CMOS Performance Scaling

  • Ali Khakifirooz
  • Dimitri A. Antoniadis


CMOS transistors have been scaling exponentially in the past two decades and the intrinsic device performance has followed a commensurate scaling trend. Prior to the 90-nm node, mere shrinking of the device dimensions, following Dennard’s scaling theory, was sufficient to guarantee increased device performance; beyond the 90-nm node, new innovations were necessary to continue the historical performance scaling trend. Strain engineering and high-k/metal gate technologies were the two major innovations that made the commensurate performance scaling in the past decade possible. However, it appears that new device structures and performance boosters will continue to be the need of the future. This chapter provides a basic overview of MOSFET scaling trend, followed by a discussion of MOSFET operation in deca-nanometer scale based on the so-called virtual source injection model. A simple analytical model for transistor IV characteristics and intrinsic transistor delay is provided and used to quantify the historical trends of MOSFET performance scaling. Carrier velocity is shown to be the main driver for the continued MOSFET performance increase. Finally, the prospect of velocity increase is reviewed for strained Si, Ge, and compound semiconductors.


Threshold Voltage Gate Voltage Parasitic Capacitance Gate Length Drain Voltage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    R. H. Dennard, F. H. Gaensslen, H.-N. Yu, V. Leo Rideout, E. Bassous, and A. R. LeBlanc, “Design of ion-implanted MOSFET’s with very small physical dimensions,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 9, pp. 256–268, 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    F. Boeuf, et al., “0.248 μm2 and 0.334 μm2 conventional bulk 6 T-SRAM bit-cells for 45 nm node low cost - general purpose applications,” in Symp. VLSI Tech., pp. 130–131, 2005.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Khakifirooz and D. A. Antoniadis, “MOSFET performance scaling – Part I: Historical trends,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1391–1400, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Khakifirooz and D. A. Antoniadis, “MOSFET Performance scaling – Part II: Future directions,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1401–1408, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Khakifirooz, O.M. Nayfeh, and D.A. Antoniadis, “A simple semiempirical short-channel MOSFET current–voltage model continuous across all regions of operation and employing only physical parameters,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 56, no. 8, pp. 1674–1680, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. H. Na, E. J. Nowak, W. Haensch, and J. Cai, “The effective drive current in CMOS inverters,” in IEDM Tech. Dig., Dec. 2002, pp. 121–124.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Lundstrom, “On the mobility versus drain current relation for a nanoscale MOSFET,” IEEE Electron Device Lett., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 293–295, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Irisawa, T. Numata, T. Tezuka, N. Sugiyama, and S. Takagi, “Electron transport properties of ultrathin-body and tri-gate SOI nMOSFETs with biaxial and uniaxial strain,” in IEDM Tech. Dig., 2006, pp. 457–460.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Hashemi, L. Gomez, M. Canonico, and J.L. Hoyt, “Electron transport in gate-all-around uniaxial tensile strained-Si nanowire n-MOSFETs,” in IEDM Tech. Dig., 2008, pp. 865–868.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. Maitra, A. Khakifirooz, P. Kulkarni, et al., “Aggressively scaled strained-silicon-on-insulator undoped-body high-k/metal-gate nFinFETs for high-performance logic applications,” IEEE Electron Device Lett., vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 713–715, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Narasimha, et al., “High performance 45 nm SOI technology with enhanced strain, porous low-k BEOL, and immersion lithography,” in IEDM Tech. Dig., 2006, p. 689.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    B. Yang, et al., “Stress dependence and poly-pitch scaling characteristics of (110) PMOS drive current,” in Symp. VLSI Tech., 2007, pp. 126–127.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D.-H. Kim and J. A. del Alamo, “Logic Performance of 40 nm InAs HEMTs,” in IEDM Tech. Dig., 2007, p. 629.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D.-H. Kim and J. del Alamo, “30 nm E-mode InAs PHEMTs for THz and future logic applications,” in IEDM Tech. Dig., 2008, p. 30.1.1.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. G. Dewey, M. K. Hudait, K. Lee, R. Pillarisetty, W. Rachmady, M. Radosavljevic, T. Rakshit, and R. Chau, “Carrier transport in high-mobility III–V quantum-well transistors and performance impact for high-speed low-power logic applications,” IEEE Electron Device Lett., vol. 29, no. 10, pp. 1094–1097, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. Kim, T. Krishnamohan, H.S.P. Wong, and K.C. Saraswat, “Band to band tunneling study in high mobility materials : III-V, Si, Ge and strained SiGe,” in Device Research Conf., 2007, p. 57.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    K. D. Cantley, Y. Liu, H. S. Pal, T. Low, S. S. Ahmed, and M. S. Lundstrom, “Performance analysis of III-V materials in a double-gate nano-MOSFET,” in IEDM Tech. Dig., 2007, p. 113.Google Scholar

Further Reading

  1. Y. Taur and T. H. Ning, Fundamentals of Modern VLSI Devices, Cambridge University Press, 2nd Ed., 2009.Google Scholar
  2. D.K. Schroder, Semiconductor Material and Device Characterization, John Wiley and Sons, 3rd Ed., 2006.Google Scholar
  3. M. Lundstrom, Fundamentals of Carrier Transport, Cambridge University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  4. S. Datta, Electronic Transport in Mesoscopic Systems, Cambridge University Press, 1997.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC  2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IBM ResearchSan JoseUSA
  2. 2.Microsystems Technology LaboratoriesMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations