CMOS与NMOS gnfet全加法器性能比较

Z. Johari, Z. Tan, Muhammad Faidzal Mohamad Rasol, A. Hamzah, Michael Tan Loong Peng, Suhana Mohamed Sultan, N. Alias, S. Isaak, Yusmeera Yusoff
{"title":"CMOS与NMOS gnfet全加法器性能比较","authors":"Z. Johari, Z. Tan, Muhammad Faidzal Mohamad Rasol, A. Hamzah, Michael Tan Loong Peng, Suhana Mohamed Sultan, N. Alias, S. Isaak, Yusmeera Yusoff","doi":"10.11113/elektrika.v21n2.347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Transistor makes up the cornerstone of modern computing. In this work, a SPICE model of GNRFET was used to simulate the performance of a NMOS and CMOS binary full adder. The performance of this adder was evaluated in terms of its average power consumption and propagation delay. Three variables, namely the resistance value, dimer lines and channel length were manipulated and the impact on its performance was assessed. It was observed that a linear improvement in propagation delay was accompanied by an exponential increase in power consumption and only a small range of values of resistance was able to deliver a relatively reasonable trade-off between power consumption and propagation delay. These values range from approximately 110 kΩ to 130 kΩ. When the dimer lines were varied from 12 to 8 and channel length was varied from 32 nm to 16 nm, the results showed that a channel length of 16 nm was superior to that of a channel length of 32 nm as it showed 25.25 % of improvement in propagation delay at approximately similar power consumption. On the other hand, the choice of dimer lines and circuit architecture was required to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. For a compute-intensive application with a controlled environment, NMOS logic with 8 dimer lines should be chosen, while for less compute-intensive applications and portable devices, CMOS logic with 12 dimer lines should be utilised. A NMOS logic was chosen for the former due to a reasonable trade-off of 30.94 % of power consumption for a 35.03 % of propagation delay was established When the performance of these full adders are compared to that of a MTGB based ternary gate in terms of their performance, it was found that the CMOS and NMOS logic full adder performed better than a MTGB based ternary full adder.","PeriodicalId":312612,"journal":{"name":"ELEKTRIKA- Journal of Electrical Engineering","volume":"120 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance Comparison of CMOS and NMOS GNRFET Full Adder\",\"authors\":\"Z. Johari, Z. Tan, Muhammad Faidzal Mohamad Rasol, A. Hamzah, Michael Tan Loong Peng, Suhana Mohamed Sultan, N. Alias, S. Isaak, Yusmeera Yusoff\",\"doi\":\"10.11113/elektrika.v21n2.347\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Transistor makes up the cornerstone of modern computing. In this work, a SPICE model of GNRFET was used to simulate the performance of a NMOS and CMOS binary full adder. The performance of this adder was evaluated in terms of its average power consumption and propagation delay. Three variables, namely the resistance value, dimer lines and channel length were manipulated and the impact on its performance was assessed. It was observed that a linear improvement in propagation delay was accompanied by an exponential increase in power consumption and only a small range of values of resistance was able to deliver a relatively reasonable trade-off between power consumption and propagation delay. These values range from approximately 110 kΩ to 130 kΩ. When the dimer lines were varied from 12 to 8 and channel length was varied from 32 nm to 16 nm, the results showed that a channel length of 16 nm was superior to that of a channel length of 32 nm as it showed 25.25 % of improvement in propagation delay at approximately similar power consumption. On the other hand, the choice of dimer lines and circuit architecture was required to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. For a compute-intensive application with a controlled environment, NMOS logic with 8 dimer lines should be chosen, while for less compute-intensive applications and portable devices, CMOS logic with 12 dimer lines should be utilised. A NMOS logic was chosen for the former due to a reasonable trade-off of 30.94 % of power consumption for a 35.03 % of propagation delay was established When the performance of these full adders are compared to that of a MTGB based ternary gate in terms of their performance, it was found that the CMOS and NMOS logic full adder performed better than a MTGB based ternary full adder.\",\"PeriodicalId\":312612,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ELEKTRIKA- Journal of Electrical Engineering\",\"volume\":\"120 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ELEKTRIKA- Journal of Electrical Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11113/elektrika.v21n2.347\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ELEKTRIKA- Journal of Electrical Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11113/elektrika.v21n2.347","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

晶体管构成了现代计算机的基石。本文利用GNRFET的SPICE模型模拟了NMOS和CMOS二进制全加法器的性能。该加法器的性能根据其平均功耗和传播延迟进行了评估。对电阻值、二聚体线和通道长度三个变量进行了控制,并评估了对其性能的影响。可以观察到,传播延迟的线性改善伴随着功耗的指数增长,并且只有很小范围的电阻值能够在功耗和传播延迟之间提供相对合理的权衡。这些值的范围大约为110 kΩ到130 kΩ。当二聚体线长度为12 ~ 8条,通道长度为32 ~ 16 nm时,16 nm的通道长度优于32 nm的通道长度,在近似相同的功耗下,传输延迟提高25.25%。另一方面,二聚体线路和电路结构的选择需要根据具体情况进行评估。对于受控环境下的计算密集型应用,应选择具有8条二聚体线的NMOS逻辑,而对于计算密集型应用和便携式设备,应使用具有12条二聚体线的CMOS逻辑。基于30.94%的功耗和35.03%的传输延迟之间的合理权衡,选择了NMOS逻辑作为前者的全加法器。当将这些全加法器的性能与基于MTGB的三叉门的性能进行比较时,发现CMOS和NMOS逻辑的全加法器的性能优于基于MTGB的三叉全加法器。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Performance Comparison of CMOS and NMOS GNRFET Full Adder
Transistor makes up the cornerstone of modern computing. In this work, a SPICE model of GNRFET was used to simulate the performance of a NMOS and CMOS binary full adder. The performance of this adder was evaluated in terms of its average power consumption and propagation delay. Three variables, namely the resistance value, dimer lines and channel length were manipulated and the impact on its performance was assessed. It was observed that a linear improvement in propagation delay was accompanied by an exponential increase in power consumption and only a small range of values of resistance was able to deliver a relatively reasonable trade-off between power consumption and propagation delay. These values range from approximately 110 kΩ to 130 kΩ. When the dimer lines were varied from 12 to 8 and channel length was varied from 32 nm to 16 nm, the results showed that a channel length of 16 nm was superior to that of a channel length of 32 nm as it showed 25.25 % of improvement in propagation delay at approximately similar power consumption. On the other hand, the choice of dimer lines and circuit architecture was required to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. For a compute-intensive application with a controlled environment, NMOS logic with 8 dimer lines should be chosen, while for less compute-intensive applications and portable devices, CMOS logic with 12 dimer lines should be utilised. A NMOS logic was chosen for the former due to a reasonable trade-off of 30.94 % of power consumption for a 35.03 % of propagation delay was established When the performance of these full adders are compared to that of a MTGB based ternary gate in terms of their performance, it was found that the CMOS and NMOS logic full adder performed better than a MTGB based ternary full adder.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信