็™ป้Œฒใ—ใฆๆ‹›ๅพ…ใƒชใƒณใ‚ฏใ‚’ๅ…ฑๆœ‰ใ™ใ‚‹ใจใ€ๅ‹•็”ปๅ†็”Ÿๅ ฑ้…ฌใจ็ดนไป‹ๅ ฑ้…ฌใ‚’็ฒๅพ—ใงใใพใ™ใ€‚

๐ท๐‘Ÿ. ๐ผ๐‘Ž๐‘› ๐ถ๐‘ข๐‘ก๐‘Ÿ๐‘’๐‘ ๐‘ 
@IanCutress
Consultant, Chief Analyst, Influencer. Substack: (@MoreThanMoore2x) Youtube: (@TechTechPotato)
ๅ‚ๅŠ  June 2011
1.3K ใƒ•ใ‚ฉใƒญใƒผไธญ    56.9K ใƒ•ใ‚กใƒณ
I am banging my head against the wall with so-called 'science experts' who still have no idea that node names aren't actual measurements. '0.7 nm' is a NAME. It is NOT A MEASUREMENT. It's been this way since at least 2005. Perhaps ask a domain matter expert rather than publish nonsense?
ใ‚‚ใฃใจ่ฆ‹ใ‚‹
OMG @IBM just announced its 0.7nm process node using homegrown NanoStack technology. It defines a route for transistors after GAA by using a staggered CFET design enabling 50% logic scaling, 40% SRAM scaling, and 666 million transistors per sq mm***.
ใ‚‚ใฃใจ่ฆ‹ใ‚‹