Continue to Site

Welcome to EDAboard.com

Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronics Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more! To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

CPU, DRAM, VNAND - why can't they be integrated together on a single SoC?

Status
Not open for further replies.

RBTKraisee

Newbie level 2
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Messages
2
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1
Activity points
26
Could someone please take a moment to explain what the technical blocker are, that currently prevent CPU's, DRAM, VNAND and all the appropriate controllers all being integrated together on a single SoC die?

I understand that economically it may not be an optimal solution. But cost-no-object, and assuming all the appropriate licenses are obtained, I would really like to put a block of DRAM on the same die as a small ARM CPU core, together with some VNAND storage on there too - and for this project I do not care about yield figures. Two different foundries have told me it can't be done on the same process. As a non-expert, I'm just trying to understand why not?

Thanks in advance, for any and all insights.

Ross.
 

Aside from the CPU, the memories want different things.
DRAM (optimized for cost) wants trench capacitors or at
least capacitors optimized for areal density. Meanwhile
"VNAND" (or any EE memory) wants an oxide / dielectric
that well tolerates repeated current stress (which normal
reliable FETs would prohibit) and high voltage programming
features, which DRAM and CPU don't need.

You can find technologies with EE features. These could
be used for CPU ("it's just gates") and DRAM (if you can
tolerate the inferior density - SRAM might fit tighter if you
have XXnm FETs, and is likely already supported in flash
memory technologies).

It's not a matter of "can't", it's a matter of competitiveness
(commercial mass market) or customers (heavy freight to
pay, all that up front NRE against a probably limited lifetime
quantity).

Of all the problem s I'd call EE reliability the biggest / most
technology-application-limiting. If you can get access to a
flow that satisfies the nonvolatile retention / wearout issues,
most other "stuff" could be made (perhaps at way inferior
density).

DRAM is so dirt cheap, you'd be mis-spending money to
integrate that on a non-optimized flow, is my opinion. But
lots of people seem to think that "system on a chip" means
"entire system on a chip" and you'll be set. Neglecting such
minor details as multi-rail and dead quiet power supplies,
and how a bazillion transistors talk usefully to the outside
world with no added help.

Given that it doesn't, really, I see little glory in pulling DRAM
onto the die (where you will pay for all the umpteen levels
of fine pitch interconnect it doesn't need or want, and all
the multiple FET species likewise, attending a modern SoC
flow, yet never get the special capacitor you need for
density).

But "by any means necessary", yes you could. Not at the
foundries you've contacted, with the relationship you've
got, I guess.
 
dick's answer is really thorough. it's all about the trade-off of market needs vs cost. we are not in a situation where most customers would benefit from embedded DRAM or NVM, so you got to pay a lot of extra money to get those features from the foundry.
 

Agreed, DF definitely answered my original question, that's its more an economic limitation than a technical one. If the application required it, and your budget could stretch high enough, it could be done.

The technical bottleneck appears to be that you'd need to build everything on your DRAM process, and then have to just swallow the high costs for the other components being made on that same process, and you just have to accept that small volume custom DRAM runs would be heinously expensive.

Another takeaway from DF's points is that, depending on your specific requirements, it might be worth considering other types of memory and storage. It might be feasible (economical) to use alternative approaches, such as using SRAM instead of DRAM, to accomplish the same task.

And his point about the relationship with the foundry is a subtle, but important factor too.

Some great insights, and exactly what I was looking for.

Ross.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top