By Topic

Performance-power tradeoffs of 8T FinFET SRAM cells

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

2 Author(s)
Michael A. Turi ; Sch. of Electr. Eng. & Comput. Sci., Washington State Univ., Pullman, WA, USA ; José G. Delgado-Frias

We present eight eight-transistor (8T) FinFET SRAM cells which differ in back-gate connections and swing of the Read-line input. These schemes are evaluated in terms of leakage current, delay, read and write energy dissipation, and static noise margin (SNM) for 16 bits by 16 words (16×16) and 32 bits by 1024 words (32×1024) SRAM arrays. Performance is compared between the 8T schemes and two well-performing six-transistor (6T) SRAM cells. Overall, the 8T-SRAM schemes perform better than the 6T schemes primarily because leakage current is reduced by low-power schemes that reverse-bias the back-gates of the cross-coupled inverters without an adverse impact on the read speed. This is especially true for larger SRAM arrays, e.g. 32×1024. For a 32×1024 SRAM array, the best performing 8T scheme, Low-Power Inverters (LP_INV), has an energy-delay product that is 87.3% less than the best-performing 6T scheme, Low-Power (minimum-sized) (LP6).

Published in:

2011 IEEE 54th International Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems (MWSCAS)

Date of Conference:

7-10 Aug. 2011