4 ms·

Which is why Moore's Law was a thing for so long: early transistors were so many orders of magnitude off of fundamental limits that the improvements could keep

Which is why Moore's Law was a thing for so long: early transistors were so many orders of magnitude off of fundamental limits that the improvements could keep up an exponential pace for a long while.

withinboredom 4y ago
Moores law is still a thing, it’s just that the “jumps” between progression along the curve are longer. It will eventually reach infinity, but that’ll be awhile.
- DubiousPusher 4y ago
  Aren't there also issues with some fundamental limits affecting the value of increased transistor density? Like we can cram the transistors in but the benefits aren't the same as before?
  - withinboredom 4y ago
    Who says we have to use transistors? Moore's Law says nothing about transistors.
    - Retric 4y ago
      Mores law is specifically about transistors: “Moore's law is the observation that the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit (IC) doubles about every two years.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law
      - withinboredom 4y ago
        Huh, this is the definition I have: Moore's Law is the prediction that the speed of computer processors doubles every 18 months.
        Retric 4y ago
        That’s a common misunderstanding, you can read the original quotes but to summarize: The observation is named after Gordon Moore, the co-founder of Fairchild Semiconductor and Intel (and former CEO of the latter), who in 1965 posited a doubling every year in the number of components per integrated circuit,[a] and projected this rate of growth would continue for at least another decade. In 1975, looking forward to the next decade, he revised the forecast to doubling every two years, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 41%. While Moore did not use empirical evidence in forecasting that the historical trend would continue, his prediction held since 1975 and has since become known as a "law". The speed of processors actually increased much faster than the number of transistors on a chip until recently. Smaller transistors used to mean both faster switching speeds and the ability to get more done per instruction cycle. The difference between the days of a 4 bit Intel 4004 and a 32Bit 486 was vast.

withinboredom 4y ago

Moores law is still a thing, it’s just that the “jumps” between progression along the curve are longer. It will eventually reach infinity, but that’ll be awhile.

DubiousPusher 4y ago
Aren't there also issues with some fundamental limits affecting the value of increased transistor density? Like we can cram the transistors in but the benefits aren't the same as before?
- withinboredom 4y ago
  Who says we have to use transistors? Moore's Law says nothing about transistors.
  - Retric 4y ago
    Mores law is specifically about transistors: “Moore's law is the observation that the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit (IC) doubles about every two years.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law
    - withinboredom 4y ago
      Huh, this is the definition I have: Moore's Law is the prediction that the speed of computer processors doubles every 18 months.
      - Retric 4y ago
        That’s a common misunderstanding, you can read the original quotes but to summarize: The observation is named after Gordon Moore, the co-founder of Fairchild Semiconductor and Intel (and former CEO of the latter), who in 1965 posited a doubling every year in the number of components per integrated circuit,[a] and projected this rate of growth would continue for at least another decade. In 1975, looking forward to the next decade, he revised the forecast to doubling every two years, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 41%. While Moore did not use empirical evidence in forecasting that the historical trend would continue, his prediction held since 1975 and has since become known as a "law". The speed of processors actually increased much faster than the number of transistors on a chip until recently. Smaller transistors used to mean both faster switching speeds and the ability to get more done per instruction cycle. The difference between the days of a 4 bit Intel 4004 and a 32Bit 486 was vast.