| Author |
Message |
David Wang
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Feb 09, 2005 3:53 pm Post subject:
Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
Montecito is indeed 596 mm^2.
I asked about the reticule limit, and I was told that there's
a new generation of machines around with larger reticule limit,
and that Montecito didn't bump up against that limit.
Does anyone know who makes the equipment and what size die
can be cranked out of it? (Assuming rectangular dies, not
octagon shaped ones)
--
davewang202(at)yahoo(dot)com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
del cecchi
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Feb 10, 2005 7:58 am Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
"David Wang" <foo@bar.invalid> wrote in message
news:cudbl8$qoj$1@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
| Quote: | Montecito is indeed 596 mm^2.
I asked about the reticule limit, and I was told that there's
a new generation of machines around with larger reticule limit,
and that Montecito didn't bump up against that limit.
Does anyone know who makes the equipment and what size die
can be cranked out of it? (Assuming rectangular dies, not
octagon shaped ones)
--
davewang202(at)yahoo(dot)com
|
A 22 mm chip seems a little big, but not out of the question. But I am
hardly current on lithography equipment
CHecked out Canon's web site, looks like 26 by 33 mm for the FPA-6000
canon exposure tool would show it to you via google.
del |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David Wang
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Feb 10, 2005 10:23 pm Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
Woggy <Woggy_tm@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Field size is the image size on the reticule. A field will include one
or more die plus scribe lines and test patterns. In most cases, a
field can not be bigger than the reticule. But if I'm not mistaken,
some products are bigger than what can fit on a single reticule and
have to be stitched together using two or more reticules. But I
believe this is only used for products like CMOS sensors and the like.
|
Yes, you can stitch things like CMOS sensors together, but not something
like Montecito. There are no natural boundaries where you can stitch
things together. The real question is how big of a die can you really
(relatively) reasonably fabricate on leading edge 90nm and soon 65 nm
processes?
Another way to put it is that prior to Montecito @ 596 mm^2, previous
processors (excluding any octagon shaped efforts) were limited to
approximately 480 mm^2 of die size. With new equipment, Montecito was
able to exceed that limitation. So, how big can one really get?
--
davewang202(at)yahoo(dot)com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woggy
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Feb 10, 2005 11:43 pm Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
Some step and scan systems are ( were ) able to use 6X9 inch reticules.
There was lots of talk in the mask industry about going to larger size
reticules ( larger than 6X6 ) years ago, but all is silent now. I
don't think anyone makes larger reticules except for solder bumps.
Woggy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Del Cecchi
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Feb 11, 2005 12:11 am Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
Woggy wrote:
| Quote: | Some step and scan systems are ( were ) able to use 6X9 inch reticules.
There was lots of talk in the mask industry about going to larger size
reticules ( larger than 6X6 ) years ago, but all is silent now. I
don't think anyone makes larger reticules except for solder bumps.
Woggy
|
The real parameter seems to be referred to as "field size". At least
that is what was used on the Canon site.
del |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woggy
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:45 am Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
Field size is the image size on the reticule. A field will include one
or more die plus scribe lines and test patterns. In most cases, a
field can not be bigger than the reticule. But if I'm not mistaken,
some products are bigger than what can fit on a single reticule and
have to be stitched together using two or more reticules. But I
believe this is only used for products like CMOS sensors and the like.
Woggy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David Wang
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:27 pm Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
Woggy <Woggy_tm@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Well, I've seen fields that came close to about 1/8" of the edges of
the reticule on top and bottom of the field. The sides can't come as
close, so say 1/2" away from the edge of the reticule. Which would
give us a field size of 5.75 X 5 or 146 X 127 for a total 18542mm^2.
With a 5X reduction stepper that would give an absolute max. field size
of 741mm^2. Scribe lines will eat some of those mm^2, so <700mm^2 is
my best guess.
|
Thanks. That sounds reasonable. Can you take a previous generation
machine, apply the same set of rough estimates and get to about 480 mm^2?
That seems to be about the size of the biggest dies that were manufactured.
--
davewang202(at)yahoo(dot)com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woggy
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Feb 11, 2005 7:47 pm Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
Well, I've seen fields that came close to about 1/8" of the edges of
the reticule on top and bottom of the field. The sides can't come as
close, so say 1/2" away from the edge of the reticule. Which would
give us a field size of 5.75 X 5 or 146 X 127 for a total 18542mm^2.
With a 5X reduction stepper that would give an absolute max. field size
of 741mm^2. Scribe lines will eat some of those mm^2, so <700mm^2 is
my best guess.
Woggy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Feb 11, 2005 10:19 pm Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
146mm/5 x 127mm/5 = 29mm x 25mm
A full size 35mm camera sensor is 36mm x 24mm, still needs reticle
stitching.
An APS sensor (eg Nikon) is 23.7mm x 15.6mm. Fits comfortably in the
old reticle.
I wonder if Canon/Nikon will now have a new generation of CMOS sensors
in their digital SLRs with e.g. 27mm x 18mm aspect ratio. The
resulting 1.3 focal distance multiplier would be a lot more useful to
DSLR owners than the current 1.6 multiplier. It would also get them
more megapixels without compromising too much pixel area / sensor
noise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woggy
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Feb 11, 2005 10:53 pm Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
The calculations I did were strictly from a mask point of view. I
haven't worked on steppers since the 1X days so I'm not up to date on
that side of the process. There have been little changes in the past
five years to allow larger reticule field size ( from a mask
manufacturing stand point ) that I know of. So I would guess that
limitation was on the stepper. But if I'm not mistaken, 9X6 capable
steppers have been out for years, so I don't understand what the
limitation was unless it was the width of the scan that was the
limiting factor. Since it doesn't look like anyone make 9X6
reticules, the width of the scan had to be increased. I'm no expert,
so take what I say with a big grain of salt!
Woggy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kai Harrekilde-Petersen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:10 pm Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
iain-3@truecircuits.com writes:
| Quote: | 146mm/5 x 127mm/5 = 29mm x 25mm
A full size 35mm camera sensor is 36mm x 24mm, still needs reticle
stitching.
An APS sensor (eg Nikon) is 23.7mm x 15.6mm. Fits comfortably in the
old reticle.
I wonder if Canon/Nikon will now have a new generation of CMOS sensors
in their digital SLRs with e.g. 27mm x 18mm aspect ratio. The
resulting 1.3 focal distance multiplier would be a lot more useful to
DSLR owners than the current 1.6 multiplier. It would also get them
more megapixels without compromising too much pixel area / sensor
noise.
|
Canon already has the 1.3x "crop factor" in the EOS-1D mk2. According
to www.dpreview.com, it was announced on 29-Jan-2004.
The EOS-1Ds mk1 and mk2 have full-size 36x24mm sensors, with 11.1 and
16.6 Mpixels respectively. I have seen a photo taken with a 1Ds mk1 in
JPG mode, blown up to 60 x 40 cm (24 x 16 inches), and you still
couldn't see the pixels. Quite amazing.
Kai
--
Kai Harrekilde-Petersen <khp(at)harrekilde(dot)dk> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Torbjorn Lindgren
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Feb 12, 2005 11:33 pm Post subject:
Re: Stepper/Reticule size? |
|
|
Kai Harrekilde-Petersen <khp@harrekilde.dk> wrote:
| Quote: | iain-3@truecircuits.com writes:
I wonder if Canon/Nikon will now have a new generation of CMOS sensors
in their digital SLRs with e.g. 27mm x 18mm aspect ratio. The
resulting 1.3 focal distance multiplier would be a lot more useful to
DSLR owners than the current 1.6 multiplier. It would also get them
more megapixels without compromising too much pixel area / sensor
noise.
Canon already has the 1.3x "crop factor" in the EOS-1D mk2. According
to www.dpreview.com, it was announced on 29-Jan-2004.
|
Which has the same "crop factor" as the original EOS-1D... Which
pushes it to early 2002 (introduced late 2001, including to reviewers,
but general availability was perhaps march 2002). This is mentioned in
the EOS-1Dmk2 review you reference...
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dmkii/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1d/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in