\section{Results} \label{sec:results} Figure~\ref{fig:layout} shows several different SRAM layouts generated by OpenRAM in FreePDK45. OpenRAM can generate single bank and multi-bank SRAM arrays. Banks are symmetrically placed to have the same delay for data and address while sharing peripheral blocks such as decoders. \begin{figure}[tb] \centering \includegraphics[scale=.4]{./figs/layout.pdf} \caption{Single bank and multi-bank SRAMs (not to scale) use symmetrical bank placement to share peripheral circuitry and equalize signal delays.} \label{fig:layout} \end{figure} Figure~\ref{fig:density_figure} shows the memory area of different total size and data word width memories in both FreePDK45 and SCMOS. As expected, the smaller process technology (45nm) has lower total area overall but the trends are similar in both technologies. Figure~\ref{fig:density_figure} also shows the access time of different size and data word width in FreePDK45 and SCMOS. Increasing the memory size generally increases the access time; long bit-lines and word-lines increase the access time by adding more parasitic capacitance and resistance. Since OpenRAM uses multiple banks and column muxing, it is possible to have a smaller access time for larger memory designs, but this will sacrifice density. \begin{figure}[tb] \begin{center} \centering %\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{./figs/Results.pdf} \includegraphics[width=7.5cm , height=14cm]{./figs/Results2.pdf} % \subfigure[FreePDK45 memory area \label{fig:freepdk_area}]{ % \includegraphics[scale=1]{./figs/Freepdk_Area.pdf}} % \subfigure[SCMOS memory area \label{fig:scn3me_area}]{ % \includegraphics[scale=.5]{./figs/Scn3me_Area.pdf}} \caption{OpenRAM provides high-density memories in multiple technologies and sizes with corresponding characterized delays. \label{fig:density_figure}} \vspace{-0.5cm} \end{center} \end{figure} %Table~\ref{table:bit-density-comparison} shows a comparison between bit %density of OpenRAM's generated memory designs and other publications %which are close in technology node with FreePDK45 and SCMOS. As shown %in this table, OpenRAM provides very dense SRAM arrays in both technologies. \begin{table}[t] \centering \caption{OpenRAM has high density compared to other published memories in similar technologies.} \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|l|l|l|l|l|} \hline \texttt{Ref.} & \texttt{Feature} & \texttt{Tech.} & \texttt{Density} \\ & \texttt{Size} & & [Mb/$mm^2$] \\ \hline \hline $~\cite{4585946}$ & $65$ nm & CMOS & $0.7700$ \\ \hline $~\cite{Bit_Density_3}$ & $45$ nm & CMOS & $0.3300$ \\ \hline $~\cite{Bit_Density_2}$ & $40$ nm & CMOS & $0.9400$ \\ \hline \verb+OpenRAM+ & $45$ nm & FreePDK45 & $0.8260$ \\ \hline \hline $~\cite{127339}$ & $0.5$ um & CMOS & $0.0036$ \\ \hline $~\cite{Bit_Density_6}$ & $0.5$ um & BiCMOS & $0.0020$ \\ \hline $~\cite{Bit_Density_5}$ & $0.5$ um & CMOS & $0.0050$ \\ \hline \verb+OpenRAM+ & $0.5$ um & SCMOS & $0.0050$ \\ \hline \end{tabular} \label{table:bit-density-comparison} \end{table} %\begin{table*} %\centering %\caption{OpenRAM has high density, fast access time and low power consumption compared to other published memories in similar technologies.} %\begin{tabular}{|c|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|} \hline %\texttt{Reference} & \texttt{Technology} & \texttt{Density (Mb/$mm^2$)}& \texttt{Access time (ns)}& \texttt{Power consumption} \\ \hline \hline %$~\cite{Bit_Density_1}$ & $65 nm CMOS$ & $0.77$ & $28$ & $22$ $uW/MHz$ \\ \hline %$~\cite{Bit_Density_2}$ & $40 nm CMOS$ & $0.94$ & $45$ & $13.8$ $pJ/access/Mbit$ \\ \hline %$OpenRAM$ & $45 nm FreePDK45$ & $0.826$ & $9.86$ & $13.14$ $mW$ \\ \hline \hline %$~\cite{Bit_Density_4}$ & $0.5 um CMOS$ & $0.0036$ & $1.5$ & $6$ $W$ \\ \hline %$~\cite{Bit_Density_6}$ & $0.5 um BiCMOS$ & $0.002$ & $1.5$ & $35$ $W$ \\ \hline %$~\cite{Bit_Density_5}$ & $0.5 um CMOS$ & $0.005$ & $75$ & $3.9$ $mW$ \\ \hline %$OpenRAM$ & $0.5 um SCMOS$ & $0.005$ & $44.9$ & $115$ $mW$ \\ \hline %\end{tabular} %\label{table:bit-density-comparison} %\end{table*} Comparison of power consumption and read access time of different memories is a bit more complicated to make a conclusion, because there are many trade-offs. Power and performance are highly dependent on circuit style (CMOS, ECL, etc.), memory organization (more banks is faster but sacrifices density), and the optimization goal: low-power or high-performance. In general, OpenRAM has reasonable trade-off between the two and can be customized by using an alternate sense amplifiers, decoders, or overall dimensional organization. Table~\ref{table:bit-density-comparison} compares the bit-density of OpenRAM against published designs using similar technology nodes. The results show the benefit of technology scaling and that OpenRAM has very good density in both technologies. As a comparison, a 76ns SRAM consumes 3.9mW~\cite{Bit_Density_5} while OpenRAM is much faster at 44.9ns but consumes 115mW for the same size. %Table~\ref{table:bit-density-comparison} shows a comparison between bit density, access %time and power consumption of OpenRAM’s generated mem- %ory designs and other publications which are close in tech- %nology node with FreePDK45 and SCMOS. As shown in this %table, OpenRAM provides very dense SRAM arrays in both %technologies. There is no easy comparison on power con- %sumption and read access time as these values vary with the %array size and configuration. Therefore, we only try to com- %pare the features of each work from a more general point of %view.