"No, they don't. The FPGA's have LUTS that represent other logic gates in weird ways for flexibility." LUTs are composed of gates. By gates I mean literal tra

"No, they don't. The FPGA's have LUTS that represent other logic gates in weird ways for flexibility." LUTs are composed of gates. By gates I mean literal transistors etched in the silicon. They're the simplest form of optimization that FPGAs use to get around the cost of re-routable interconnects. However, you seem to be missing my point: that complex tiles will no longer be an advantage, for performance or for differenciation. We're reaching the bottom of what silicon can do, and the rules of the game are going to change - the future isn't going to be just smaller and faster versions of the same thing we have now. And while I agree that differenciation is a powerful driver, it happens just as often as not that the ability to differenciate goes away. That's how we get commoditization. Certainly there will be still be the ability to differenciate based on the various analog peripherals on the chip (GPIOs, DACs, etc.), but in terms of the actual digital FPGA fabric, I think that will go away, and the benefits of standardization and reduced SKUs (i.e. in terms of supply-chain management and economies of scale) will start to win out. And, certainly the market-driven complexity you talk about will always exist, but it will be driven from the silicon side of it.