<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Ibm on IT News</title>
    <link>https://it-news.uk/tags/ibm/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Ibm on IT News</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0800</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://it-news.uk/tags/ibm/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Musk Calls IBM&#39;s &#39;0.7nm Chip&#39; Label Misleading, Proposes Naming by Atom Count</title>
      <link>https://it-news.uk/posts/musk-ibm-07nm-chip-naming-misleading/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid>https://it-news.uk/posts/musk-ibm-07nm-chip-naming-misleading/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Semiconductor process node names stopped being literal a long time ago. The number that used to refer to the gate length of a transistor — 7nm, 5nm, 3nm — now functions more as a generational marketing label than a measurement. But Elon Musk thinks the industry has taken that abstraction a step too far.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The billionaire weighed in after a post on X pointed out that IBM&amp;rsquo;s newly announced &amp;ldquo;0.7nm&amp;rdquo; chip — which the company also calls 7Å (angstrom) — contains zero printed features smaller than 1 nanometer. The post called the naming &amp;ldquo;completely nonsensical and extremely misleading.&amp;rdquo; Musk agreed, and went further.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&amp;ldquo;We should name process nodes by the number of atoms corresponding to the minimum feature width,&amp;rdquo; Musk wrote on X. &amp;ldquo;In my opinion, that would be the most accurate way to name them.&amp;rdquo;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
