4 ms·
If anything this necessitates advances in parallel computing. We can keep up with Moores law for a bit longer if we add more cores too.
by tzakrajs 10y ago
If anything this necessitates advances in parallel computing. We can keep up with Moores law for a bit longer if we add more cores too.
- nine_k 10y agoProbably live things had to develop massively-parallel async processing and then things akin to "deep learning" and other thick neural nets because their wetware was (and is) ridiculously slow.
- greggyb 10y agoMoore's law is about transistor density.
- DenisM 10y agoYou don't have to increase density to increase the number of transistors.
- ansible 10y agoYes, but: 1. That's not Moore's Law, which is specifically about density. 2. When you aren't getting density increases, your processing power / memory size / whatever increases linearly with die area. We've been used to living in an age with regular process node shrinks, meaning that more and more powerful computers don't end up being more expensive. Sometimes the cost goes down while the performance goes up. We're seeing the end of that right now.
- Symmetry 10y agoTraditionally the term has been mostly about speed rather than density. Well, a lot of people say it's about transistors per chip since Moore wrote a paper on that doubling and that was the first time people noticed periodic doubling in the semiconductor industry. But it took almost 10 years for "Moore's Law" to come into currency and in the mean time Moore had made lots of speeches about lots of different doubling. And the term "Moore's Law" has never really referred to one aspect of semiconductor technology in particular since during the era of Dennard scaling they all improved together.