> Number of Cores on CPUs have also increased. Correct, though number of cores is far harder to use in software than the higher Mhz/Ghz we enjoyed before. Same

> Number of Cores on CPUs have also increased. Correct, though number of cores is far harder to use in software than the higher Mhz/Ghz we enjoyed before. Same for GPUs. If you can use them you still enjoy a noticable increase in performance, but not all programs (or rather algorithms) can be changed to benefit from more cores and even less commercial ones. > You might say that Dennard scaling is dead. But Dennard scaling isn't Moore's law even thought is gets conflated a lot. Fair enough. I looked this up and the combination of Dennard scaling and Moore's law seems to be called Koomey's law - I've never heard that term before, but it fits the definition of what people usually attribute to Moore's law: > Jonathan Koomey articulated the trend as follows: "at a fixed computing load, the amount of battery you need will fall by a factor of two every year and a half." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koomey%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koomey%27s_law