Scaling Factors and Scaling Parameters
Scaling Factors and Scaling Parameters
Scaling Factors and Scaling Parameters
Scaling of MOS Circuits CONTENTS 1. What is scaling? 2. Why scaling? 3. Figure(s) of Merit (FoM) for scaling 4. International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors (ITRS) 5. Scaling models 6. Scaling factors for device parameters 7. Implications of scaling on design 8. Limitations of scaling 9. Observations 10. Summary
Figure1 to Figure 5 illustrates the technology scaling in terms of minimum feature size, transistor count, prapogation delay, power dissipation and density and technology generations.
10
10
10
10
-1
10 1960
-2
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Year
x1.4 / 3 y
ears
0.7
10 1
100
10
0.1 0.01 80
Scaling Factor normalized by 4 m design rule (b) Power density vs. scaling factor.
10
Technology Generations
Figure-5:Technology generation
4.
Table 1: ITRS
5.Scaling Models Full Scaling (Constant Electrical Field) Ideal model dimensions and voltage scale together by the same scale factor Fixed Voltage Scaling Most common model until recently only the dimensions scale, voltages remain constant General Scaling Most realistic for todays situation voltages and dimensions scale with different factors 6.Scaling Factors for Device Parameters Device scaling modeled in terms of generic scaling factors: 1/ and 1/ 1/: scaling factor for supply voltage VDD and gate oxide thickness D 1/: linear dimensions both horizontal and vertical dimensions
Why is the scaling factor for gate oxide thickness different from other linear horizontal and vertical dimensions? Consider the cross section of the device as in Figure 6,various parameters derived are as follows.
Figure-6:Technology generation
Gate area Ag
Ag = L *W
Where L: Channel length and W: Channel width and both are scaled by 1/ Thus Ag is scaled up by 1/2 Gate capacitance per unit area Co or Cox
Cox = ox/D Where ox is permittivity of gate oxide(thin-ox)= inso and D is the gate oxide thickness scaled by 1/ 1 = Thus Cox is scaled up by 1 Gate capacitance Cg C g = Co * L *W Thus Cg is scaled up by * 1/ 2 =/ 2 Parasitic capacitance Cx
Cx is proportional to Ax/d where d is the depletion width around source or drain and scaled by 1/ Ax is the area of the depletion region around source or drain, scaled by (1/ 2 ). Thus Cx is scaled up by {1/(1/)}* (1/ 2 ) =1/ Carrier density in channel Qon
Qon = Co * Vgs where Qon is the average charge per unit area in the on state. Co is scaled by and Vgs is scaled by 1/ Thus Qon is scaled by 1 Channel Resistance Ron
Ron = L 1 * W Qon *
* =
fo =
W CoVDD * L Cg
1 1 = 2
Current density J I dss Current density, J = A where A is cross sectional area of the Channel in the on state which is scaled by (1/ 2). So, J is scaled by
1 1
E = 1 C V 2 g g DD 2 So Eg is scaled by
1 1 * 2 = 2 2
Pg comprises of two components: static component Pgs and dynamic component Pgd: Where, the static power component is given by:
Pgd = E g f o
2 V DD Pgs = R on
Since VDD scales by (1/) and Ron scales by 1, Pgs scales by (1/2). Since Eg scales by (1/2 ) and fo by (2 /), Pgd also scales by (1/2). Therefore, Pg scales by (1/2).
PT = Pg * Td =
1 1 = 2 2 2
6.1 Scaling Factors Summary Various device parameters for different scaling models are listed in Table 2 below. Table 2: Device parameters for scaling models NOTE: for Constant E: =; for Constant V: =1
Parameters VDD L W D Ag Co (or Cox) Cg Cx Qon Ron Idss Constant E General (Combined V Description and Dimension) 1/ 1/ Supply voltage Channel length 1/ 1/ Channel width 1/ 1/ Gate oxide thickness 1/ 1/ 2 2 Gate area 1/ 1/ Gate capacitance per unit area 1/ Gate capacitance /2 1/ Parsitic capacitance 1/ 1 1 Carrier density 1 1 Channel resistance 1/ 1/ Saturation current Constant V
1 1/ 1/ 1 2 1/ 1 1/ 1/ 1 1 1
2
10
Parameters
Description Conductor cross section area Current density Logic 1 level Switching energy Power dissipation per gate Gates per unit area Power dissipation per unit area Gate delay Max. operating frequency Power speed product
Ac J Vg Eg Pg N Pa Td fo PT
Constant V
1/ 2 1 1/ 1 2 2 1/ 2 1/
1/ 1 / 3 1/ 2 1 1/ 1 / 3
2
2 2 / 2 / 2 2 / 1 / 2
7.Implications of Scaling
Improved Performance Improved Cost Interconnect Woes Power Woes Productivity Challenges Physical Limits
11
Figure-7:Technology generation
7.2:Interconnect Woes Scaled transistors are steadily improving in delay, but scaled wires are holding constant or getting worse. SIA made a gloomy forecast in 1997 Delay would reach minimum at 250 180 nm, then get worse because of wires But For short wires, such as those inside a logic gate, the wire RC delay is negligible. However, the long wires present a considerable challenge. Scaled transistors are steadily improving in delay, but scaled wires are holding constant or getting worse. SIA made a gloomy forecast in 1997 Delay would reach minimum at 250 180 nm, then get worse because of wires But For short wires, such as those inside a logic gate, the wire RC delay is negligible. However, the long wires present a considerable challenge. Figure 8 illustrates delay Vs. generation in nm for different materials.
Figure-8:Technology generation
12
Figure-9:Technology generation
13
Figure-10:Technology generation
Vt must decrease to maintain device performance But this causes exponential increase in OFF leakage A Major future challenge(Figure 11)
7.6 Productivity Transistor count is increasing faster than designer productivity (gates / week)
Bigger design teams Up to 500 for a high-end microprocessor
More expensive design cost Pressure to raise productivity Rely on synthesis, IP blocks
Effects, as a result of scaling down- which eventually become severe enough to prevent further miniaturization. o Substrate doping
o Limits of interconnect and contact resistance o Limits due to sub threshold currents o Limits on logic levels and supply voltage due to noise o Limits due to current density 8.1 Substrate doping o Substrate doping o Built-in(junction) potential VB depends on substrate doping level can be neglected as long as VB is small compared to VDD. o As length of a MOS transistor is reduced, the depletion region width scaled down to prevent source and drain depletion region from meeting. o the depletion region width d for the junctions is d = o si relative permittivity of silicon o 0 permittivity of free space(8.85*10-14 F/cm) o V effective voltage across the junction Va + Vb o q electron charge o NB doping level of substrate o Va maximum value Vdd-applied voltage
2 si 0V q NB 1
8.2 Depletion width N B is increased to reduce d , but this increases threshold voltage Vt trends for scaling down.
-against
Maximum value of N B (1.3*1019 cm-3 , at higher values, maximum electric field applied to gate is insufficient and no channel is formed. N B maintained at satisfactory level in the channel region to reduce the above problem. Emax maximum electric field induced in the junction.
Emax = 2V d
ln
16
Where
d=
si 0
q NB
2 si Ecrit .d q NB 2
( Ecrit )
Figure 12 , Figure 13 and Figure 14 shows the relation between substrate concentration Vs depletion width , Electric field and transit time. Figure 15 demonstrates the interconnect length Vs. propagation delay and Figure 16 oxide thickness Vs. thermal noise.
Figure-12:Technology generation
17
Figure-13:Technology generation
8.3 Limits of miniaturization minimum size of transistor; process tech and physics of the device
Reduction of geometry; alignment accuracy and resolution Size of transistor measured in terms of channel length L L=2d (to prevent push through) L determined by NB and Vdd Minimum transit time for an electron to travel from source to drain is
v drift = E
t= L Vdrift = 2d E
smaximum
18
Figure-14:Technology generation
19
Figure-15:Technology generation
Emax = 2{ Va + Vb }/ d
8.6 Limits on supply voltage due to noise
Decreased inter-feature spacing and greater switching speed result in noise problems
20
Figure-16:Technology generation
9. Observations Device scaling o Gate capacitance per micron is nearly independent of process o But ON resistance * micron improves with process o Gates get faster with scaling (good) o Dynamic power goes down with scaling (good) o Current density goes up with scaling (bad) o Velocity saturation makes lateral scaling unsustainable 9.1 Observations Interconnect scaling o Capacitance per micron is remaining constant o About 0.2 fF/mm o Roughly 1/10 of gate capacitance o Local wires are getting faster o Not quite tracking transistor improvement o But not a major problem o Global wires are getting slower o No longer possible to cross chip in one cycle 10. Summary
Scaling allows people to build more complex machines That run faster too It does not to first order change the difficulty of module design
21
Module wires will get worse, but only slowly You dont think to rethink your wires in your adder, memory Or even your super-scalar processor core
It does let you design more modules Continued scaling of uniprocessor performance is getting hard -Machines using global resources run into wire limitations -Machines will have to become more explicitly parallel
22