Don
Scansen,
Semiconductor
Insights
Jan 21,
2008
As noted in EE Times almost one month prior to the
December
2007
International
Electron
Devices
Meeting
(IEDM),
the main
features
of
Intel's
45-nanometer
process
technology
are the
incorporation
of
high-k
hafnium-based
dielectric
material,
titanium
nitride
(TiN)
for the
PFET
replacement
gate and
a TiN
barrier
alloyed
with a
work
function
tuning
metal
for the
NFET
replacement
gate.
(Click
here
for full
story.)
Some
high
points
of
Intel's
45-nm
HKMG
technology
are:
high-k
first,
metal-gate-last
integration;
hafnium
oxide
(HfO2)
gate
dielectric
(1.0-nm
EOT);
and dual
band-edge
work
function
metal
gates (TiN
for
PMOS;
TiAlN
for
NMOS).
The
gate-last
integration
is one
point
that
needs a
bit
of
clarification
in the
Intel
process
flow.
The
references
to
"first"
and
"last"
refer to
the
order of
the
high-k
and
metal-gate
formation
in light
of
polysilicon
deposition.
It is
now
well-known
that
Intel
uses a
gate-last,
or
replacement
gate,
process
flow at
45 nm.
But even
that
provides
opportunity
for a
great
debate
on
semantics:
whether
it's
"gate"
or
"last."
I'm not
predicting
that the
lawyers
are
already
on their
way, but
there's
likely a
patent
out
there
that
will
help
create
just
such an
argument.
The
replacement
gate
flow
allows
Intel to
reuse
many
process
steps
and
tools
from the
age-old
polysilicon-gate
technology.
The
process
of
patterning
polysilicon
and
forming
traditional
silicon
oxide
and
nitride
sidewall
spacers
leverages
tried-and-true
self-aligned
processes
for
source
and
drain
formation
and
their
lightly
doped
extension
regions.
Once
those
steps
are
completed,
the
polysilicon
is
removed,
and work
function
metals
are
deposited
in their
stead.
Click
here for
larger
image
But
something
interesting
is going
on even
before
the
first
poly
deposition.
Contrary
to the
suggestion
in its
IEDM
paper,
Intel
deposits
the
first
work
function
metal
prior to
the
sacrificial
gate
polysilicon.
For
the
P-channel
transistor,
titanium
nitride
(TiN) is
deposited
immediately
after
the HfO2
dielectric.
Adding
aluminum
to form
TiAlN
tunes
the work
function
for the
N-channel
transistors.
Intel's
process
protects
HfO2
from the
polysilicon
etch by
depositing
the
first
work
function
layers
before
forming
and
patterning
polysilicon.
SI
engineers
refer to
the
first
metal-gate
layer as
the top
interface
layer (TIL)
because
of the
undeniable
protection
it
provides
the HfO2
dielectric.
The
P-type
metal
gates
are TiN,
and Al
is added
to
create
TiAlN
and the
appropriate
work
function
for
NMOS.
Thicker
layers
of both
metals
are
deposited
in their
respective
N- and
P-channel
transistors
after
removing
the
sacrificial
polysilicon,
and a
barrier
layer is
formed
on the
bottom
and
sidewalls
of the
trench
left
behind
by the
polysilicon
etch.
Click
here for
larger
image
Comments
about
the
meaning
of
"gate"
are
arguably
less
important
than the
electrical
performance
of the
finished
product.
Intel's
45-nm
technology
is
certainly
impressive
in that
regard.
SI's
extraction
of
transistor
electrical
parameters
indicates
the
following
saturated
drive
currents
at 1.0 V
at room
temperature:
•
PFET
IDSAT =
1.08 mA/micrometer
•
NFET
IDSAT =
1.36 mA/µm
Intel
confirmed
these
values
at its
IEDM
presentation
in
December
(although
our PFET
number
is
actually
10 µA
higher
than
Intel
reported).
Not
surprisingly,
our
results
show
higher
drive
currents
at low
temperature
(–20°C)
and
reduced
current
at high
temperature
(85°C).
These
high
values
for
drive
current
evoke
more
questions
regarding
the gate
structure.
There
has
always
been a
discrepancy
between
the
physical
gate
length (LG)
of
transistors
and the
shorter
electrically
active
channel
length (Lelec).
Before
the
advent
of
modern
metal-gate
technology,
however,
it was
relatively
easy to
specify
LG
and
compare
transistor
performance
among
fabs.
The
Intel
gate
structure
creates
some new
problems
for
analysts.
Intel
reports
a gate
length
of 35
nm,
which
fits
well
with the
1.36- mA/µm
drive
current
generated
by its
NFET.
But the
edge-to-edge
dimension
of the
gate
structure
is
closer
to 45 nm
if
measured
in a
fashion
similar
to the
standard
used for
polysilicon
gates.
Click
here for
larger
image
So
what
gives?
The
ratios
of LG,
Lelec
and
source/drain
extension
lengths
would be
out of
whack to
produce
such
large
saturation
currents.
The
answer
appears
related
to our
question
about
the
location
of the
metal
gate's
edge. In
the
past, it
was
assumed
that the
entire
width of
the poly
gate
influenced
carriers
in the
transistor
channel.
Because
polysilicon
is
etched
and
replaced
with a
metal
gate
filling
the
trench
in the
gate-last
process,
the
situation
is less
straightforward.
The
first
material
deposited
into the
gate
trench
is not
metal
for the
gate but
actually
a
barrier
material,
which
means
that the
active
portion
of the
gate is
less
than the
traditional
length
measurement
that
would
essentially
run
between
the
sidewall
spacer
on
either
side of
the
gate.
However,
because
the
barrier
is quite
thin, it
cannot
account
for the
gate
measurement
difference.
What
appears
to set
the
electrically
active
gate
length
is the
bird's
beak
formed
where
the
sidewall
spacer
meets
the TIL.
SI
analysis
concluded
that
this
bird's
beak is
the
result
of TIL
and
high-k
etches
undercutting
the
polysilicon.
Reoxidation
of the
polysilicon
sidewall
prior to
silicon
nitride
spacer
formation
exacerbates
the
undercut.
For the
metal
gate
deposited
into the
trench,
there is
a thick,
relatively
low-k
path
toward
the
channel
at this
point
that
obviously
could
not
electrically
influence
charge
carriers
in the
region
directly
underneath
the
bird's
beak.
The
critical
portion
of the
metal
gate
could
also be
the TIL
itself.
Because
this
layer is
composed
of the
same
work
function
metal as
the
gate-last
layer,
perhaps
its edge
defines
the
metal-gate
length.
Fortunately,
the
edge
of the
TIL
layer
approximately
aligns
with the
bird's
beak
above
it, so
the
choice
of
measurement
point
will not
affect
the
value
you get
for LG.
The
punch
line to
all of
this is
that the
gap
between
the gate
trench
edge and
the
electrically
active
edge of
the work
function
metal
(whether
first or
last)
accounts
for
somewhere
between
8 and 10
nm. And
that
appears
to
explain
the
difference
between
Intel's
reported
value
for LG
and what
the rest
of us
have
been
looking
at.
Despite
its cure
for
leakage
power,
adding
hafnium
creates
headaches
for the
process
integration
engineer.
Intel
avoided
hafnium's
downsides
(threshold
voltage
pinning
and
reduced
carrier
mobility)
by
creating
a
silicon
oxide
(or
possibly
oxynitride)
bottom
interface
layer (BIL)
between
the
silicon
substrate
and the
HfO2
layer.
The BIL
not only
gets
hafnium
into the
gate
stack
but
gives
the
process
engineer
one more
tuning
knob.
Because
the gate
dielectric's
influence
on the
transistor
channel
and
electrical
performance
is a
function
of the
individual
contributions
of the
various
layers,
threshold
voltages
can be
controlled
by
varying
the BIL
thickness
for
different
transistor
applications.
Design-for-manufacturabilty
Process
variability,
and
designing
for it,
is a hot
topic as
problems
such as
line-edge
roughness
and
random
dopant
fluctuations
become
more
problematic
at 45
nm. This
was
addressed
in
Intel's
second
IEDM
2007
presentation,
in which
Kelin
Kuhn
discussed
improving
yield by
process
improvements
as well
as
design
changes.
The
SRAM
cell
illustrated
Kuhn's
point as
she
showed
the
evolution
from
90-nm to
45-nm
design.
The
"tall"
cell
layout
used at
90 nm
was
replaced
with a
"wide"
cell at
65 nm.
The
65-nm
cell
design
improved
dimension
control
and
variability
by
aligning
the
polysilicon
in a
single
direction
and
removing
the
corners
in the
active
area
patterns.
At 45
nm,
Intel's
process
removed
"dog
bone"
and
"icicle"
shapes
by
employing
only
square
end
caps.
These
uniform
structures
are also
easier
to fill
reliably
in the
gate-last
process.
Intel
continues
to use
193-nm
dry
lithography
at 45
nm.
Restricted
design
rules
create
"structured"
gate
layouts,
as Kuhn
mentioned
in her
discussion
of the
SRAM
cell.
This DFM
technique
of
uniform,
regular
arrangement
of metal
gates
improves
yields
for the
advanced
HKMG
technology
without
requiring
investment
in new
immersion
tooling.
Creating
strictly
rectangular
gate
patterns
did
require
an extra
step,
because
double-patterning
was used
for the
sacrificial
polysilicon
layer.
Many
features
of
Intel's
65-nm
process
remain
in
evolved
forms.
"Third
generation"
strained
silicon
is used
that is
structurally
similar
to the
embedded
SiGe
PMOS of
Intel's
65-nm
process.
Nickel
salicide
is also
used
again at
45 nm.
Intel
employs
dual
damascene
copper
up to
metal
nine. A
SiCN
barrier
with
carbon-doped
oxide
creates
the
low-k
interlevel
dielectric
integration
scheme.
Don Scansen (dons@semiconductor.com), semiconductor technology analyst at Semiconductor Insights, a CMP Technology company, holds a BSEE, MS and PhD from the University of Saskatchewan. |
|