[HN Gopher] Die Shots of the Raspberry Pi RP2040
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Die Shots of the Raspberry Pi RP2040
        
       Author : mmastrac
       Score  : 204 points
       Date   : 2021-01-29 15:23 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (twitter.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
        
       | mmastrac wrote:
       | Alternative Twitter thread:
       | https://twitter.com/johndmcmaster/status/1355092011829719046
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Yes, much better, thank you. (I made the same suggestion)
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Ok, we'll change to that from
           | https://blog.adafruit.com/2021/01/29/die-shots-of-the-
           | raspbe.... Thanks!
        
       | breck wrote:
       | Oh wow this thread (and his whole Twitter account) is gold.
       | thanks for sharing.
       | 
       | Edit: this zoomable image is great
       | (https://siliconpr0n.org/map/raspberry-pi/rp2-b0/mz_mit20x/#x...)
        
       | jacquesm wrote:
       | Why not link to the original thread instead?
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/johndmcmaster/status/1355092011829719046
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Changed from https://blog.adafruit.com/2021/01/29/die-shots-of-
         | the-raspbe.... Thanks!
        
       | AbraKdabra wrote:
       | How does one of those die get made at all? It's such a minuscule
       | small scale and it has such detail I cannot even comprehend how
       | those components get "stamped" there, it's black magic.
        
         | swalsh wrote:
         | It's not really "Stamped". It's more of a photographic process.
         | My basic understanding is that they apply a photographic
         | reactive chemical, expose it. From there they apply another
         | chemical process to form an oxidation layer, and then use an
         | acid process to "etch" away material creating channels of
         | positively charged particles. Then they can apply a mask, and
         | throw tiny amounts of metal which will become the gate.
        
           | geerlingguy wrote:
           | The process of photolithography [1] involves a lot of complex
           | optics, and interestingly you find a lot of lens
           | manufacturers involved in it since it involves a lot of steps
           | where light (e.g. lasers in this case) gets passed through a
           | set of very precise optics until it hits the wafer and etches
           | in the correct pattern from a larger 'reference copy'.
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photolithography
        
           | baybal2 wrote:
           | Actually, the process of actually "stamping" ICs mechanically
           | is being pursued to make IC production even more cheaper.
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanoimprint_lithography
        
         | kube-system wrote:
         | Extremely simplified answer:
         | 
         | You know how a microscope makes a small image really big? You
         | can also do the same in reverse -- take a big picture and
         | project it really small. Use that idea to project your design
         | on to your silicon, coated in a series of photosensitive
         | chemicals that etch away the silicon until you have what you
         | want.
        
         | acomjean wrote:
         | From my partner who used to work at a fabless semiconductor:
         | 
         | The chipmaking process starts with code. Veralog I think is
         | still being used. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verilog
         | 
         | You get information from your fab (libraries about sizes of
         | things so you can do layouts and simulation with very expensive
         | software (https://www.synopsys.com) (fun exercise, try to get a
         | price on their website...)
         | 
         | Often you send your design to the fab to get some samples to
         | test back.
         | 
         | Wikipedia has a decent summary about how the chips are made
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiconductor_device_fabricati...
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | It is "just" photo-etching, with the big wrinkle that 40nm is
         | way below the wavelength of light, so all sorts of clever
         | tricks with diffraction have to be done to make it work.
        
         | MarkusWandel wrote:
         | A quick google for "homemade integrated circuit" brings up
         | 
         | http://sam.zeloof.xyz/first-ic/
         | 
         | At the very primitive end of the technology, integrated
         | circuits can be made in the home workshop.
        
         | auxym wrote:
         | I like this animation showing how a FET is fabricated using
         | photolithography processes:
         | https://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/electromag/java/transistor/inde...
        
           | blcArmadillo wrote:
           | Thanks for sharing! It was really nice seeing each step of
           | the process with a visualization.
        
       | MuffinFlavored wrote:
       | cheap microcontrollers:
       | 
       | ESP32: WiFI, no USB
       | 
       | RP2040: USB, no WiFi
       | 
       | :(
        
         | jesse_cureton wrote:
         | The "Arduino Nano RP2040 Connect" is an RP4040 board slated to
         | be coming soon that will provide WiFi and Bluetooth.
         | 
         | I expect we'll see more RP2040 devboards & SOMs coming soon
         | that fill the connectivity niche.
        
       | 725686 wrote:
       | The resistor value captcha at the end of the page is golden.
        
         | war1025 wrote:
         | How do I interact with it? I tried picking the colors, but
         | nothing I tried did anything.
        
           | allenu wrote:
           | You can drag the slider. Clicking doesn't seem to work.
        
             | war1025 wrote:
             | Doesn't work for me on Firefox.
             | 
             | I'm guessing it works on Chrome, but it also would sort of
             | surprise me that a maker website wouldn't test against
             | Firefox. Maybe I'm giving them too much credit.
        
               | drewzero1 wrote:
               | It took me a minute to figure out, you have to drag the
               | circle up and down to select the number. I had expected
               | to drag the whole bar - oops!
               | 
               | Edit: Also on FF. (85.0 on Linux)
        
               | allenu wrote:
               | Strange. I'm on Firefox and it works for me.
        
       | jsmith45 wrote:
       | I'm suprised that even the CPU cores are implemented just as a
       | sea of standard cells. It is common to have them be macros
       | containing a clearly separate datapath and control logic.
       | 
       | On the other hand, the fact that the prototyping was done on an
       | FPGA makes this less surprising. Sea of cells is certainly easier
       | to update, and less work than any form of manual datapath when
       | migrating from FPGA to ASIC.
        
         | mlyle wrote:
         | Yup. This is pretty clearly a case of getting it to run on an
         | FPGA and using a commercial FPGA to ASIC service instead of
         | spending a lot of time in synthesis and validation.
         | 
         | Mask costs can be cheaper this way, too, because some layers
         | can be invariant between different parts.
        
           | ohazi wrote:
           | > using a commercial FPGA to ASIC service
           | 
           | This was not an FPGA conversion.
           | 
           | "Commercial FPGA to ASIC service" usually refers to
           | Altera/Intel's HardCopy or Xilinx's EasyPath. EasyPath is
           | where Xilinx sells you defective FPGAs for way cheaper, but
           | with just enough of the right parts of the fabric working
           | that your design can still fit and work properly. HardCopy is
           | where Altera sells you a small number of metal mask layers to
           | implement your design on a much smaller/faster sea-of-gates
           | style ASIC that mimics the non-reprogrammable parts of the
           | target FPGA.
           | 
           | The Raspberry Pi Foundation did neither of these things. They
           | _tested_ their design on an FPGA, which is common, and then
           | used standard cell libraries and IP blocks provided by the
           | fab and their partners to get through the _normal_ ASIC
           | workflow.
           | 
           | It turns out it's just easier and faster to tell the tools to
           | automatically place and route the core complex than to do a
           | careful floorplan. Also given that the RP2040 is apparently
           | "very overclockable" (the PIO bitbanged HDMI output bumped
           | the clock to something like double the nominally guaranteed
           | maximum), the merits of doing it this way seem sound.
        
           | 0xTJ wrote:
           | Interestingly, there are documented bits in registers for
           | marking whether you're running on an FPGA or as an ASIC.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | myself248 wrote:
       | How common is it to use copper bondwires? I thought these were
       | always gold.
        
       | samstave wrote:
       | One of my regrets from when I worked at Intel was that we had die
       | plans on 36x48 printouts in the lab - and they were beautiful, I
       | wish I had taken them home - I would love to have some framed on
       | my walls now.
        
       | dboreham wrote:
       | Interesting. I did not realize wire bonding is still used on
       | large devices.
        
       | tomcam wrote:
       | Not a big fan of Twitter but I have to say it was an amazing use
       | of the medium.
        
       | mobilio wrote:
       | Attention to detail is amazing!
        
       | mbreese wrote:
       | From the twitter thread, someone said it was fabbed by TSMC at
       | 40nm.
       | 
       | I wonder, with the cutting edge moving to smaller and smaller
       | processes (5nm, etc)... how much of the older/larger capacity can
       | be reused? Meaning, are we about to see a ton of cheaper chips
       | like this RP2040 that are using older/slower/obsolete fab
       | capacity? Or is the same equipment able to be used across a
       | family of process sizes?
       | 
       | In other words, once TSMC has X amount of capacity on 40nm, is
       | that capacity always around and fixed to 40nm? If so, I imagine
       | that creating new chips that don't need to be super fast will
       | just become super cheap.
        
         | baybal2 wrote:
         | > how much of the older/larger capacity can be reused?
         | 
         | Not only reused, but expanded, and improved over the years.
         | 
         | So more than 100% of the original.
         | 
         | The biggest surprise of the last few years was the growth in
         | really, really old 200mm fab capacity (late eighties, early
         | nineties tech.)
        
         | lizknope wrote:
         | The fab will eventually be upgraded. I design semiconductors
         | and I have worked at two companies that had their own fabs (I
         | didn't work in the fab)
         | 
         | Back in 1997 the new technology was 0.25 micron (250nm) but we
         | still operated fabs at 0.35, 0.6, 0.8, and 1 micron. I believe
         | these 4 lines operated at 6 different factories.
         | 
         | The next year we shut down the 1 micron fab. The building
         | itself still had all the air filtering and cleanroom
         | facilities. The old equipment (steppers, testers) was removed
         | and new equipment for 0.18 micron was installed. I think this
         | took about a year. At the end we still had 6 factories but the
         | building that used to have all the old stuff was now the
         | cutting edge fab.
        
           | bobsmooth wrote:
           | What happens to the old equipment? Scrap?
        
             | peterburkimsher wrote:
             | Usually the equipment is rented, and returned to the
             | owners. I spent 4 years in Taiwan working for OSE, a
             | semiconductor packaging company (cutting up silicon wafers,
             | bonding wires onto them, and putting them into little
             | plastic SD cards or RAM chips labelled "Made in Taiwan").
             | 
             | The pick & place machines and ovens weren't owned by OSE -
             | they were on a 30-year lease from other companies in Japan,
             | Germany, etc.
             | 
             | Software updates would void the warranty/lease conditions.
             | One of my tasks was to write a program to measure yields
             | for factory monitoring. This meant figuring out how to use
             | SQL on Windows 2000, with no .NET framework or additional
             | libraries.
             | 
             | My guess is that when the equipment is too old, the
             | original owners either take them back for salvaging, or
             | sell off the pieces as scrap. I went to many scrapyards in
             | Kaohsiung though, and found many treasures like $10
             | bicycles or old consumer gadgets, but no factory-level
             | machines.
        
         | TorKlingberg wrote:
         | Older processes available for cheap are not a new thing. They
         | do indeed stay around until TSMC decide they're no longer worth
         | running. It's not always cheaper as a larger process wastes
         | more wafer.
        
           | geerlingguy wrote:
           | I believe Eben Upton mentioned in a Twitter thread somewhere
           | that they were getting thousands of chips off each wafer at
           | the current node size? Only had to order like 20 or 40 wafers
           | for the first production run, something like that.
        
         | avian wrote:
         | Microelectronics cutting edge has been moving to smaller
         | processes for the past 70 years. This is nothing new. If
         | anything, the progress has slowed down.
         | 
         | Some fabs get closed down/rebuilt for a different process, some
         | stay and produce parts that don't benefit from higher
         | densities. Last I checked some ICs still get produced in 0.35
         | um processes. You don't need billions of transistors for an
         | opamp.
        
         | mlyle wrote:
         | Microcontrollers being on larger processes like this is nothing
         | new. As you mention, it's a way to keep using older fabs, but
         | that's not the only reason.
         | 
         | 40nm offers tons of performance for microcontrollers and the
         | die area can still be reasonably small. You tend to want to
         | have lots of variants of microcontrollers for different
         | applications, so mask costs matter. And you tend not to want
         | exotic, very low core voltages and _do_ want high voltage
         | tolerances and strong drivers on the IOs, which mean relatively
         | big geometry-- no matter what your minimum feature size is.
         | 
         | Also, sleep power consumption is important, so low leakage is
         | nice, which is easier to get on large geometry.
        
           | baybal2 wrote:
           | 40nm is a quite recent move for MCUs, and the mainstream
           | majority can still be anywhere in between 90nm, and 180nm.
           | 
           | Only very few, top of the line MCUs ventured to 40nm, like
           | ESP32 which had no other option because of WiFi eating gates,
           | or ST's MCUs with 3D accelerator on board.
           | 
           | Problem for MCUs is that MCU specific features start to cost
           | too much more in IP, design time, yields, and fab service
           | cost below 90nm. Things like embedded flash, per-model mask
           | memory, SRAM, non-CMOS cells, RF, and other analogue
           | circuitry.
           | 
           | Below 28nm conventional eFlash, and many other things stop
           | scaling, and only proprietary solutions are on the table at
           | the moment.
        
             | petra wrote:
             | BayBal, since you're an expert in Semi, I wonder if you can
             | fill in the blanks?
             | 
             | EbenUpton(Raspberry Pi's CEO) , on Twitter:"We get ~20k die
             | per wafer""
             | 
             | A Tsmc 40nm wafer costs about $2300.
             | 
             | How much do you estimate the full chip manufacturing cost
             | for this would be ?
             | 
             | I wonder, because Eben Upton talked about "business model
             | hacking" in regards to this chip, so they may want to do
             | some interesting stuff in the mcu market.
        
               | zeckalpha wrote:
               | In the docs they described the naming convention for the
               | processor, which suggests there are more under
               | development
        
         | swalsh wrote:
         | For how long is the equipment for these fabs amortized?
        
           | baybal2 wrote:
           | All eternity really. Even eighties era equipment is still
           | being bought, and resold. Quite a number of early nineties
           | fabs still work producing pretty much same things for 30
           | years straight.
        
             | VectorLock wrote:
             | Its easy to forget the long tail of smaller ICs these will
             | get use out of for generations.
        
           | monocasa wrote:
           | Not long, around five years after full production.
        
         | lmilcin wrote:
         | This chip is very small and it does not benefit in any possible
         | way from more advanced technological process. And using more
         | advanced process means additional drawbacks and cost increases.
        
           | teruakohatu wrote:
           | I think it is safe to say they will come out with a WiFi
           | version. The 40nm will be beneficial then.
        
       | breck wrote:
       | A simple stack of these images with a CSS offset (to give it a
       | 3-d look) would be great.
       | 
       | Edit: his zoomable image is even better
       | (https://siliconpr0n.org/map/raspberry-pi/rp2-b0/mz_mit20x/#x...)
        
         | rwmj wrote:
         | How do you change the layer?
        
           | teraflop wrote:
           | If you navigate up one directory, there are a couple more
           | layers available: https://siliconpr0n.org/map/raspberry-
           | pi/rp2-b0/
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-01-29 23:00 UTC)