67 lines
3.3 KiB
TeX
67 lines
3.3 KiB
TeX
|
\documentclass{article}
|
||
|
|
\usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry}
|
||
|
|
\usepackage{amsmath}
|
||
|
|
\usepackage{graphicx}
|
||
|
|
\begin{document}
|
||
|
|
\section*{Lab 2}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The data gathered in this lab is listed in tables
|
||
|
|
1 and 2.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
\begin{figure}[h]
|
||
|
|
\centering
|
||
|
|
\begin{tabular}{lcccccc}
|
||
|
|
Node & $g_m$ (S) & $r_o$ ($\Omega$) & Gain & $I_\text{off} (A)$ & $I_\text{on} (A)$ & $I_\text{on}/I_\text{off}$ \\
|
||
|
|
\hline
|
||
|
|
longchannel pmos & 4.01E-04 & 1.36E+04 & 5.457 & 1.02E-11 & 1.36E-03 & 1.34E+08 \\
|
||
|
|
longchannel nmos & 9.13E-04 & 1.31E+04 & 11.95 & 1.12E-11 & 3.22E-03 & 2.87E+08 \\
|
||
|
|
50nm pmos & 2.11E-04 & 1.55E+04 & 3.259 & 8.84E-09 & 1.48E-04 & 1.68E+04 \\
|
||
|
|
50nm nmos & 4.44E-04 & 1.31E+04 & 5.793 & 3.64E-09 & 3.12E-04 & 8.55E+04 \\
|
||
|
|
16nmlp pmos & 1.62E-04 & 1.68E+04 & 2.72 & 2.30E-11 & 5.54E-05 & 2.40E+06 \\
|
||
|
|
16nmlp nmos & 2.88E-04 & 1.33E+04 & 3.83 & 8.87E-12 & 9.13E-05 & 1.03E+07 \\
|
||
|
|
16nmhp pmos & 3.33E-04 & 5.37E+03 & 1.787 & 9.22E-08 & 1.51E-04 & 1.64E+03 \\
|
||
|
|
16nmhp nmos & 4.95E-04 & 5.56E+03 & 2.755 & 7.41E-08 & 2.17E-04 & 2.93E+03 \\
|
||
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
||
|
|
\label{fig:dc}
|
||
|
|
\caption{Properties of various transistor sizes and types}
|
||
|
|
\end{figure}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
\begin{figure}[h]
|
||
|
|
\centering
|
||
|
|
\begin{tabular}{lcccccc}
|
||
|
|
Node & Oscillation Period (ps) & Oscillation Frequency (GHz) \\
|
||
|
|
\hline
|
||
|
|
longchannel & 1020 & 0.980 \\
|
||
|
|
50nm & 222 & 4.49 \\
|
||
|
|
16nmlp & 140 & 7.11 \\
|
||
|
|
16nmhp & 32.2 & 31.0 \\
|
||
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
||
|
|
\label{fig:t}
|
||
|
|
\caption{Switching frequency of 5-long inverter loop.}
|
||
|
|
\end{figure}
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
From these tables, we can see that smaller transistors have progressively smaller
|
||
|
|
gain, and progressively smaller ratios of on current $I_\text{on}$ and off current
|
||
|
|
$I_\text{off}$. We can explain the drop in gain with velocity saturation. At smaller
|
||
|
|
scales, short-channel effects make the relationship between current and gate voltage no longer
|
||
|
|
quadratic, but linear (and thus smaller in magnitude). This means that the transconductance
|
||
|
|
of a transistor decreases as it gets smaller, leading to lower gain. Furthermore,
|
||
|
|
due to short-channel effects such as impact ionization, current doesn't stop increasing
|
||
|
|
past the theoretical saturation point. This makes the transistor behave less like
|
||
|
|
a current source past saturation, and decreases gain.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Decreasing the size of the transistor does, however, significantly improve its timing characteristics.
|
||
|
|
While at 1$\mu m$ the 5-transistor loop we simulated has an oscillation frequency of 0.98GHz, the 16nm
|
||
|
|
high power loop can go as fast as 31GHz. This is likely due to the decreased capacitances at
|
||
|
|
this scale: it takes less time to charge up any part of the CMOS logic, including the outputs,
|
||
|
|
which makes it possible for subsequent transistors to respond faster, and so on.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
For analog circuits, we care about gain, since we want to ensure that our signal is transmitted
|
||
|
|
properly through our circuit. Thus, bigger transistors are probably better suited for this application,
|
||
|
|
since they have higher (sometimes much higher) gains than smaller transistors. On the other hand,
|
||
|
|
from the digital side, the gain doesn't matter as much as the performance characteristics of the transistor,
|
||
|
|
which makes the smaller nodes (ones that we measured to have higher oscillation frequency) preferable.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
\end{document}
|
||
|
|
|