5 ms·
This article is complete fluff. There's no _real_ discussion of Moore's law. No new revelations about chip design. You say workloads need to exploit parallelis
by cbarrick 7y ago
This article is complete fluff.
There's no _real_ discussion of Moore's law. No new revelations about chip design. You say workloads need to exploit parallelism these days to see increased performance gains? No shit. Putting memory closer to the logic cores is a good idea? duh. Hell, the author makes the common mistake of conflating AI with ML, because it's clearly illegal for a businessman in any industry to not buzz about "AI".
> by Godfrey Cheng, Head of Global Marketing, TSMC
Yeah, this is fluff.
- perl4ever 7y agoI agree. Seems like almost every article I see about an interesting topic fails to address the core of whatever it's supposed to be covering. If Moore's law does not address speed increase, that's fine; we've heard that before. If this guy thinks that the shrinkage will continue, despite some people's expectations, he should have said something about how and why. Otherwise, just don't publish the article because you have nothing to say. It's like documentation these days that is all autogenerated boilerplate.