Advertisement

Tradeoff Analyses for Multichip Systems

  • Peter A. Sandborn
  • Hector Moreno
Chapter
Part of the The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science book series (SECS, volume 250)

Abstract

Numerous studies have appeared which compare various packaging technologies [5.1–5.16]. These studies contain valuable information about the general applicability of one technology or material over another. Application specific tradeoff studies have also appeared, but are less prevalent than generic treatments [5.17–5.23]. These studies present tradeoff analyses for specific real modules.

Keywords

Print Circuit Board Power Dissipation Flip Chip Tradeoff Analysis Area Array 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [5.1]
    D. Balderes and M. White, “Packaging Effects on CPU Perfor- mance of Large Commercial Processors,” Proceedings of the 35th Electronic Components Conference, pp. 351–356, 1985.Google Scholar
  2. [5.2]
    H. B. Bakoglu and J. D. Meindl, “A System Level Circuit Model for Multi-and Single-Chip CPU’s,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Solid State Circuits Conference, pp. 308–309, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. [5.3]
    C. A. Neugebauer and R. O. Carlson, Comparison of Wafer Scale Integration with VLSI Packaging Approaches, IEEE Transactions on Components, Hybrids, and Manufacturing Technology, vol. CHMT-10, no. 2, pp. 184–189, June, 1987.Google Scholar
  4. [5.4]
    J. P. Krusius and W. E. Pence, “Analysis of Materials and Structure Tradeoffs in Thin and Thick Film Multi-Chip Packages,” Proceedings of the Electronic Components Conference, pp. 641–646, 1989.Google Scholar
  5. [5.5]
    V. K. Nagesh, D. Miller, and L. Moresco, “A Comparative Study of Interconnect Technologies,” Proceedings of the International Electronic Packaging Symposium (IEPS), pp. 433–443, 1989.Google Scholar
  6. [5.6]
    C. A. Neugebauer, “Materials for High-Density Electronic Packaging and Interconnections in the Higher Packaging Levels,” J. of Electronic Materials, vol. 18, no. 2, part 2, pp. 229–239, March, 1989.Google Scholar
  7. [5.
    ] R. Kaw, “Comparison of Chip Crossing Delay in Various Packaging Environments,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Design pp. 233–236, 1989.Google Scholar
  8. [5.8]
    L. L. Moresco, “Electronic System Packaging: The Search for Manufacturing the Optimum in a Sea of Constraints,” IEEE Transactions on Components, Hybrids, and Manufacturing Technology, vol. 13, pp. 494–508, September, 1990.Google Scholar
  9. [5.
    ] R. Hannemann, “Interconnects and Packaging for Highly Integrated Systems,” Presented at SPIE International Conference on Advances in Interconnect and Packaging 1990.Google Scholar
  10. [5.10]
    J. P. Krusius, “System Interconnection of High Density Multi-Chip Modules,” Proceedings of the SPIE International Conference on Advances in Interconnects and Packaging, vol. 1390, pp. 261–270, 1990.Google Scholar
  11. [5.11]
    L. L. Moresco, “System Interconnect Issues for Sub-Nanosecond Signal Transmission,” Proceedings of the SPIE International Conference on Advances in Interconnects and Packaging, vol. 1390, pp. 202–213, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. [5.12]
    C. A. Neugebauer, R. A. Fillion, W. Daum, and M. Gdula, “The Single Chip Versus Multichip Packaging Option for Digital CMOS in the 1990’s,” IEEE Transactions on Components, Hybrids, and Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 915–921, October, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [5.13]
    G. Messner and W. Smit, “Equations for Selection of Cost-Efficient Interconnection Designs,” Proceedings of Electronic Component and Technology Conference, pp. 10–16, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. [5.14]
    L. W. Schaper, “Meeting System Requirements Through Technology Tradeoffs in Multi-Chip Modules,” Proceedings of the International Electronic Packaging Symposium (IEPS), pp. 25–33, 1990.Google Scholar
  15. [5.15]
    M. Terasawa and S. Minami, “A Comparison of Thin Film, Thick Film, and Co-Fired High Density Ceramic Multilayer with the Combined Technology: T and T HDCM (Thin Film and Thick Film High Density Ceramic Module),” International Journal for Hybrid Microelectronics, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 607–615, October, 1983.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. [5.16]
    A. Iqbal, M. Swaminathan, M. Nealon, and A. Omer, “Design Tradeoffs Among MCM-C, MCM-D and MCM-D/C Technologies,” Proceedings of the IEEE Multi-Chip Module Conference (MCMC), pp. 12–17, 1993.Google Scholar
  17. [5.17]
    P. A. Sandborn, “A Software Tool for Technology Tradeoff Evaluation in Multichip Packaging,” Proceedings of the International Electronics Manufacturing Technology Symposium, pp. 337–341, 1991.Google Scholar
  18. [5.18]
    M. M. Salatino and R. C. Braken, “Die and MCM Test Strategy: The Key to MCM Manufacturability,” Proceedings of the Eleventh International Electronics Manufacturing Technology Symposium, pp. 440–445, 1991.Google Scholar
  19. [5.19]
    M. M. Salatino and R. C. Bracken, “Assembly Choices in Multi-Chip Module Fabrication, The Harris Digital Drop Receiver DDR-1,” Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Multichip Modules, pp. 74–82, 1992.Google Scholar
  20. [5.20]
    J. Shiao and D. Nguyen, “Performance Modeling of a Cache System with Three Technologies: Cyanate Ester PCB, Chip-on-Board, and Cu/PI MCM,” Proceedings of the IEEE Multichip Module Conference, pp. 134–137, 1992.Google Scholar
  21. [5.21]
    P. A. Sandborn, “Technology Application Tradeoff Studies in Multichip Systems,” Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Multichip Modules, pp. 150–158, 1992.Google Scholar
  22. [5.22]
    P. A. Sandborn, H. Hashemi and L. Bal, “Design of MCMs for Insertion into Standard Surface Mount Packages,” Proceedings of the National Electronic Packaging and Production Conference (NEPCON-West), pp. 651–660, 1993.Google Scholar
  23. [5.23]
    S. Rao, B. Haskell, and I. Yee, “Trade-Off Analysis on Cost and Manufacturing Technology of an Electronic Product: Case Study,” Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on The Economics of Design, Test, and Manufacturing for Electronic Circuits and Systems, 1993.Google Scholar
  24. [5.24]
    H. B. Bakoglu, Circuits, Interconnections, and Packaging for VLSI, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1990.Google Scholar
  25. [5.25]
    D. W. Dobberpuhl, et al, “A 200-MHz 64-b Dual-Issue CMOS Microprocessor,” IEEE J. of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 1555–1567, November, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [5.26]
    P. H. Dehkordi and D. W. Bouldin, “Design for Packagability: The Impact of Bonding Technology on the Size and Layout of VLSI Dies,” Proceedings of the IEEE Multichip Module Conference, pp. 153–159, 1993.Google Scholar
  27. [5.27]
    M. Abadir, A. Parikh, L. Bal, P. Sandborn, and C. Murphy, “High Level Test Economics Advisor (Hi-TEA),” Proceedings of the Economics of Design, Test, and Manufacturing Workshop, 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter A. Sandborn
    • 1
  • Hector Moreno
    • 1
  1. 1.Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation (MCC)USA

Personalised recommendations