nanometre

A lot (most) of the cost of the chips is really the capital cost of building a new x nanometre fabs and the chip design etc.

And first they'd have to show you could measure stuff on the nanometre scale without messing it up.

Not Drexlerian nanomachine fantasies, but nanometre scale control of the surface geometry of materials.

However, quantum behaviour also presents an unresolved challenge facing electronics at the few-nanometre scale: resistive channels start leaking owing to quantum tunnelling.

Generally nautical miles should be represented as NM, with nanometre as nm.

They used to form wax modls and deposit nanometre layers of metal.

Not that it's a bad patent, I just thought people had been doing nanometre scale photolithography with other metals for decades.

It's not like an average soccer mum shops for CPUs and choses the 3nm because she is impressed with the 3 nanometre transistor gates, right?

I spent a lot of time working on this problem for nanometre-accurate servo controls.

Generally smaller nanometre designs are a lot more power efficient.

So very roughly, about 1 bit per square nanometre.

Back-of-the-napkin maths is that a chip that is 3cm on each side -- which is huge -- can be subdivided into 0.007 nanometre increments using 32 bit integers.