6 ms·

I've recently seen two talks on how Moore's Law is alive and kicking, by none other than Jim Keller and (IIRC) a chief scientist at TSMC. Wonder why this notion

I've recently seen two talks on how Moore's Law is alive and kicking, by none other than Jim Keller and (IIRC) a chief scientist at TSMC. Wonder why this notion of Moore's Law dying stays so pervasive.

NortySpock 7y ago
Do you have links to those talks? Here's what I found: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb2tebYAaOA&t=1805s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb2tebYAaOA&t=1805s (94min, jump to 30m for Mr. Keller discussing Moore's law and his interpretation of it.) Jim Keller: Moore's Law, Microprocessors, Abstractions, and First Principles | AI Podcast Lex Fridman, host.
- ksec 7y ago
  I think that is the one people should watch. The 1000x1000x1000 atoms analogy. But then again he hasn't touch on the economic issues of Moore's Law
- ncray 7y ago
  Here's another one: https://eecs.berkeley.edu/research/colloquium/190918 https://eecs.berkeley.edu/research/colloquium/190918 Moore’s Law is Not Dead Wednesday, September 18, 2019
sremani 7y ago
Every 2 years the number of people saying Moore's law is dead doubles. -- A microsoft exec I cannot recall!
magoghm 7y ago
The notion of Moore's Law dying is because John Hennessy and David Patterson said so in their Turing Lecture: https://www.acm.org/hennessy-patterson-turing-lecture https://www.acm.org/hennessy-patterson-turing-lecture
magila 7y ago
To a typical consumer "Moore's Law" used to mean they could buy a computer that's the same price but twice as fast as the one they bought a couple of years ago. That trend has been dead for a while now. The technical definition of Moore's Law is still standing, but it's relevance has retreated into areas where relatively few people notice. E.g. massively multi-core server chips and flagship phone SoCs.
- sudosysgen 7y ago
  This is mostly Intel's fault. The day Ryzen came out, I almost quadrupled the computing power of my similarly priced Intel CPU. If I were to do so again I could get an eight times more powerful CPU for that money.
slongfield 7y ago
Intel and TSMC's business models are built on top of Moore's law continuing, and them maintaining an edge over the lower-end manufacturers. The end of Moore's law is an existential threat to their viability. At the same time, businesses that design specialized architectures, or work on alternative devices have been publishing things about the End of Moore's Law for a long time [1], since it means that their 2x improvement of the day won't be obliterated by next year's Moore's law jump. [1]: E.g, this article from 2000, saying that the "End of Moore's Law" is why their research is relevant https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-0-306-47013-4_1 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-0-306-47013-...

NortySpock 7y ago

Do you have links to those talks? Here's what I found: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb2tebYAaOA&t=1805s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb2tebYAaOA&t=1805s (94min, jump to 30m for Mr. Keller discussing Moore's law and his interpretation of it.) Jim Keller: Moore's Law, Microprocessors, Abstractions, and First Principles | AI Podcast Lex Fridman, host.

ksec 7y ago
I think that is the one people should watch. The 1000x1000x1000 atoms analogy. But then again he hasn't touch on the economic issues of Moore's Law
ncray 7y ago
Here's another one: https://eecs.berkeley.edu/research/colloquium/190918 https://eecs.berkeley.edu/research/colloquium/190918 Moore’s Law is Not Dead Wednesday, September 18, 2019

sremani 7y ago

Every 2 years the number of people saying Moore's law is dead doubles. -- A microsoft exec I cannot recall!

magoghm 7y ago

The notion of Moore's Law dying is because John Hennessy and David Patterson said so in their Turing Lecture: https://www.acm.org/hennessy-patterson-turing-lecture https://www.acm.org/hennessy-patterson-turing-lecture

magila 7y ago

To a typical consumer "Moore's Law" used to mean they could buy a computer that's the same price but twice as fast as the one they bought a couple of years ago. That trend has been dead for a while now. The technical definition of Moore's Law is still standing, but it's relevance has retreated into areas where relatively few people notice. E.g. massively multi-core server chips and flagship phone SoCs.

sudosysgen 7y ago
This is mostly Intel's fault. The day Ryzen came out, I almost quadrupled the computing power of my similarly priced Intel CPU. If I were to do so again I could get an eight times more powerful CPU for that money.

slongfield 7y ago

Intel and TSMC's business models are built on top of Moore's law continuing, and them maintaining an edge over the lower-end manufacturers. The end of Moore's law is an existential threat to their viability. At the same time, businesses that design specialized architectures, or work on alternative devices have been publishing things about the End of Moore's Law for a long time [1], since it means that their 2x improvement of the day won't be obliterated by next year's Moore's law jump. [1]: E.g, this article from 2000, saying that the "End of Moore's Law" is why their research is relevant https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-0-306-47013-4_1 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-0-306-47013-...