3 ms·
Everyone can go and check what was said: http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~agrawvd/COURSE/E7770_Spr07/READ/Gordon_Moore_1975_Speech.pdf http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~agra
by Nokinside 7y ago
Everyone can go and check what was said: http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~agrawvd/COURSE/E7770_Spr07/READ/Gordon_Moore_1975_Speech.pdf http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~agrawvd/COURSE/E7770_Spr07/READ/G...
It's all about complexity per chip. Complexity as number of components per chip.
- coldtea 7y agoNot what TFA said, what "Quarrelsome" said that started this subthread: "I thought Moore's Law effectively ended over a decade ago when we switched to multi-core chips? This ruined all sorts of single-threaded architectures that relied on these performance increases over time and resulted in programmers being less able to realise performance gains in released chips without having to rework their code to accommodate the change." To which someone pedantically replied that Moore's Law is not about performance increases, but transistor count -- to which I replied that that's just one way it has been used (and not the most popular one either, or the more pertinent to the grandparent's question).