A (partial, biased?) history of the MOSFET from a physicist’s perspective (i.e., A brief history of sand) M. Fischetti October 2, 2009 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering This talk: Void where prohibited, limitations and restrictions apply Technology (i.e., how do we make them?) vs. electronic operation (i.e., how do they work and how do we make them better?) Too much to cover Talk about what I know Major omissions (that is, a disclaimer*): • Doping: Diffusion (theory and technology), ion implantation, high-doping effects • Lithography, possibly a “technology enabler”: Optical, contact, phase-shift, X-ray… • Metallization: Deposition/growth, DAMASCENE, electromigration • Etching: Wet vs. dry, RIE, plasma • Film growth: Epitaxy, CVD, PE-CVD, MBE, ALD,… • Contacts: Silicides, salicides, FUSI,… • Layout issues: Isolation (deep/shallow trenches), cross-talk, latch-up, design rules, DRAM/SRAM design, power,… • … Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 2 History of the MOSFET? What’s that? Thanks to Jiseok Kim for having put me on the spot…. It’s OK… I wish him good luck in getting his PhD wherever ELSE he may wish to get it…. I’m not sure what he meant by “history”… So, let’s start from the beginning…. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 3 The main character of our story: The MOSFET No other human artifact has been fabricated in larger numbers (except perhaps nails?) “…some consider it one of the most important technological breakthroughs in human history…” (Wikipedia, the source of all human knowledge) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 4 Timeline I Technology Physics/Simulations 1925: Julius Edgar Lilienfeld’s MESFET patent 1935: Oskar Heil’s MOSFET patent 194?: Unpublished Bell Labs MESFET 1947: Ge BJT (Bardeen, Brattain, Shockley, Bell Labs) 1954: Si BJT (Teal, Bell Labs) 1955: Si, Ge conduction band (Herring&Vogt) 1960: MOSFET (Atalla&Khang, Bell Labs) Deformation-potential, high-field (Bardeen&Shockley) 1961: Integrated circuit (Kilby, TI) 1957: BTE in semiconductors – impurities (Luttinger&Kohn), 1963: CMOS (Sah&Wanlass, Fairchild) phonons (Price, Argyles) 1964: Commercial CMOS IC (RCA) 1964: Band structure calculations (Hermann) 1965: DRAM (Fairchild) Monte Carlo for semiconductors (Kurosawa) 1968: Poly-Si gate (Faggin&Klein, Fairchild) 1965: Linear-parabolic oxidation model (Deal&Grove) 1968: 1-FET DRAM cell (Dennard, IBM) 1966: Observations of 2DEG (Fowler, Fang, Stiles, Stern,..) 1971: UV EPROM (Frohman, Intel) 1967: Conductance technique (Nicollian&Goetzberger) 1971: Full CPU in chip, Intel 8008 (Faggin, Intel) 1974: Digital watch 1974: DDE device simulator (Cottrell&Buturla) 1974: Scaling theory (Gänsslen&Dennard, IBM) 1975: Quantum Hall Effect predicted (Ando) 1978: Use of ion implanter 1978: Flotox EEPROM (Perlegos, Intel) 1979: Quantum Hall Effect observed (von Klitzing) 1980: Ion-implanted CMOS IC 1981: Identification of native Nit: Pb-centers (Poindexter) 1980: Plasma etching Full-band MC (Shichijo&Hess) 1984: Scaling theory <0.25 μm (Baccarani, U. Bologna)1982: Fractional QHE observed (Störmer&Tsui, Laughlin) 1986: 0.1 μm Si MOSFET (Sai-Halasz, IBM) 1988: Full-band MC device simulator (MVF&Laux) 1991: CMOS replaces BJT also at high-end 1992: NEGF device simulator (Lake, Klimeck, et al.) 1993: DGFET scalable to 30 nm (theory, Frank et al.) 2007: Non-SiO2 (HfO2–based) MOSFET (Intel) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 5 Timeline II Feature size 1975: 20 μm (tOX≈250 nm) Main Problems ↑ SiO2 growth and instability: Ions, traps, interface 1980: 10 μm (tOX≈150 nm) 1985: 5 μm (tOX≈70 nm) SiO2 instability during operation: electron trapping, NBTI Hot electron effects: oxide trapping, VT shift, breakdown 1990: 1 μm (tOX≈15 nm) Scaling: Short-channel effects (SCE), oxide, dopants ↓ 1995: 0.35 μm (tOX≈8 nm) 2000: 0.18 μm (tOX≈3 nm) ….life is good… 2005: 65 nm (tOX≈1.4 nm) 2010: 32 nm (tOX≈1.2 nm?) Scaling: SCE, insulator Leakage: Insulator Power: Alternative devices Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 6 Timeline III Feature size Transport Physics 1975: 20 μm 1980: 10 μm 1985: 5 μm Drift-Diffusion ↓ Hydrodynamic/ Energy transport 1990: 1 μm 1995: 0.5 μm 2000: 0.25 μm 2005: 63 nm 2010: 32 nm 2015: 16 nm ? ↕ Boltzmann ↓ Quantum? Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 7 Transistor prehistory 1935 Heil’s patent 1947 First BJT 1960 Atalla’s MOSFET Bardeen, Shockley, Brattain (Bell Labs) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 8 IC Prehistory 1961 Kilby’s first IC 1962 Fairchild IC Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering 1964 First MOS IC (RCA) MVF October 2, 2009 9 Moore’s law prehistory Gordon Moore 1965: Cost vs time Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Moore’s law 1960-1975 MVF October 2, 2009 10 Moore’s law Number of transistors/die & feature size vs time Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 11 Microprocessor prehistory 1965: Federico Faggin 1968: Fairchild 8-bit μP Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering 1971: Intel 8080 μP MVF October 2, 2009 12 Memory prehistory: DRAM and EPROM Bob Dennard (1-FET DRAM cell, 1968; scaling theory with Fritz Gänsslen,1974) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering 1971 Frohman’s UV-erasable EPROM (written by avalanche injection) MVF October 2, 2009 13 More historical trends Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering J. Armstrong (ca.1989) MVF October 2, 2009 14 Timeline II once more Feature size 1975: 20 μm (tOX≈250 nm) Main Problems ↑ SiO2 growth and instability: Ions, traps, interface 1980: 10 μm (tOX≈150 nm) 1985: 5 μm (tOX≈70 nm) 1990: 1 μm (tOX≈15 nm) SiO2 instability during operation: electron trapping, NBTI Hot electron effects: oxide trapping, VT shift, breakdown Scaling: Short-channel effects (SCE), oxide, dopants ↓ 1995: 0.35 μm (tOX≈8 nm) 2000: 0.18 μm (tOX≈3 nm) ….life is good… 2005: 65 nm (tOX≈1.4 nm) 2010: 32 nm (tOX≈1.2 nm?) Scaling: SCE, insulator Leakage: Insulator Power: Alternative devices Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 15 SiO2 growth and instability Ionic contamination (K, Na): Unrecognized source of early problems Fixed traps (oxygen vacancies?), especially near Si-SiO2 interface Growth kinetics: Deal & Grove model: linear (reaction-limited) and parabolic (diffusion-limited) regions; dry and wet oxidation rates Interface-state passivation: Al (with H) Post Metallization Anneal (PMA, Peter Balk): H2O → H+ + OH Si- + H+ → Si-H Andrew Grove (left), Bruce Deal (center) and Ed Snow (left) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Ed Snow’s cartoon, ca. 1966 about SiO2 instabilities MVF October 2, 2009 16 SiO2 growth and instability, as-grown and during operation CV-plot instabilities (VFB or VT shifts): Ions (mainly Na+ and K+, contamination in chambers, handling, gases, etc…) Interface states generation (stretch-out, Lai, Feigl, Sandia group, Technion, Siemens,…) Electron and hole traps (DiMaria, Young, Feigl): • Neutral: H2O-related (mainly OH-) in wet oxides, radiation induced in processing, σ ≈ 10-15 to 10-17 cm2 • Charged-attractive: Ionic contamination, σ ≈ 10-13 cm2 , field-dependent • Charged-repulsive: Radiation-induced, σ ≈ 10-19 cm2 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 17 SiO2 instability during operation Anomalous Positive Charge (APC): Caused by electron injection (Avalanche, Fowler-Nordheim) and also hole injection Related to Hydrogen: Boron deactivation in p-type substrates (Sah) Related to hole back-injection from anode? Dependent on gate-metal workfunction Au vs. Al vs. Mg (MVF&Weinberg, Chenming Hu) Occurring at Si-SiO2 interface even under negative bias: Neutral species such as solitons, H2 diffusion…? (Weinberg). Connected to wear-out and breakdown (DiMaria, Stathis) Strongly correlated to interface traps (Pb-centers, Lenahan, Poindexter) Oxygen deficiency (Revesz)? Broken Si-H bonds (Si-D experiment, Lyding&Hess)? Negative Bias Temperature Instability (NBTI): No time to discuss, but big issue in high-κ dielectrics Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 18 Understanding SiO2 degradation: Two approaches MVF and DiMaria, INFOS 1989 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 19 SiO2 growth and instability: Injection techniques and damage generation Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 20 SiO2 growth and instability: Electronic transport in SiO2 Electrons: Long-standing problems of high-field electron transport in polar insulators (Karel Thornber’s 1970 PhD Thesis with Richard Feynman) LO-phonon scattering run-away connected to dielectric breakdown Experimental observations do not show predicted run-away at 2-3 MV/cm Umklapp scattering with acoustic phonons keeps electron energy under control (MVF, DiMaria, Theis, Kirtley, Brorson, 1985) Holes: Small polaron (self-trapping) transport (Bob Hughes’ 1977 time-of-flight experiments explained by David Emin’s 1975 theory). MVF et al., PR B (1985) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 21 Hot electron effects in constant-voltage-scaled MOSFETs Two problems: Understand origin/spectrum of hot carrier Understand nature/process of damage generation Practical problems: Unnecessary and expensive burn-in Wall Street “big glitch” in 1994 Theory: Shockley’s “lucky-electron model” widespread in EE community in the ’80s (publicized by Chenming Hu, UCB): Even the Gods can be wrong at times… Full-band models (Sam Shichijo & Karl Hess, MVF&Laux, then others) Basic physics of electron scattering, injection into SiO2, etc. The mid-1990s “pseudo-full-band” frenzy (Bologna, UNC, Udine, Lille, TUVienna, Aachen,..): Gain without pain… didn’t work… Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 22 Electron injection into SiO2 MVF, Laux, and Crabbé, JAP (1996) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 23 Timeline III once more Feature size Transport Physics 1975: 20 μm 1980: 10 μm 1985: 5 μm Drift-Diffusion ↓ Hydrodynamic/ Energy transport 1990: 1 μm 1995: 0.5 μm 2000: 0.23 μm 2005: 63 nm 2010: 32 nm 2015: 16 nm ? ↕ Boltzmann ↓ Quantum? Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 24 Electron transport in Si at 3 eV: A big headache Effective-mass approximation valid only for E ≈ a few kBT Scattering rates at E ≥ {a few kBT} totally unknown Moments of the BTE (DDE, Hydrodynamic) not sufficiently accurate Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 25 Electron transport in Si at 3 eV ca. 1992: A depressing picture… The state-of-the art circa 1992 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 26 A good example of experiments-theory feedback XPS (McFeely, Cartier, Eklund at the Brookhaven IBM synchrotron line, 1993) Carrier separation (DiMaria, 1992) Cartier et al. APL (1993) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 27 Electron transport in Si at 3 eV ca. 1994: Much better… The state-of-the art circa 1994 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF et al., JAP (1996) MVF October 2, 2009 28 Scaling Shrink dimensions maintaining aspect-ratio Must shrink electrostatic features as well (depletion regions→ doping level and profiles) ↔ 1 μm 1980 → 1985 → 1988 → 1991 → 1994 1994 → 1999 → 2003 … μm 1.3 nm …. LGATE μm 2.5 2.5 μm 1.3 μm μm 0.63 0.63 μm μm 0.25 0.25 μm μm 130 130 nm nm …. 5 μm GATE = 10 μm Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 29 Scaling Electrostatic integrity (Well-tempered MOSFET, Antoniadis): SOI, DGFETs, FinFETs, NW-FETs Reduce power, an example: The tunnel FET n (tFET) Reduced leakage: High-κ gate-insulators Improve (or, at least, maintain) performance: Alternative channel materials? Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 30 Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: SOI 22 nm strained-Si nFET: SOI to prevent punch- through, strained Si to improve performance (B. Doris, IBM, 2006) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 31 Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: Double gate FET AIST (2003) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 32 Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: Multibridge FETs (TEM, SEM) Samsung Electronics Ltd. (2005) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 33 Multibridge FETs: Process flow Samsung Electronics Ltd. (2005) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 34 Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: FinFETs Freescale Semiconductors Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 35 Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: Si Nanowire Transistors KAIST (2007) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 36 Scaling – Reduce power: The tunnel-FET (tFET) Stand-by power dissipation approaching “on” power dissipation… Cannot continue like this! 60 mV/dec → ΔVG ≈ 250 mV for Ioff/Ion ≈ 10-4 VT + ΔVG ≥ 0.45 V at 300 K (nFETs) Must increase slope (i.e., go below 60 mV/dec) if we want the `Green’ FET (term coined by C. Hu) Problem: Ion too low in all attempts (DARPA to IBM, UCB, Stanford,…) so far InAs Tunnel-FET: structure (M. Haines, UMass 2009) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering InAs Tunnel-FET: pair generation rate (M. Haines, UMass 2009) MVF October 2, 2009 37 Scaling – Reduce leakage Off-leakage: Accepted value increasing: Ioff/Ion ≈ 10-4 for the 32 nm node (used to be 10-6 or lower!) Connected to electrostatic integrity (punch-through, junction leakage, gate leakage) Gate leakage: C = εox/tox, so if tox has reached its limit (≈ 1nm, too aggressive so far), scale εox: High-κ insulators such as HfO2, ZrO2, Al2O3, etc. Problem: Low mobility in high-κ MOS systems (scattering with interfacial optical phonons) Metals with different workfunction needed! Hi-res TEM from Susanne Stemmer, UCSB Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF et al., JAP (2001) MVF October 2, 2009 38 Scaling – Reduce leakage: Gate oxide scaling at Intel Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering C. Hu et al., IEDM (1996) MVF October 2, 2009 39 Scaling – Improve performance Taken for granted early on (ca. 1986) Slow realization that early optimism was unjustified MVF and S. Laux, EDL (1987) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 40 Scaling – Improve performance Look for high-velocity, low-effective mass semiconductors… or should we? Problems: High-energy (≈ 0.5 eV ≈ 20 kBT) DOS and rates identical in most fcc semiconductors Low DOS → loss of transconductance Low DOS → smaller density in quasi-ballistic conditions → lower Ion Low DOS → less scattering in source → source starvation Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 41 Scaling – Improve performance: DOS bottleneck Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF and S. Laux, TED (1991) MVF October 2, 2009 42 Scaling – Improve performance: Strained Si Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF and S. Laux, JAP (1996) MVF October 2, 2009 43 Scaling – Improve performance: Strained Si IBM 32 nm strained (tensile) Si nFET on SiGe virtual substrate Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Intel 45 nm strained (compressive) Si pFET with regrown SiGe S/D MVF October 2, 2009 44 Why are sub-40 nm devices getting slower? Power dissipation → reduce frequency or fry! Parasitics play a bigger role (Antoniadis, MIT) Higher oxide fields squeeze carriers against interface → increased scattering (Antoniadis, MIT) Intrinsic Coulomb effects! MVF and S. Laux, JAP (2001) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 45 Why are sub-40 nm devices getting slower? The effect of e-e interactions Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 46 Sub-32 nm Si CMOS devices: Where do we stand? 22 nm: Planar (Intel), SOIs (IBM), FinFETs doable but too expensive. 16 nm: Possibly FinFETs, still Si Below 16 nm: Ge pFETs and III-V nFETs (IMEC)? A pipedream… Ge nFETs still lousy, improvements promised at Dec 2009 IEDM, we’ll see III-Vs in the works: • MIT (del Alamo): Great HEMTs, but huge S/D-gate gap not easily scalable • SRC/UCSB MOSFETs: Wait and see… Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 47 The future and “post Si CMOS” devices: What do we need? Three terminal devices (Josephson computers taught us something…!) At least some gain (preserving signal over billions of devices, beating kBT) At least a few devices must have high Ion to charge external loads On/off behavior (Landauer’s water faucet analogy) Low power, possibly non-charge-switching (spins, QCA,…). BUT: If we use ≈ kBT to switch, the heat bath will switch for us even if we do not want to… Notable historic failures: Josephson: Excessively strict tolerances (on insulators), complicated 2-terminal logic SETs: No output current (`a slight impedance matching issue’, as someone kindly put it….) Optical computers: Photons are huge! Clumsy 3-terminal devices Resonant tunneling diodes and multi-state logic: Non off-off switches, impossible to control manufacturing tolerances High hopes: Nanowires: They are just thin and narrow FinFETs Long shots: Spins and QCA: Low power but no gain CNT: No current in single tube, must use many in parallel III-Vs: Battle already lost in 1991 (DOS bottleneck),,, why bother again? Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 48 And by popular demand… The future of “post-Si CMOS” logic technology Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 49 More slides about the lunatic fringe…. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 50 The lunatic fringe: Exploratory devices Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 51 The lunatic fringe: Exploratory devices Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 52 The lunatic fringe: Exploratory devices Carbon NanoTube (CNT) FET IFF-Jülich, Germany (2004) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 53 CNT Transistors IFF-Jülich, Germany (2004) Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 54 CNT FET inverter J. Appenzeller, IBM Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009 55