Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DARPA Expert Believes Moore’s Law to Remain Viable Till 2020 - 2022.
Xbitlabs ^ | 08/29/2013 11:50 PM | Anton Shilov

Posted on 08/30/2013 8:17:02 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

From time to time various experts come up with predictions regarding the end of Moore’s law, economical and technological viability to double the number of transistors per chip every two years. Some companies believe that economical efficiencies of Moore’s law are going to drastically decrease on 20nm node. But a DARPA expert believes that the law will lose its feasibility in 2020 – 2022, or at 5nm or 7nm nodes.

(Excerpt) Read more at xbitlabs.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Computers/Internet
KEYWORDS: darpa; hitech; mooreslaw

1 posted on 08/30/2013 8:17:02 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Dateline Jan 2021: Students at City College leverage minor improvements in technology to extend Moore's law to 2040....

One lesson I've learned about technology is that you can't predict the future, and if you try, you will almost always underpredict.

/johnny

2 posted on 08/30/2013 8:20:55 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Some companies believe that economical efficiencies of Moore’s law are going to drastically decrease on 20nm node.

They said the same thing when the process went down under a micron...........

3 posted on 08/30/2013 8:21:09 AM PDT by Red Badger (It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong. .....Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

It should be called Moore’s conjecture, not Moore’s law.


4 posted on 08/30/2013 8:22:26 AM PDT by I want the USA back
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Is that the date range when Skynet becomes self-aware?


5 posted on 08/30/2013 8:23:36 AM PDT by edpc (Wilby 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edpc

When we all become the slobs like in the movie Wall-E and it doesn’t matter anymore. We won’t know how it works machine will make machines.


6 posted on 08/30/2013 8:32:25 AM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
One lesson I've learned about technology is that you can't predict the future, and if you try, you will almost always underpredict.

Oh, I dunno. I'd guess it's probably safe to predict there'll be lots of new products, and the witless hype will be louder than ever.

7 posted on 08/30/2013 8:32:41 AM PDT by Standing Wolf (No tyrant should ever be allowed to die of natural causes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Michael Moore?

Able to double his weight every two years?


8 posted on 08/30/2013 8:49:14 AM PDT by Hardraade (http://junipersec.wordpress.com (Obama: the bearded lady of the Muslim Brotherhood))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back

I’ve considered it more a viable goal than a law. It works until it doesn’t.


9 posted on 08/30/2013 8:50:26 AM PDT by rightwingcrazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I thought the original time frame was 18 months!? What happened?

CA....

10 posted on 08/30/2013 8:56:19 AM PDT by Chances Are (Seems I've found that silly grin again....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chances Are

FWIW, here’s the explanation in the opening paragraph of the Wikipedia entry for it:

“Moore’s law is the observation that, over the history of computing hardware, the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles approximately every two years. The period often quoted as “18 months” is due to Intel executive David House, who predicted that period for a doubling in chip performance (being a combination of the effect of more transistors and their being faster).[1]”


11 posted on 08/30/2013 9:00:19 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; cardinal4; ...

Thanks Ernest.

[snip] Some companies believe that economical efficiencies of Moore’s law are going to drastically decrease on 20nm node. But a DARPA expert believes that the law will lose its feasibility in 2020-2022, or at 5nm or 7nm nodes. [/snip]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/22_nanometer

[snip] The ITRS 2006 Front End Process Update indicates that equivalent physical oxide thickness will not scale below 0.5 nm (about twice the diameter of a silicon atom), which is the expected value at the 22 nm node. This is an indication that CMOS scaling in this area has reached a wall at this point, possibly disturbing Moore’s law. [/snip]

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/97469-is-14nm-the-end-of-the-road-for-silicon-lithography

[snip] In 1985, 1 micron — 1,000nm — was the state of the art, and was used by the Intel 80386 processor. By 2004, the micron scale had been abandoned and 90nm processors like the Winchester AMD 64 and Prescott Pentium 4 were the norm... Most current digital devices use processors, sensors, and memory chips based on 45 and 60nm processes because very few silicon foundries — except for Intel — have managed to make the jump to 32nm, let alone 22nm. The fact is, the standard process of arranging components on a silicon wafer using a top-down, layer-by-layer approach, has hit a wall. Even atomic layer deposition, the process that will take us to 22nm, 16-and-14nm, and introduce FinFET “3D” transistors, can go no further... In the case of the 22nm chips — a process that only Intel has mastered and will come to market with Ivy Bridge — the high-x dielectric layer is just 0.5nm thick; just two or three atoms! [/snip]


12 posted on 09/02/2013 5:36:55 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's no coincidence that some "conservatives" echo the hard left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

whoops, that de-HTMLing should have been “the high-K dielectric”


13 posted on 09/02/2013 5:38:30 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's no coincidence that some "conservatives" echo the hard left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Intel launches Haswell desktop processors
(higher freq graphics, slightly better specs, apparently cheaper?)
By Anthony Shvets
Sunday September 1, 2013 16:53
http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2013/2013090101_Intel_launches_Haswell_desktop_processors.html

Ivy Bridge-E Processors Expected To Be Unveiled At IDF 2013
By Adnan Farooqui on 09/02/2013
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2013/09/ivy-bridge-e-processors-expected-to-be-unveiled-at-idf-2013/
[snip] The Ivy Bridge-E based 6-core 3.6Ghz Core i7-4960X, 3.4GHz Core i7-4930K and quadcore 3.7GHz Core i7-4820K are rumored to be released. These three processors will reportedly adopt the LGA 2011 socket and will support the X79 chipset, PCI-Express Gen 3.0 and DDR3 memory. [/snip]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_Bridge_(microarchitecture)

Ivy Bridge is the codename for a line of processors based on the 22 nm manufacturing process developed by Intel’s Israel team. The name is also applied more broadly to the 22 nm die shrink of the Sandy Bridge microarchitecture based on tri-gate (”3D”) transistors, which is also used in the Xeon and Core i7 Ivy Bridge-EX, Ivy Bridge-EP and Ivy Bridge-E microprocessors released in 2013. Ivy Bridge processors are backwards-compatible with the Sandy Bridge platform, but might require a firmware update (vendor specific).[1] In 2011 Intel released 7-series Panther Point chipsets with integrated USB 3.0 to complement Ivy Bridge.[2]

Volume production of Ivy Bridge chips began in the third quarter of 2011.[3] Quad-core and dual-core-mobile models launched on April 29, 2012 and May 31, 2012 respectively.[4] Core i3 desktop processors, as well as the first 22 nm Pentium, were announced and available the first week of September, 2012


14 posted on 09/02/2013 5:51:05 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's no coincidence that some "conservatives" echo the hard left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson