Go Back   F150online Forums > Owner's Connection > General Discussion
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?

General Discussion
SPONSORED BY:

Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-14-2014, 04:46 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Durham, NC
Vehicle: 2005 Ford F150
Posts: 352
Send a message via AIM to Takeda
P7 CPU Chip

While working for IBM, I developed, and taught a semiconductor (microelectronics) course. One of my "show and tells" was a P7 CPU chip (wafer, and modules). The P7 was developed by IBM in 2009, using a 45nm (nanometer) technology. 45nm is the minimum feature size (poly width) for the chip design. The P7 successor is the P8 CPU.

Here are some photos, that I thought would be of interest. The DOF is extremely shallow in some of the photos, even at f/22.


1 300mm silicon wafer. Red rectangle is one of many P7 CPU chips on the wafer.
Click the image to open in full size.


2 Closer image of P7 CPU chip.
Click the image to open in full size.


3 P7 CPU chip size comparison to penny.
Click the image to open in full size.


4 Magnified edge of P7 CPU chip.
Click the image to open in full size.


5 Magnified edge of P7 CPU chip.
Click the image to open in full size.


6 Eye of needle used for size reference. Spherical shapes are solder ***** used for I/O, power, and ground connections to chip.
Click the image to open in full size.


7 Black rectangle is backside of “diced” chip attached to ceramic substrate. Chip solder ***** are reflowed to attach chip to ceramic substrate.
Click the image to open in full size.


8 Edge of ceramic substrate.
Click the image to open in full size.


9 Bottom of ceramic substrate. Gold pads are for chip connections to socket/card.
Click the image to open in full size.


10 Top of completed module.
Click the image to open in full size.


11 Edge of completed module.
Click the image to open in full size.


12 Bottom of completed module.
Click the image to open in full size.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-14-2014, 05:05 PM
Global Moderator &
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Among javelinas and scorpions in Zoniestan
Vehicle: 2005 Ford F150
Posts: 5,700
It's completely amazing to me that it all works.

Nice pictures, as always.

Edit: This may be a totally stupid/dumb question, but do you or anyone know why rectangular chips are produced on round wafers?

- Jack
__________________

2005 KR 4x4 SCrew 5.4, "Gott's" style CAI, PHP Gryphon CTS Tuned

Last edited by JackandJanet; 01-14-2014 at 05:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-14-2014, 05:17 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Durham, NC
Vehicle: 2005 Ford F150
Posts: 352
Send a message via AIM to Takeda
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackandJanet View Post
It's completely amazing to me that it all works.

Nice pictures, as always.

Edit: This may be a totally stupid/dumb question, but do you or anyone know why rectangular chips are produced on round wafers?

- Jack
Good question!

The wafers are sliced from a cylinder, which is round by the way it is fabricated. Chips are either square or rectangular, because their image is "stepped" across the wafer.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-15-2014, 09:19 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Durham, NC
Vehicle: 2005 Ford F150
Posts: 352
Send a message via AIM to Takeda
Check out this link for P7 CPU specs: http://www.7-cpu.com/cpu/Power7.html
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-15-2014, 05:56 PM
Global Moderator &
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Among javelinas and scorpions in Zoniestan
Vehicle: 2005 Ford F150
Posts: 5,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda View Post
Good question!

The wafers are sliced from a cylinder, which is round by the way it is fabricated. Chips are either square or rectangular, because their image is "stepped" across the wafer.
I never thought to question the design of a chip. Using a rectangle or square shape maximizes surface area and, I suspect it works best with the shape of the internal circuitry.

And, I suppose a cylindrical wafer blank is easier to fabricate than a rectangular one. Still, I can't help but notice the wasted area around the perimeter, and it seems to me a rectangular wafer would be more efficient. But, I imagine the fab engineers have considered all this, rejecting my thoughts.

- Jack

Last edited by JackandJanet; 01-15-2014 at 06:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-15-2014, 06:13 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Durham, NC
Vehicle: 2005 Ford F150
Posts: 352
Send a message via AIM to Takeda
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackandJanet View Post
I never thought to question the design of a chip. Using a rectangle or square shape maximizes surface area and, I suspect it works best with the shape of the internal circuitry.

And, I suppose a cylindrical wafer blank is easier to fabricate than a rectangular one. Still, I can't help but notice the wasted area around the perimeter, and it seems to me a rectangular wafer would be more efficient. But, I imagine the fab engineers have considered all this, rejecting my thoughts.

- Jack
Jack, the silicon "cylinder" is pulled from molten silicon, while spinning. This is why it is round, instead of square. And a round wafer is easier to handle through the different processes.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-15-2014, 06:21 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Durham, NC
Vehicle: 2005 Ford F150
Posts: 352
Send a message via AIM to Takeda
Jack, here ya go, I found a video of the wafer making process:

Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-16-2014, 12:31 PM
Global Moderator &
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Among javelinas and scorpions in Zoniestan
Vehicle: 2005 Ford F150
Posts: 5,700
Thanks, Takeda. That clears things up very well. I suppose I could have found that myself if I had used my search finger, but like some others, I was just too lazy at the time.

It's still fascinating to me that a silicon chip can do so much, so reliably. I know that CPUs can fail, but they must be the last components to do so in normal use. Those tiny solder points are just amazing too.

I attempted to find information on the manufacturing failure rate of these components and didn't really succeed, possibly because the answer doesn't exist since chips may still be used if they are not "perfect" and actual yield rates may be confidential. However, I found this well-written article that's only 4.5 years old, so it should still be fairly relevant: http://www.geek.com/chips/from-sand-...s-made-832492/

Having taught digital processor/systems design for many years, I'm in awe of the physical design of modern ULSI circuits. What an amazing design/development process!

- Jack
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-16-2014, 11:25 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Durham, NC
Vehicle: 2005 Ford F150
Posts: 352
Send a message via AIM to Takeda
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackandJanet View Post
Thanks, Takeda. That clears things up very well. I suppose I could have found that myself if I had used my search finger, but like some others, I was just too lazy at the time.

It's still fascinating to me that a silicon chip can do so much, so reliably. I know that CPUs can fail, but they must be the last components to do so in normal use. Those tiny solder points are just amazing too.

I attempted to find information on the manufacturing failure rate of these components and didn't really succeed, possibly because the answer doesn't exist since chips may still be used if they are not "perfect" and actual yield rates may be confidential. However, I found this well-written article that's only 4.5 years old, so it should still be fairly relevant: http://www.geek.com/chips/from-sand-...s-made-832492/

Having taught digital processor/systems design for many years, I'm in awe of the physical design of modern ULSI circuits. What an amazing design/development process!

- Jack
You mention yield, and failure rate Jack. Two different things Jack. To yield is confidential, but typically, worst case failure rates are published. I'll see if I can find some information on this for you. Device infant mortality can be improved with burn-in processes, with a cost adder.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2014, 11:25 PM


 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:40 AM.





This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
 
Contact Us Advertising Privacy Statement Terms of Service Jobs Forum Text Archives
Emails & Contact Details