# Difference between 180nm and 130nm with same W/L ratio

1. ## Difference between 180nm and 130nm with same W/L ratio

Im curious what this difference would be? If you sized both of them, say 5um/1um, would there be any performance differences? If so why?

Thanks!

•

2. ## Re: Difference between 180nm and 130nm with same W/L ratio

Oxide thickness also tends to track nominal gate dimension
and remains a factor even at gross W, L. Reliable working
voltage is reduced, whether you gain or lose drive strength
will depend on how much (V-VT)^2 you can get before you
break or wear out the gate. VT is often moved lower to help
with the lesser max voltage, then costing you subthreshold
(incl "off") leakage.

If you were really curious you'd get down to cases because
there's lots of "knobs" that can be set / traded a lot of ways.

1 members found this post helpful.

•

3. ## Re: Difference between 180nm and 130nm with same W/L ratio

I guess I'm wondering why the oxide thickness tracks with gate dimension? If you have a lower oxide thickness, you'll have a bigger Cox and lower threshold, but why can't a 180nm process have the exact same oxide thickness as a 130nm process?

Also, take a 180nm process, the smallest pattern you can generate on the mask is usually something like 35nm, so why can't you make the polysilicon 35nm instead of 180nm? Is there something I am missing?

•

4. ## Re: Difference between 180nm and 130nm with same W/L ratio

The lateral D-S field that can be stood off at Lmin will
determine the working voltage (subject to many features
that modify hot carrier effects). Any gate oxide thicker
than what's needed to reliably stand that max working
voltage (subject to blah blah) is just leaving performance
on the table. You can't really optimize one without the
other (you could go there but it will not be optimum).

Where density is king, geometry goes where it's led.
Shrinking the FET gate is proxy for many other co-shrinks.

In your final question, you could, but then it would be
(advertised as) a 35nm technology and would not live
at 1.8V core voltage. Maybe this is a don't-care (often