3 ms·
> when Moore's Law hits physical limits? It already did. Sophie Wilson said [0] its 28nm for ever. Scaling further makes no economic sense (unless you really n
by qznc 10y ago
> when Moore's Law hits physical limits?
It already did. Sophie Wilson said [0] its 28nm for ever. Scaling further makes no economic sense (unless you really need the space, e.g. in Smartphones).
[0] https://youtu.be/_9mzmvhwMqw?t=34m4s https://youtu.be/_9mzmvhwMqw?t=34m4s
- strictnein 10y ago> It already did. Sophie Wilson said [0] its 28nm for ever. That's not quite what her slide said. It's that the transistors on 14nm are _currently_ more expensive than those at 28nm, although that may change. And then she states that only some things will make sense to do at less than 28nm. But a lot of the really big players are already at 14nm or will be there very shortly. Apple, Intel, Samsung, AMD and Nvidia are at 14nm now, either for their newest products or ones to be introduced later this year.
- deepnotderp 10y agofwiw, 14/16nm is now cheaper than 28nm due to wafer price cuts and improved yields
- obsurveyor 10y agoAre you talking about something different here? Kaby Lake is 14nm.
- sqeaky 10y agoWe have a really small sample size and forever is a long time.