3 ms·

> Moore's law is about transistor density, which has already slowed way past what Moore's Law (more like Moore's Observation) noted, a doubling of density aroun

> Moore's law is about transistor density, which has already slowed way past what Moore's Law (more like Moore's Observation) noted, a doubling of density around every ~18 months (give or take 6)... What makes you say that? It looks right on track: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law#/media/File:Moore's_Law_Transistor_Count_1971-2018.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law#/media/File:Moore'... Dennard scaling is the one that has broken down and forced us into multi-core versus high-frequency: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennard_scaling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennard_scaling

theresistor 7y ago
I don't think that chart actually reflects Moore's Law well, because it doesn't normalize for total area. Many of the chips listed, especially at the high end, are very large but not especially dense.
ghaff 7y ago
The two are pretty related though. If you could build a chip with more transistors economically but had to run it at 500MHz for cooling reasons, you probably wouldn't do that. (The exact nature of the challenges in the two domains differ though.) >What makes you say that? It looks right on track: Especially given that the vertical axis is a log scale, it looks to me as if it's flattening out a bit. I'd have to run an actual regression but that's what it looks like in terms of eyeballing. (And it's consistent with what we know of process nodes slipping out.
- birdyrooster 7y ago
  The processors which are creating this flattening of the curve are for low-power, mobile or embedded use-cases where transistor density comes at a bigger cost. The more cores you add, the more overhead power consumption there is for switching.
  - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
    Density affects high end processors too. We already are past the point where it's necessary to throttle down to protect a processor from self-destruction. Nobody wants to employ the sort of heat exchanger necessary to keep running full bore all the time. Power consumption takes a back seat to power density.
    - vardump 7y ago
      It's been past that point more or less for 20 years. Thermal throttling is nothing new.
- BubRoss 7y ago
  People do exactly that. More cores, even at a lower frequency still benefit from the ratio of cycles to memory latency being reduced. The computing power and energy usage is much better, the problem is only software taking advantage of more cores. Intel's most expensive 28 core CPUs have lower clock speeds and more cores.

theresistor 7y ago

I don't think that chart actually reflects Moore's Law well, because it doesn't normalize for total area. Many of the chips listed, especially at the high end, are very large but not especially dense.

ghaff 7y ago

The two are pretty related though. If you could build a chip with more transistors economically but had to run it at 500MHz for cooling reasons, you probably wouldn't do that. (The exact nature of the challenges in the two domains differ though.) >What makes you say that? It looks right on track: Especially given that the vertical axis is a log scale, it looks to me as if it's flattening out a bit. I'd have to run an actual regression but that's what it looks like in terms of eyeballing. (And it's consistent with what we know of process nodes slipping out.

birdyrooster 7y ago
The processors which are creating this flattening of the curve are for low-power, mobile or embedded use-cases where transistor density comes at a bigger cost. The more cores you add, the more overhead power consumption there is for switching.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
  Density affects high end processors too. We already are past the point where it's necessary to throttle down to protect a processor from self-destruction. Nobody wants to employ the sort of heat exchanger necessary to keep running full bore all the time. Power consumption takes a back seat to power density.
  - vardump 7y ago
    It's been past that point more or less for 20 years. Thermal throttling is nothing new.
BubRoss 7y ago
People do exactly that. More cores, even at a lower frequency still benefit from the ratio of cycles to memory latency being reduced. The computing power and energy usage is much better, the problem is only software taking advantage of more cores. Intel's most expensive 28 core CPUs have lower clock speeds and more cores.