Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Trends in Microelectronic Systems Integration: From System on a Chip to System in a Package

  • Robert H. Reuss (a1), Babu R. Chalamala (a1), Simon Thomas (a1), Marc Chason (a2), Daniel Gamota (a2) and Janice Danvir (a2)...

Abstract

The continued shift towards the integration of diverse functions into single chips and chip assemblies requires a new vision in microelectronic systems integration. Over the last decade or so, there has been a tremendous push towards systems on chip (SoC) approach for increased functionality. While systems on a chip has received much deserved credit for the size and cost reduction of many products, a true system on a chip solution has not been practical for a number of applications. In some cases, this is simply an issue of chip size, in others material compatibility (Si and GaAs), in yet others electrical compatibility (high voltage, RF, analog, with digital) and in some others the overall cost of integration on silicon, even if technically feasible. The need to combine diverse materials and technologies to achieve increased functionality with decreased size and weight, along with the ever present pressure for lower cost, has created the opportunity for new system level integration opportunities. Among the new concepts, system in a package (SiP) and system on a substrate (SoS) have received the most attention. System in a package is a natural extension of system on a chip concept. Currently, there are aggressive programs to develop SiP capabilities to allow rapid, cost effective design and fabrication of subsystem level packages. System on a substrate is an emerging concept based on the integration of technologies in a wide area of electronics. SoS will take the next step to the full system level (e.g. a monolithic radio). However, there is another important concept that seeks the same objective of system-level integration, but with a different set of drivers. In situations where the product is required to be a certain size (e.g. a display or a smart card), further size reductions of the components is no longer productive. This creates the opportunity for alternative technologies such as thin film transistors and plastic substrates. Integration of these technologies offers the potential for significant cost savings because of lower manufacturing costs, and light weight, wearable, flexible products by elimination of today's rigid substrates. Such technologies not only offer new capabilities, but also change the basic premise of the electronics industry. We could move from the microelectronics to the macroelectronics era. In this paper, we will present an overview of this diverse and emerging technology.

Copyright

References

Hide All
1 For a complete overview of SoC and SiP technology, refer to IC Packaging Update 1999, Bogatin, E., ed., ICE Corp., Scottsdale, AZ, 1999.
2 Kada, M. and Smith, L., Portable Design 6, 46 (2000).
3 Sherman, D., Elect. Eng. Times Magazine, Oct 16, 2000.
4 Truzzi, C. and Lerner, S., Solid State Technol. 43, 115 (2000).
5 Baliga, J., Semicond. Int. 23, 169 (2000)
6 Tummula, R. R. and Madisetti, V. K., IEEE Design and Test of Comp. 16, 48 (1998).
7 Gregus, J. A., Yau, M. Y., Degani, Y., and Tai, K. L., Bell Labs. Tech. J., p116, Jul-Sep 1998
8 Tummala, R.R., White, G.E., Sundaram, V., and Bhattacharyam, S., Advancing Microelectronics 27, 13 (2000).
9 Amey, D.I., Dirks, M.T., Draudt, R.R., Horowitz, S.J., and Needes, C.R.S., Adv. Packaging 19, 37 (2000).
10 Arbuckle, B., Logan, E., Pedder, D., Solid St. Technol. 43, 84 (2000).
11 Ulrich, R. K., Brown, W. D., and Schaper, L. W., IEEE Circuits and Dev. Mag. 16, 17 (2000).
12 Oh, C.-H. and Matsumura, M., IEEE Elect. Dev. Lett. 22, 20 (2001).
13 Clark, M. G., IEE Proc. Circuits, Dev. Syst. 141, 3 (1994).
14 For a look at the history and evolution of TFTs for LCDs, refer to Sharp Corporation's website at www.sharp.co.jp and the links therein.
15 Young, N. D., Harkin, G., Bunn, R. N., McCulloch, D. J., and French, I. D., IEEE Trans. Elect. Dev. 43, 1930 (1996).
16 Kane, M. G. et al, IEEE Elect. Dev. Lett. 21, 534 (2000).
17 Kishore, R., Hotz, C., Naseem, H. A., and Brown, W. D., Electrochem. and Solid St. Lett. 4, G14 (2001)
18 Mikami, Y., Nagae, Y., Mori, Y., Kuwabara, K., Saito, T., Hayama, H., Asada, H., Akimoto, Y., Kobayashi, M., Okazaki, S., Asaka, K., Matsui, H., Nakamura, K. and Kaneko, E., IEEE Trans. Electron Dev. 41, 306 (1994).
19 Pique, A., Chrisey, A.D.B., Fitz-Gerald, J.M., McGill, R.A., Auyeung, R.C.Y., Wu, H.D., Lakeou, S., Nguyen, V., Chung, R. and Duignan, M., J. Mat. Res. 15, 1872 (2000).
20 Hong, C. M. and Wagner, S., IEEE Elect. Dev. Lett. 21, 384 (2000).
21 Gleskova, H., Konenkamp, R., Wagner, S. and Shen, D. S., IEEE Elect. Dev. Lett. 17, 264 (1996).

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed