1. 1 2010 Litho ITRS Update Lithography iTWG Dec 2010

2. 2 Outline 2010 –Lithography Potential Solutions –Major Challenges 2011 –Lithography Potential Solutions –Major Challenges –Some 2011 Update Focus Summary

3. 3 2010 Updates

4. 4 July Conference ITRS Litho Working Group

5. 5

6. 6

7. 7 Difficult Challenges > / = 16nm

8. 8

9. 9 Difficult Challenges <16nm

10. 10 Difficult Challenges <16nm

11. 11 Difficult Challenges <16nm

12. 12 Preliminary 2011 Updates

13. 13 December Conference ITRS Litho Working Group

14. 14

15. 15

16. 16 Difficult Challenges (2011 - )

17. 17 Preliminary feedback: No differentiation among different products No mask cost increase by node Write time increase No breakdown on critical and non-critical Need to check published data by TSMC and Intel

18. 18 Some 2011 Update Focus Potential Solutions (long term vs short term) Number of masks trend Impact of LWR on EUV mask inspection. EUV blank surface roughness is not in the spec (actinic and non actinic inspection) Imprint LER Litho resist spec DSA – Start a new table OR become part of double patterning Computational Lithography – Start a new table OR figures Data Volume for mask and maskless writers update Max in mask write time (for process control and throughput ) Mask Grid – 0.5nm (0.125nm 1X) or 0.4nm (0.1nm 1X)?

19. 19 Summary Lithography solutions for 2010 –45 nm half-pitch - 193 Immersion Single Exposure for DRAM/MPU –Flash using Double Patterning (Spacer) for 32 nm half-pitch Lithography solutions for 2013 –32 nm half-pitch Double patterning or EUV for DRAM/MPU –EUV needed – 16 nm half-pitch for Flash and 22nm DRAM/MPU Double exposure / patterning requires a complex set of parameters when different exposures are used to define single features Mask Complexity for Double patterning Mask Infrastructure for EUV