Circuit Simulation
79
81
General Conclusions
MOS technology is approaching saturation problems/limits in the nanometer range Several new possibilities emerging Validation of the new devices must be done at system level Competitive circuit structures, Spicestructures Spicecompatible simulation models, and MOSmodels, MOScompatibility are a demand for the emerging devices.
82