32
Moore's Law is dead, but not for the reasons everyone says
(wumpus-cave.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
32 points (86.4% liked)
Programming
17662 readers
336 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
In short, the death of Moore's Law is about the end of economic scaling of transistors. Packing more transistors on a chip does not save you money like it use to. This contradicts the point of Moore's Law.
So its not about transistor being too small that the electron just jumps from one circuit to another unintentionally?
That might be a contributing factor, but the main reason comes down to cost. Moore's Law originally stated that the cost per integrated component would be cut in half every year. The timeframe was variously adjusted to 24 months or 18 months, but however you want to run the numbers, the cost has not kept up. Starting from the Intel 8008, we're now a few orders of magnitude behind.