5 ms·

Sure there are many problems in moore's law, and it's definetly slowing(not sure yet about stopping, because maybe euv lithography will work, or maybe monolithi

by minthd 12y ago

Sure there are many problems in moore's law, and it's definetly slowing(not sure yet about stopping, because maybe euv lithography will work, or maybe monolithic 3d will - quallcomm is said to sells such chips in 2016, or maybe something else). Also there are interesting innovations in the higher levels - how to build much smaller SRAM cells, the use of memristors, etc - which could still support a declining cost for electronics. But i don't agree that the market base is declining.Two major factors in the market base($$) are - the value of uses of computing, and how much of that value chip manufacturers extract.And there are some really killer apps with plenty of value in the future(virtual reality, AI in all it's forms, new large data sets to work with, emerging markets, etc). Also chip makers in many markets get a small share of the created value, and might get more. As for the problem of small/large players and design costs - the solution is platforms, whether GPU/FPGA/CPU or more exotic programmable platform like specialized computer vision chips, or whether it's using chip where some of the layers are already created(and standard) and just creating the rest(like easic is selling) ,which can lead to great design cost reduction and relatively good efficiency. So in general i tend to agree with some guy from darpa who said that we're near the end of moore's law, but we might still be able to get a total of 50x improvement from a combination of things.

marcosdumay 12y ago
> Two major factors in the market base($$) are - the value of uses of computing, and how much of that value chip manufacturers extract. You are defining the market as the entire market for chips, while the GP is talking about the market for next generation chips only. Your definition is useless for a company deciding if they invest in R&D for improving their chips or not. The GP definition is the one Moore's law depends upon.
- minthd 12y ago
  For most of the markets i've defined lower transistor costs and lower power are critical factors and assuming the next generation provides both, they must improve their chips to compete.

by minthd 12y ago

marcosdumay 12y ago

> Two major factors in the market base($$) are - the value of uses of computing, and how much of that value chip manufacturers extract. You are defining the market as the entire market for chips, while the GP is talking about the market for next generation chips only. Your definition is useless for a company deciding if they invest in R&D for improving their chips or not. The GP definition is the one Moore's law depends upon.

minthd 12y ago
For most of the markets i've defined lower transistor costs and lower power are critical factors and assuming the next generation provides both, they must improve their chips to compete.