A MOSFET that is OFF still conducts a small current. Below the threshold voltage, a few carriers have enough thermal energy to cross into the channel, producing subthreshold leakage. As transistors shrink, the drain starts to compete with the gate for control of the channel. These short-channel effects lower the threshold voltage and make that leakage worse. Across billions of transistors, leakage has become a major part of chip power.
14 min read | Intermediate Level
What You'll Learn
- Why current does not drop to zero below the threshold voltage
- How subthreshold swing links threshold voltage to OFF-state leakage
- What threshold roll-off and drain-induced barrier lowering (DIBL) are, and why they appear in short transistors
- How design and process techniques keep leakage under control
Quick Answer: Leakage Proportion Rules
Subthreshold leakage in proportions
Below Vth, current falls by 10x for every "swing" S of gate voltage
ideal limit at room temperature: S = ~60 mV per 10x
real transistors: S = ~70 to 100 mV per 10x
Lower Vth by one swing (e.g. ~80 mV) -> OFF current ~10x higher
Raise Vth by one swing -> OFF current ~10x lower
Hotter chip -> Vth drops AND S worsens -> more leakage
Shorter channel / higher V_DS -> Vth drops -> more leakage
Why an OFF Transistor Still Conducts
With the gate below Vth, there is no strong inversion channel, but the silicon under the gate is not completely empty of electrons either. The source is full of electrons, and an energy barrier keeps most of them from entering the channel region. The gate voltage sets the height of that barrier.
Electrons have a spread of thermal energies. A small fraction always have enough energy to get over the barrier. Once over, they diffuse to the drain and form a current. Because the fraction of electrons with enough energy falls off exponentially with barrier height, the current falls off exponentially as the gate voltage drops below Vth.
The subthreshold swing S is the gate voltage change needed to change this current by a factor of 10. At room temperature, the physics of thermal energy sets a limit of about 60 mV per decade. Real devices are worse because the gate does not have perfect control of the barrier: planar bulk transistors are typically around 80 to 100 mV per decade, while FinFETs, with a gate wrapped around the channel, come closer to 65-75 mV per decade.
Why Vth Cannot Simply Be Lowered
Subthreshold swing creates a hard trade-off. Lowering Vth adds overdrive and speed, but every swing's worth of Vth reduction multiplies OFF-state leakage by about 10.
| Vth change (S = 80 mV/decade) | Overdrive at VDD = 0.8 V | OFF leakage (relative) |
|---|---|---|
| Vth = 0.40 V | 0.40 V | 1× |
| Vth = 0.32 V | 0.48 V | ~10× |
| Vth = 0.24 V | 0.56 V | ~100× |
This is why supply voltages stopped scaling down as fast as transistor dimensions. To keep performance, VDD must stay well above Vth, and Vth cannot drop much further without leakage exploding. Supplies in modern processes have settled at a few tenths of a volt to around one volt instead of continuing to fall.
Quick Check
Q: A transistor has a subthreshold swing of 90 mV/decade. If a process change lowers its Vth by 180 mV, roughly how much does its OFF current change?
Show Answer
180 mV is two swings of 90 mV, so the OFF current rises by about 10 × 10 = 100×.
Short-Channel Effects: The Drain Joins In
In a long transistor, the gate alone controls the barrier between source and channel. As the channel gets shorter, the source and drain regions sit so close together that the drain's electric field reaches into the channel region too. The gate now shares control with the drain, and it loses some of its grip.
| Effect | Cause | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Vth roll-off | Shorter channel: source and drain depletion regions take over part of the channel region's charge | Vth falls as L shrinks; small variations in L cause large variations in Vth and leakage |
| DIBL (drain-induced barrier lowering) | Higher drain voltage pulls down the source-side barrier | Vth falls as V_DS rises; OFF current at full VDD is higher than at low V_DS |
| Weaker subthreshold swing | Gate has less control over the barrier | Larger S, so leakage falls off more slowly below Vth |
DIBL is quoted in millivolts of Vth shift per volt of drain voltage. Well-controlled modern devices keep it to a few tens of mV/V; poorly controlled short planar devices can exceed 100 mV/V. An OFF transistor in a logic gate usually has the full supply across it, so DIBL applies directly to the leakage that matters most.
Why shrinking gets harder (cause and effect)
shorter channel
-> drain field reaches the source-side barrier
-> gate has less control relative to the drain
-> Vth drops (roll-off) and drops further at high V_DS (DIBL)
-> OFF leakage rises
-> designers must restore gate control:
thinner / high-k gate dielectric
shallower junctions and halo implants
gate wrapped around the channel (FinFET, then gate-all-around)
Where Did Short-Channel Effects Change Transistor Shape?
Planar transistors reached their practical limit around the 20-28 nm generation, where short-channel leakage became too hard to control. The industry moved to FinFETs, in which the gate wraps three sides of a thin fin, and more recently to gate-all-around nanosheet transistors, in which the gate surrounds the channel completely. Each step gave the gate stronger control over the channel, reducing DIBL and improving subthreshold swing so that transistors could keep shrinking.
Other Leakage Paths
Subthreshold current is usually the largest leakage component, but it is not the only one:
| Leakage path | Mechanism | Main countermeasure |
|---|---|---|
| Subthreshold | Thermal carriers over the source barrier while OFF | Higher Vth, better gate control |
| Gate tunnelling | Electrons tunnel through a very thin gate dielectric | High-k dielectrics (physically thicker for the same control) |
| Junction leakage | Reverse current across source/drain-to-body junctions | Doping profile control; grows with temperature |
| GIDL (gate-induced drain leakage) | Strong field where the gate overlaps the drain lets electrons tunnel across bands | Drain engineering; worse with large gate-drain voltage |
What This Means for Chip Design
An OFF transistor might leak only nanoamps or less, but a chip has billions of them, and every one of them is powered whenever its block is powered. Leakage has become a significant fraction of total power in advanced processes, and in devices that spend most of their time idle, such as phones and wearables, it often dominates standby power.
RTL does not describe leakage, and simulation does not show it. It is controlled during implementation:
Leakage-control toolbox (where each decision is made)
Multi-Vt cells synthesis / place-and-route swap HVT cells onto paths with slack
Power gating power intent file (UPF) defines switchable domains;
tools insert header/footer switch cells made from HVT devices
Stacking two OFF transistors in series leak far less than one,
because the middle node rises and reverse-biases the upper one
Body biasing reverse body bias raises Vth in idle modes (process-dependent)
Lower temperature leakage falls sharply with junction temperature
Where Is Power Gating Used?
Mobile SoCs divide the chip into many power domains - CPU cores, GPU, media engines, modems - and switch off the supply to any domain that is idle. A switched-off domain leaks almost nothing, apart from the small leakage of its high-Vt power switches. Retention flip-flops or saved state let the domain resume quickly when it is powered back on. This is one of the main reasons a phone can last for days in standby.
Where Does the Stack Effect Help?
In a NAND gate's pull-down network, NMOS transistors are in series. When both are OFF, the node between them floats up slightly, which gives the upper transistor a negative gate-to-source voltage and a small body-effect Vth increase. Its leakage drops by a large factor compared with a single OFF transistor. Leakage-aware libraries and tools take this into account, and designers sometimes add stacked "sleep" transistors to exploit it.
Quick Check
Q: Vth is measured as 0.35 V at V_DS = 0.05 V. The device's DIBL is 60 mV/V. What is its effective Vth when its drain is at VDD = 0.85 V?
Show Answer
The drain voltage rises by 0.8 V, so Vth drops by about 0.8 × 60 mV = 48 mV. The effective Vth is about 0.30 V, and the OFF current at full VDD is correspondingly higher than a low-V_DS measurement suggests.
Cause-and-Effect Summary
| Condition | Effect |
|---|---|
| V_GS ↑ | Channel charge ↑ → drain current ↑ |
| V_DS ↑ past pinch-off | Drain current levels off (saturation) |
| NMOS gate HIGH | NMOS ON |
| PMOS gate LOW | PMOS ON |
| Vth ↓ by one subthreshold swing | OFF leakage ↑ about 10× |
| Temperature ↑ | Vth ↓ and swing worsens → leakage ↑ |
| Channel length ↓ | Gate control weakens → Vth ↓, DIBL ↑, leakage ↑ |
Common Mistakes
Mistake #1: Treating an OFF transistor as an open circuit
OFF means "exponentially reduced current", not zero current. For logic function this approximation is fine, but for power it is not: billions of slightly leaky transistors add up to a large static power.
Mistake #2: Using a low-V_DS threshold voltage for leakage estimates
Vth is often quoted at a small drain voltage. In a logic gate, an OFF transistor usually has the full supply across it, and DIBL lowers its effective Vth. Leakage estimated from the low-V_DS value will be too optimistic.
Mistake #3: Assuming clock gating removes leakage
Clock gating stops switching activity, which removes dynamic power. The gated logic is still powered, so every transistor in it still leaks. Only cutting the supply with power gating, or raising Vth, removes subthreshold leakage.
Mistake #4: Assuming FinFET or gate-all-around transistors have eliminated leakage
Better gate control improves subthreshold swing and reduces DIBL, but it does not beat the thermal limit of about 60 mV per decade. Leakage is reduced, not removed, and it still grows rapidly with temperature.
Practice Exercise
Challenge: Choose a Vt Mix for an Idle-Heavy Block
A block uses SVT cells with Vth = 0.35 V and leaks 20 mW at the hot corner. The library also offers HVT cells with Vth 100 mV higher and LVT cells with Vth 80 mV lower. Assume a subthreshold swing of 80 mV/decade.
- Estimate the leakage if every cell were HVT, and if every cell were LVT.
- Timing analysis shows 90% of the cells have enough slack to become HVT; the remaining 10% must stay SVT. Estimate the new leakage.
- The block is idle 95% of the time. What additional technique would remove most of the remaining leakage during idle periods?
Hint
Leakage changes by 10× for every 80 mV of Vth change. For 100 mV, that is 10 raised to the power 100/80.
Solution
1. HVT: Vth +100 mV -> leakage / 10^(100/80) = / ~17.8
20 mW / 17.8 = ~1.1 mW
LVT: Vth -80 mV -> leakage x 10
20 mW x 10 = 200 mW
2. 90% of the cells as HVT : 0.9 x 20 mW / 17.8 = ~1.0 mW
10% of the cells as SVT : 0.1 x 20 mW = 2.0 mW
Total = ~3.0 mW (about 6.7x lower)
3. Power gating: put the block in a switchable power domain and
turn off its supply when idle. Only the high-Vt power switches
(and any retention logic) keep leaking.
These are proportion estimates. Real leakage also depends on cell type, input states, stacking, and temperature, so sign-off uses the library's characterized leakage values.
Summary
In this tutorial, you learned:
- Below Vth, thermally energetic carriers still cross the source barrier, so OFF current falls exponentially but never reaches zero
- Subthreshold swing is the gate voltage per 10× change in current: about 60 mV/decade at best, 70-100 mV/decade in real devices
- Each swing's worth of Vth reduction multiplies OFF leakage by about 10, which limits how far Vth and VDD can scale
- Short channels suffer Vth roll-off and DIBL because the drain shares control of the channel with the gate
- FinFET and gate-all-around structures restore gate control but do not beat the thermal limit
- Leakage is managed during implementation with multi-Vt cells, power gating, stacking, and body biasing