2 ms·
Frequency increases haven't held. Strictly, Moore's Law is about transistor density - and it's holding so far. Relevant here is the corollary, that transistors
by hyp0 13y ago
Frequency increases haven't held. Strictly, Moore's Law is about transistor density - and it's holding so far.
Relevant here is the corollary, that transistors per unit cost doubles every 1.5 years (also held), which in 5 years is approx x10 (10.0793684), so x1,000 in 15 years.
Assuming this simulation is largely parallelizable (likely, because matter acts locally), then for whatever the hardware it ran on cost, in 15 years it should take 5 * 60/1000= .3 seconds per frame (not 0.04s, for 25 fps). In 20 years, it would be .03s (33 fps). But consider that fakey shortcuts that look OK will be assiduously sought.
Moore's Law (and especially this corollary) have a few years left, but maybe not 15 years... However, I'm optimistic about another technology taking over (as has happened previously). There's plenty of scope, considering what brains and cellular machinery can do. (I think the quantum stuff is BS. Probably.)
- TylerE 13y agoExactly - but look at how long basically everyone has been at 28nm ... it's getting REALLY hard to shrink farther.