3 ms·
The article is click bait. Moore's law may slow down, but it will not be predicted in the Economist. For example, a quote from the article: "Moore’s law was n
by sounds 11y ago
The article is click bait. Moore's law may slow down, but it will not be predicted in the Economist.
For example, a quote from the article:
"Moore’s law was never a physical law, but a self-fulfilling prophecy—a triumph of central planning"
The physics and triumphs of engineering were all about physical law; "The end of Moore's law" was always just around the corner because of physics.
No central planning led Intel to invest their billions in R&D.
Central planning can neither force nor halt additional refinements in transistor density or alternate ways to compute.
- Retric 11y agoMoore’s has been slowing down for a long time. In 1965 he wrote a paper predicting a doubling every year. In 1975 it was revised to double ~every 2 years. With 18 months as suggested by someone else being the accepted target for quite a while. Intel failed to keep up with every 2 years back in 2012. CEO of Intel, announced that "our cadence today is closer to two and a half years than two.” This is scheduled to hold through the 10 nm width in late 2017.