DDR3 RAM manufacture nm node

[maverick77_uk]

Hi all,

Just stumbled on a few news reports etc and go me thinking.....

Taking DDR3 RAM, this has spanned many years now, starting in about 2007 until current times. I'm guessing over those 11 years, the manufacturing process has changed and evolved....

I recently built a computer for a relative - it was a basic one, and I had a couple of 2GB DDR3 sticks I had lying around from about 2011 I stuck in it. All good.

Obviously DDR3 is a standard and with JEDEC, ensures cross compatibility. the standard voltage for DDR3 is also 1.5V. I'm however guessing that the old RAM I put into the computer was manufactured on a much larger node than RAM you would get if you bought some new DDR3 today.

Does anyone know what the original size node was, and what it is now? 65nm to maybe 20nm now?

As it's standard is 1.5V, I'm guessing the efficiency saving is simply in less heat produced by the chips? as the standard means that although in theory the voltage could be reduced, it is not in practice (apart from specific low voltage parts) to maintain compatibility.

So I guess what I'm asking is what is the actual difference in manufacture between the 2GB sticks I put in the computer from 2011 and ones that I would of put in had I bought new DDR3 now? What would be the advantage (if any) of the newer stuff?

Cheers!

[aidanjt]

It's was probably initially around 65nm, that was the cutting edge node the year before DDR3 started being pumped out. I know a lot of DDR3 moved onto 50nm by 2009. From the user standpoint, not much changes, all DDR3 is going to be compatible with JEDEC standard DDR3 settings, so your motherboard wont just blow out the DDR3 chips by applying 1.5v and their tiny little transistors not being able to take the heat. On the plus side, with modern DDR3, you're going to be able to tune your memory up in frequency, down to 1.35v, have tighter timings, and so on. Still going to pay extra for the manufacturer guaranteed higher frequencies, and lower voltages and timings, of course.