×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Andy Grove Says End Of Moore's Law At Hand

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the ibm-says-otherwise dept.

Intel 520

Jack William Bell writes "Intel chief Andy Grove says Moore's Law has reached its limit. Pointing to current leaks in modern chips, he says -- "Current is becoming a major factor and a limiter on how complex we can build chips," said Grove. He said the company' engineers "just can't get rid of" power leakage. -- But, of course, this only applies to semiconductor chips, there is no guarantee that some other technology will not take over and continue the march of smaller, cheaper and faster processors. I remember people saying stuff like this years ago before MOSFET." Update: 12/11 22:01 GMT by T : Correction: the text above originally mangled Andy Grove's name as "Andy Moore."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

520 comments

first palestinian terrorist post (-1)

c0nfucio-licious (594487) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864021)

palestinians are terrorists, and the rivers of blood that will soon flow from Iraq will wash palestine into the sea, where they belong.

Palestinian Joke (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864042)

Q: How long does it take a Palestinian to make a bomb?
A: 9 months.

Re:Palestinian Joke (-1)

c0nfucio-licious (594487) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864058)

LOL!!! Moderators, mod this up! Any joke about filthy palestinians deserve nothing less!

Re:Palestinian Joke (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864199)

I AM GREATER THAN ALLAH

ISLAM IS TEH SUCK. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864210)

Andy Moore? (5, Informative)

ikewillis (586793) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864029)

Shouldn't that be Andy Grove and Gordon Moore?

More like Michael Moore... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864219)

More like Michael Moore...

Chip design and simulation software like OpenDK [fazigu.org] can takedown these so-called leakage "problems" and "barriers".

This is just a bunch of FUD from Intel to justify higher chip prices. The more they talk the "moore" they sound like "big oil" and "big tobacco"!

Long Live Moore! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864036)


And his law... and first post while I am at it....

(I wonder if he is spinning in his grave at faster and faster intervals.... with each breakthrough in speed!)

Moore's Law (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864046)

I wonder if there's a similar law representing toxicity to the environment of semiconductor manufacturing techniques.

Re:Moore's Law (4, Funny)

Twirlip of the Mists (615030) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864154)

Oooh, so Mother Nature needs a favor?! Well maybe she should have thought of that when she was besetting us with droughts and floods and poison monkeys! Nature started the fight for survival, and now she wants to quit because she's losing. Well I say, "Hard cheese."

Re:Moore's Law (2)

N3WBI3 (595976) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864192)

I dont know why dont you use the **COMPUTER** youre on to do some research with software developed on other **COMPUTERS** to find out why the demand for Si based devices is so high..

Kinda like someone driving to an environmental protest in a yukon..

Other materials (3)

dirvish (574948) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864048)

But, of course, this only applies to semiconductor chips, there is no guarantee that some other technology will not take over and continue the march of smaller, cheaper and faster processors.

I think they will just move away from silicon. Perhaps we have reached the limits of silicon but their is lots of research being done by acedamia and chip manufacturers on other materials.

Re:Other materials (2)

N3WBI3 (595976) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864158)

yea, materials science is going to get even bigger in the next couple of years. I should not have changed from Chemical to Electrical engineering ;).

I dont think semiconductors are going anywhere any time soon, because there is no viable technology that I am aware of to replace them. When we see an alternative form of processing born we can start the countdown to the end of semiconductors.

I did a paper a while back on Optical based systems using optically controlled polarization rotators, filters, and the like to do binary and trinary logic but the loss and size of such devices is huge.

Hmm.... (4, Interesting)

craenor (623901) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864060)

I'm curious what kind of results the experimentation in superconductivity and semi-conductors will yield. They sound kind of mutually exlusive. But we may yet see Moore's Law revived and revised...

Course, that's probably 15 years away...

I remember... (4, Funny)

216pi (461752) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864064)

...hearing this news the first time in 1989 and I read it the second time in 1994.

So. we'll see. I wonder if it now starts applying to graphic cards.

In all seriousness.......... (1)

Ride-My-Rocket (96935) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864228)

In those two cases, wasn't the same decision reached by consensus? That is, the general scientific public thought that Moore's Law had been reached......... but I believe this is the first time that somebody this close to the originator of said law (Andy Grove) has agreed with the belief.

Of course, I'm by no means a history buff, so I could be wrong............ and who knows, maybe Andy Grove's opinon doesn't really count, either.

15% ! (5, Funny)

nogoodmonkey (614350) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864065)

The industry is used to power leakage rates of up to fifteen per cent, but chips constructed of increasing numbers of transistors can suffer power leakage of up to 40 per cent said Grove.

No wonder my laptop only gets about a hour of runtime on its battery. :-)

Re:15% ! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864132)

Get a Mac, dumbass!

Re:15% ! (2)

nogoodmonkey (614350) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864145)

Actually my laptop is a Mac. An hour of battery might be a high estimate too. It's more like 45 minutes. :-/

Re:15% ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864167)

how old is it? all batteries wear out after a couple of years.

Re:15% ! (2)

nogoodmonkey (614350) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864214)

Pretty old. The laptop was manufactured in 97 and I have replaced the battery once since then. I use it plugged in all the time, so its not too big of an issue. I wonder if Apple assumes this same 15% power loss.

Re:15% ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864284)

Ahh, ok... A 1997 PowerPC would experience nowhere near the quoted 15% energy dissipation. Your problem is battery related.

-Original Anonymous Jerkface

Re:15% ! (1)

C_nemo (520601) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864300)

batteries degrade even faster when they are fully charged, you should drain it completly to keep it up to specs.

Re:15% ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864172)

well.. ahem.. eh... what's all this egg doing all over my face? ahem...

New battery perhaps?

Well... (2, Redundant)

The Great Wakka (319389) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864068)

haven't people been saying that for quite a while now?

Re:Well... (2)

N3WBI3 (595976) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864251)

Actually I think what people generally refer to when they pull the moors law card is the quantum effects you get as you make transistors smaller (e.g. 1000 electrons behaves like ten groups of 100 electrons, and 100 behaves pretty much like 5 groups of 20, but when you get down to single digits the behavior is totally different).

As transistors get smaller fewer electrons are used to trigger it, but when the number get low enough that the quantum behavior of the electron is a factor the current model can not be expanded any more..

I could be wrong, just my 2 cents..

In Soviet Russia (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864077)

the limit reaches you!

Great! (5, Funny)

Lagged2Death (31596) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864080)

So, this means that anything that possibly can go wrong no longer will! Hey, I'm all for that!

What? Moore's Law? Oh. Nevermind.

Short sighted, or just playing it safe? (5, Interesting)

Marx_Mrvelous (532372) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864086)

Seeing as he is a big part of a major CPU firm Intel, is he being short-sighted (which I doubt) or is he trying to brace the market for a slowdown in CPU clock speed?

It might help the company if expectations for new CPUs aren't higher than what they can produce.

Personally, my vote goes for optical CPUs as the wave of the future. Larger than curent CPUs might not be a problem if they don't put off much heat.

Re:Short sighted, or just playing it safe? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864129)

"Seeing as he is a big part of a major CPU firm Intel"

Nice english you fucking retard.

IN SOVIET RUSSIA... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864171)

Retards are fucking you!

Re:Short sighted, or just playing it safe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864204)

What is up with these weak trolls nowadays? Either it's a old goatse link or it's just some random profanities, where are all the clever ones that would really make people take the bait? Really trolls, do try to put some effort into it.

Re:Short sighted, or just playing it safe? (4, Interesting)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864169)

Sounds likely. AMD have been saying - and demonstrating - for years that clock speed isn't the whole story.

Also, we're just not finding compelling applications to drive upgrade cycles in the home and office. We have a few years until we reach movie quality real time rendering, and after that, what do we need more speed for? If AMD and Intel are gambling on the mass market wanting to perform ever faster ripping of movies and audio, they'd better stop supporting Palladium, hadn't they?

Re:Short sighted, or just playing it safe? (5, Interesting)

Usquebaugh (230216) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864294)

Optical CPUs are still only research projects and nobody is sure these things are going to work as well as silicon. I talked with somebody at Livermore regarding feasability and his take was never. 30+ years of chip evolution is not going to be beaten by a few research projects. The bar is set to high for optical to come in.

I'm more hopeful that we might get away from the whole stupid clock idea and go asynchronos. This area seems to be opening up more and more. It's beena round for ever but nobody could find a reason to go to the extra expense.

If Moores law fails then I guess SMP will become mainstream. I mean it's either that or software engineers write programs that are efficient. I expect to see an aerobatic display by flying pigs before I see an efficient program.

sure sure... (4, Funny)

jfroot (455025) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864087)

As the submitter eluded to; this has been said so many times before that I simply don't believe it. I remember reading the same thing about 100Mhz being the fastest we could build. Technology will find away as long as people are willing to buy it. And people will be willing to buy it because we all need to run Quake 4, 5, 6 etc.

Re:sure sure... (4, Interesting)

cheezedawg (413482) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864203)

A couple of things:

- Grove said basically the same thing you said- if better insulators or other technologies aren't developed, Moore's Law could become "redundant" in 10 years.

- That said, there are other ways to increase chip performance other than increasing transistor density according to Moore's law. Grove cites a few of them in that article (more efficient transistors, multiple cores, etc). So you will still be able to play the latest Quake in 10 years.

Re:sure sure... (5, Interesting)

grungebox (578982) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864213)

Well...it's a little bit harder to manage this time around. As transistors get smaller, if I remember correctly, one of the main reasons for current leakage is quantum tunneling between the source and drain of a given transistor as the channel length decreases (I think). Also, you get leakage through electrons/holes tunneling though the gate of the MOSFET as the insulating material decreases in width. You can't really outmaneuver quantum mechanics.

Of course, I think something else will pop up (like the aforementioned optoelectronic switch, perhaps), since companies are resourceful folks. Academia is good about researching ways to reduce current leakage, and my prof says high-K dielectric insulators are a good way to reduce leakage through the gate. Whatever...something will come up.

My point is that the situation now is a lot more physically complex than that of, say, 1989 or something, where the limitation was "we can't go past 100 MHz because we haven't thought of a way to do it!" Now it's more "we can't go past [whatever]Ghz because of goddamn physics!"

By the way, anyone else think Gordon Moore gets a little too much by having a "law" named after him? I mean, sheesh...all he did was draw a freakin' best-fit curve on a plot of easily-found data. And on top of that, Moore's Law isn't a law at all...it's a statistic.

"The End" (4, Insightful)

FosterSJC (466265) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864088)

The end of Moore's law is heralded on Slashdot every 2 months or so; it comes at the hand of new materials (copper, etc), new layering techniques, the ever-popular quantum computing, etc. Frankly, it doesn't seem to me to be that useful a benchmark anymore. The article says it will come sooner, but I foresee in 7 to 10 years the physical production, leakage stoppage and general quality of the chips will be so perfected that Moore's law will no longer be applicable to silicon chips. But, by then, new sorts of chips will be available to pick up the slack. So let us say farewell to silicon, and enjoy it while it lasts. It is like the fossil fuels problem really, except the industry is slightly more willing to advance, having set up years in advance a healthy pace to keep.

Re:"The End" (5, Funny)

tigertigr (610853) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864274)

I predict that, henceforth, these "The End of Moore's Law" articles will double in number every 18 months or so. Eventually all the posts we see on Slashdot will be about The End of Moore's Law. Furthermore, I propose we call this new law Les's Law.

Great! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864090)

Now I can just buy a really fast computer and know that I'll never need to upgrade again!

LOL +1 Funny (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864197)

Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment ... like the body or the subject!)

So, back to Don Knuth's Books? (5, Insightful)

sisukapalli1 (471175) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864091)

I hope this means back to actually finding ways of optimizing code, and not the standard "We can throw money at it", or "Next year computers will be twice as fast".

However, may be better processor architectures and clusters will keep the march going.

Either way, I believe some progress would be made.

S

Re:So, back to Don Knuth's Books? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864138)

Perhaps we could write code to optimize code, then run that code through the code optimizer?

Why not do like M$? (2)

glrotate (300695) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864298)

Perhaps we could write code to optimize code, then run that code through the code optimizer?

I believe the SOP at M$ is to take the result of the above and the run it through the optimizer again. Usualy this results in a 5-7% speedup.

According to most sources the plan for LongHorn is to at the end run it through the optimizer one more time. They think that this could net another 2-3%. We'll see.

Screw this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864094)

I'm still waiting for my quantum computer...

Newton? (5, Funny)

pa3gvr (548273) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864096)

As long as Newton's law stays in effect I am not to worried.

BTW do most of the users really need fast machines? I can do all my work without any problems on my 333Mhz PII

CU :-) Sjaak

Re:Newton? (3, Funny)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864160)

>> BTW do most of the users really need fast machines?

Yes. Better, faster, cheaper.

>> can do all my work without any problems on my 333Mhz PII

And you could probably ride a horse to work, too. So what?

Need for Speed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864161)

do most of the users really need fast machines?
But this one goes to ELEVEN!

RMS Goes to the Zoo (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864118)

With a twinkle in his eye and a skip in his step, RMS slammed his sky-blue Chevette's rusted-out car door and turned on heel toward the MIT Zoo entrance. Today was a Sunday, and RMS had decided the daily stresses of Free Software, the GPL, and his "crazy" drug habits could go away for just one afternoon while he enjoyed the zoo.

"That'll be twenty-five dollars, sir," the lady at the admission booth said glumly. She looked at RMS expectantly.

"I was expecting this zoo to be Free," RMS stated loudly, eyes darting around to gauge onlookers' reactions. There were none: RMS's capital F had went unnoticed. "Can you ensure me that this money will not help fund--"

The admissions lady cut him off. "Twenty-five dollars, or twenty bucks with a Mr. Pibb can," the lady cut in.

With a grumble and shake of his beard, RMS handed over twenty five of his hard-earned dollars. Considering that the GPL works to unemploy programmers, one must wonder where this money came from...

By evening, RMS found himself in front of the penguin exhibit. He felt himself start to sweat, which would have been no surprise-- his thick, full, grizzly beard must be worth a thousand down comforters-- except that he was wearing only a pair of nylon biking shorts and a travel pack around his waist. He stared at his hands. What was wrong?

"AWWWK!" a nearby bird offered. RMS wheeled in the direction the screech had come from. He was met with the steely, unfeeling stares of a penguin. "AWK! Ooooh God, the penguin said AWK... lord, lord lord, it's LINUX. THE PENGUIN IS TUX!" RMS blurted out. He felt dizzy, and cold sweat now washed over his brittle, hairy chest. He looked this way and that. From nearby a bird again squawked.

"AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWK"

RMS ran as fast as his atrophied hippy-programmer legs could carry him, right thru a gate and into an exhibit. He realized what he had done, and before he could turn around, he heard a low, ominous sound. Like the Devil's riding mower. "MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" RMS gasped.

MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

He was standing in the Gnu section, and it seemed these bull yaks were in rut and ready to mate with the first hairy thing with a hole in its center they found. Bad luck for RMS and his beard. Just then he felt cloven hooves push him down...

Re:RMS Goes to the Zoo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864187)

He was standing in the Gnu section, and it seemed these bull yaks were in rut and ready to mate with the first hairy thing with a hole in its center they found. Bad luck for RMS and his beard. Just then he felt cloven hooves push him down...
See pictures [mini-itx.com] of this.

The End of Moore's Law (4, Insightful)

jazman_777 (44742) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864123)

If it's the end, it wasn't a law to start with, then, was it?

Re:The End of Moore's Law (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864248)

well, not really.

lots of 'laws' aren't really, but since they apply in a useful domain, they are called 'laws'.

for example, Hookes 'law' for a spring-mass system is just the first order expansion...

DAMN IT! (2, Funny)

Nevermore-Spoon (610798) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864124)

I wanted to live to see 1 atom wide transistors

Re:DAMN IT! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864215)

Yeah, well... I know you're trying to be funny, but that just can't happen. Think about how transistors work... and then think about what is needed in the smallest functional block to achieve "transistor-ness". It will take a little more that a single atom.

Now having one-atom-wide interconnects is something to look forward to. Isn't someone somewhere doing research on carbon nano-tubes with metal atoms in the center to create nano-wires? Something like that? Anyone? Bueller?

I guess it isn't a Law then (4, Interesting)

Headius (5562) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864126)

I've always had issues with calling Moore's Law a "Law". Nobody has conclusively proven it. It should instead be called "Moore's Hypothesis" or "Moore's Theorem" if you're more optimistic...

Re:I guess it isn't a Law then (2, Insightful)

corsec67 (627446) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864201)

Hypothesis is more approiate. He observed something, that processor power doubles every 18 months, and said that that trend might continue. No one has proved it yet.

Re:I guess it isn't a Law then (1)

WhyDoubt (472635) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864257)

Maybe a 'postulate' or an 'axiom'?
I believe in the hyphothesis/theorum/law
progression, there is some implication that
it is *provable*. I don't believe Moore's
whatchamacallit is.

Re:I guess it isn't a Law then (1)

p3d0 (42270) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864276)

It's called "Moore's Law" in the same sense as "power law": it is a trendline that matches the data.

Re:I guess it isn't a Law then (1)

mph (7675) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864288)

Theorems are backed up with mathematical proof. The Pythagorean theorem, for example.

You're confusing it with the much weaker, colloquial use of the word "theory."

Well, possibly... (2, Informative)

Jay Addison (631128) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864134)

People have been predicting the end of Moore's law for ages - it seems to come up every couple of years at least. But, technology always seems to beat the critics (the poster mentions MOSFETs).

Just recently I attended a seminar by a Cambridge lecturer discussing the performance benefits of quantum computing - 1/n*root(n) maximum search relationship for unsorted lists, which seems silly - but thats just quantum stuff for you - who knows, maybe it'll be the next jump to break against Moore's law. Does still look like its a while off though.

Arrogant Intel (2, Insightful)

Bendebecker (633126) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864137)

Just because Their engineers can't solve the problem, the problem must be unsolvable.

Re:Arrogant Intel (2, Interesting)

cheezedawg (413482) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864305)

Hmmm- I didn't see anywhere in the article where Grove said it is "unsolvable". Lets read what the article actually said:

He said the company' engineers "just can't get rid of" power leakage.

Sounds to me like he is just saying Intel hasn't solved it yet (but neither has anybody else).

Thank Godness! (3, Insightful)

dokebi (624663) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864143)

Moore's law is finally coming to an end. Seriously, continous and rapid advance of processing power is the one thing that's holding back affordable universal and pervasive computing in schools. These cash strapped schools cannot afford to replace text books every two years, let alone computers that cost hundreds more. Things are better now because relatively useful computers can be had for very cheaply, compared to just a few years ago, but scrapping Moore's law altogether is even better. Steve Wazniak also agrees [wired.com]

Measured by what? (2, Insightful)

narq (464639) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864152)

While Intel's batch of in-design processors may not keep up, and the engineers' current take on things seem to be dim, I would think a longer period would have to go by before it could be determined whether Moore's laws will hold. New designs have caused great jumps in the past that have kept the overall change of things in line with Moore's law.

Well maybe... (5, Insightful)

Chicane-UK (455253) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864156)

..if Intel and AMD hadn't got locked into that stupid GHz battle and instead concentrated on optimizing their CPU design (rather than just ramping up the speed silly amounts) then there might have still be a few more years left before it became such a problem.

Maybe thats the way forward? Optimisations and improvements on the chips instead of raw clock speed....?

Re:Well maybe... (5, Insightful)

dillon_rinker (17944) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864291)

If there'd been no competition, you're absolutely correct that we'd have had better CPU designs, and overall performance would likely have been orders of magnitude below what it is now.

So, speed and feature size are as good as they're going to get, and they were easy to do. Now we can work on the hard stuff with the benefit of all the processor power we've got sitting around unused.

Don't optimize the hard stuff until you've optimized the easy stuff.

Moore's Law Applies to Stories Like This (4, Funny)

MattW (97290) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864159)

The number of stories posted on Slashdot about the end of Moore's Law will double every 18 months.

How many times have they already said this? (1)

LegendNH (65593) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864175)

I have read things like this for years. That the future chips won't be able to follow Moore's law and time and time again it has.

So take this with a grain of salt

What the...? (1)

C0LDFusion (541865) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864190)

I remember macslash running an article a little under a year ago about how a Germanium chip had reached nearly 100 mhz but wasn't on the desktop because of the cooling requirements and the lack of practical bus application.

You mean, we're stalled at 3 Mhz? That's BS. We have a 100 Mhz chip, if you can crank the bus speeds to make it practical and make it drain less power so it doesn't overheat without a liquid nitro system.

Chicken little (2)

tuxlove (316502) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864194)

Ever so often someone prominent proclaims, "The end of Moore's Law is near!" People listen, because this person is usually someone people listen to. And then he's proven wrong.

It may be true that the current chip technology has reached its end, no more progress possible. But believing that's "the end" is shortsighted. There has always been yet another way to see the law complied with. I do not doubt we will again this time. Be it optical, asynchronous logic, new materials, or whatever, it will probably happen.

It's not time to call Moore's law dead just yet.

Again? (2)

ColdGrits (204506) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864200)

Someone or other is ALWAYS saying that we are about to hit the end of Moore's so-called "Law".

Then again, they said it woudl be impossible to make semiconductors using geometries of less than 1 micron; they said that 8x was the fastest a CDROM could ever hope to read; they said that 14,400 baud was the fastest the telephone system could handle; and so on.

They were all wrong, just as Mr Grove most likely will be.

Still, I suppose if you prophecy doom often enough, you will eventually be right!

What will Joe Sixpack do? (2)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864205)

If he can't get a 1.21 THz Pentium9 to surf the web, chat on AIM, and have his kids type school reports on? How can people possibly learn, communicate, or work? Oh, the humanity!

In Soviet Russia, Moore's Law ends YOU!

Another Perspective (1)

privacyt (632473) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864238)

Perhaps this is GOOD NEWS that Moore's Law may no longer be valid. To understand why, read The Unabomber's Manifesto. http://www.panix.com/~clays/Una/ Hopefully our "utterly reckless ride into the unknown" (to use the Unabomber's description of technological advancement) will at least slow down.

It is not in the best interest of a freedom-loving people to have the computing power of the Pentagon's Total Information Awareness office double every 18 months. It's therefore time for Moore's Law to take a break for awhile.

Moore's law is all about transistor density (4, Interesting)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864244)

or am I wrong?

So we're running out of ways to pack more and more transistors into a device. There's still a ton of room to improve the layout of those transistors, the world is full of whines about x86 architecture.

This doesnt mean 'computers are as good as they're going to get', it just means the fabrication plants are as good as they're going to get.

...this years ago before MOSFET? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4864249)

MOSFET? I had a '73 Toshiva tuner/amp/BSR turntable combo (kid, I was) that proclaimed MOSFETs on its label. Whooopdeeeedooooodaaaa! The solution is to get away from silcon entirely, and onto .... (if I told you I'd have a couple of big-bads around to off me).

Off Topic (Slightly)... (2)

zentec (204030) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864253)

...but did anyone catch the last paragraph.

Finally an American CEO that understands the problems of shifting operations overseas.

We are definetly mortgaging the future of our children for today's short-term buck. Far too many businesses are willing to sell their souls to the people that could one day go to war with the US.

Would be news except... (-1, Flamebait)

MacGoldstein (619138) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864255)

We mac users have known Moore's Law hasn't worked for years! I mean, just look at the PPC's progress: It goes against all of Moore's speculations.

[ More Quotes Like This ] (5, Interesting)

ekrout (139379) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864256)

How many times do we have to hear people put their foot in their mouth? I would have thought Intel would've known better!

But what ... is it good for?
- Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.

I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.
- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.

What can be more palpably absurd than the prospect held out of locomotives traveling twice as fast as stagecoaches?
- The Quarterly Review, England (March 1825)

The abolishment of pain in surgery is a chimera. It is absurd to go on seeking it. . . . Knife and pain are two words in surgery that must forever be associated in the consciousness of the patient.
- Dr. Alfred Velpeau (1839) French surgeon

Men might as well project a voyage to the Moon as attempt to employ steam navigation against the stormy North Atlantic Ocean.
- Dr. Dionysus Lardner (1838) Professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy, University College, London

The foolish idea of shooting at the moon is an example of the absurd length to which vicious specialization will carry scientists working in thought-tight compartments.
- A.W. Bickerton (1926) Professor of Physics and Chemistry, Canterbury College, New Zealand

[W]hen the Paris Exhibition closes electric light will close with it and no more be heard of.
- Erasmus Wilson (1878) Professor at Oxford University

Well informed people know it is impossible to transmit the voice over wires and that were it possible to do so, the thing would be of no practical value.
- Editorial in the Boston Post (1865)

That the automobile has practically reached the limit of its development is suggested by the fact that during the past year no improvements of a radical nature have been introduced.
- Scientific American, Jan. 2, 1909

Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.
- Lord Kelvin, ca. 1895, British mathematician and physicist

Radio has no future
- Lord Kelvin, ca. 1897.

While theoretically and technically television may be feasible, commercially and financially I consider it an impossibility, a development of which we need waste little time dreaming.
- Lee DeForest, 1926 (American radio pioneer)

There is not the slightest indication that [nuclear energy] will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.
- Albert Einstein, 1932.

Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 19,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and perhaps only weigh 1.5 tons.
- Popular Mechanics, March 1949.
(Try the laptop version!)

There is no need for any individual to have a computer in their home.
- Ken Olson, 1977, President, Digital Equipment Corp.

I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't lastout the year.
- The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957.

[Quotes from this page [athenet.net].]

In unrelated news... (2)

aengblom (123492) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864261)

Intel announced plans to "double the number" we put in front of the letters "G, H, and Z" every 18 months.

"It will be a boon to our company," said Grove. "Consumers like more G,H, and z's and investors like more money!"

Process technology (2)

ottffssent (18387) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864277)

Current process technology may be running into limits. Bulk CMOS, SOI, copper interconnects, stretched silicon - these are all improvements but may be at the end of the road. In any event, there are newer things on the horizon like GaAs and various magicks with industrial diamond. So while CMOS may be doomed (and really, I think it is, but the old girl's still got a few years left in her), the semiconductor industry isn't going to shrug its collective shoulders and say "That's all folks! We had a fun time of it, we're going to have to stop now."

There should be a law... (3, Redundant)

bartman (9863) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864282)

... stating that Moore's Law is questioned once every 16 months.

Hitting the silicon wall, revisited (1)

hpulley (587866) | more than 11 years ago | (#4864292)

When doing my M.Sc. in VLSI in the mid '90s, I saw an Intel talk about the end of Moore's law. This was about the time that the first Pentiums were out. They said that by the end of the decade (which at that time would be the year 2000) they would hit the 'silicon wall'.

They said a 1GHz clock was the limit -- where are we today with clocks? 3GHz today and still rising.

They said 1 volt was the limit and the current generation of laptop processors run at 0.95V, already below the limit. How much lower they can go, I don't know.

They are down .13 micron processes but EUVL allows for down to 0.03 micron manufacturing processes so we have a ways to go there in CPUs before we have to go beyond extreme ultraviolet.

Surprisingly, they weren't worried about current leakage a decade ago so perhaps this parameter really will define the position of the silicon wall but I wouldn't bet on it.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...