On Wednesday, Intel announced that by building a microprocessor’s transistor above the surface, they could make chips that are smaller, faster, and lower-power. This is different from the typical design of most computer chips. Most microchip transistors have been two dimensional, but now designers are turning to the third dimension. The design used is called a FINFET, based on a small pillar of silicon rising above the chip surface. Despite this, many feel that Intel is spending billions on what could be a bad decision. Some think Intel could win the technology battle, but lose the battle in the marketplace, because it is not involved in the growing smartphone market. However, Intel is acknowledging the challenges they face with this new design.
This article is important because regardless of whether Intel’s new FINFET design is successful or not, it will have an impact on the technology market. If it is successful, it could revolutionize technology. If it is a failure, it could be used as an example of a multibillion-dollar mistake.
This article was very interesting. It is important because the FINFET design could either become a success or a failure, and it could be a major part of future computer design. Whether FINFET is a success or failure, it will impact Intel’s future and inspire major changes in computer design.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/science/05chip.html?_r=1&ref=science
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
1. I liked how he explained the differnce between the old technology and the new technology.
2. I liked how he explained the make up of the chip, however he did not go into to much detail and make it confusing.
3. I liked how he expressed what the public opinion is on this topic because I did not know about this topic before and helped me better understand what others think about the new technology.
1. I thought he could have given a little more details about the subject.
2. I thought he could have made the review a little longer.
1. I did not know that new designs could make the chips three-dimensional.
1. I liked how he explained the differnce between the old technology and the new technology.
2. I liked how he explained the make up of the chip, however he did not go into to much detail and make it confusing.
3. I liked how he expressed what the public opinion is on this topic because I did not know about this topic before and helped me better understand what others think about the new technology.
1. I thought he could have given a little more details about the subject.
2. I thought he could have made the review a little longer.
1. I did not know that new designs could make the chips three-dimensional.
I liked how Andrew in this article explained what the difference would be between the new chips. I also like how he explained the make up of the new chips and how he explained the difference between the technologies. Finally, I liked how he related this to our lives.
I think that he could have gone more into this articles importance. Also, he could have given us more information on this technology.
I learned that this new chip is turning into the third dimension.
Andrew's review was detailed, precise and interesting. Having little previous knowledge on the subject of computer chips, it was interesting to learn the differences between the current technology and potential future technology of computer chips. Explaining the difference between 2-D and 3-D computer chips. Additionally, the physical differences between FINFET and current chip technologies. The review was detailed in its descriptions of discrepancies between Intel and other technologies. The review refrained from excess information and exemplified interesting insight on Intel's future.
To improve this review, there could have been more facts or interesting notes to improve its length. The review is unfortunately brief, and could be improved by more detail. Additionally, the review could have provided more information on the difference in capabilities of 3D chips versus 2D ones.
Overall I was interested to learn more about chip technology. It was especially interesting to find that Intel was developing a potentially revolutionary technology, and not Apple or any other large technologies company.
Andrew wrote a good review on his article. I liked the topic he chose because it was interesting and taught me a lot. I liked how he bgan with background information because it would’ve been difficult to understand without prior knowledge. Andrew seemed to have a pretty good understanding with this topic. I thought it was really interesting that smaller, faster, and lower power chips can be made. To improve this review, it should be longer. More details would make his explanation of certain things better and more complete.
Post a Comment