Are we in the violation of the Moore's law now?

Thank you, Folks, for all your illuminating responses! I refreshed my (rather rusty) undestanding of it.

It looks like Moore's is not over yet. My own experience might be just because of my personal needs/habits.. It is good, because Moore's was a major driver of progress in the last few decades...

However, the threats to Moore's (and hopes for it to continue) are on the horizon.. 2nm fabrication is promised in a couple of years.. Wow. Imagine, it is just about 10 atoms thick! Quantum Physics is gonna have its square dance! But also there are good promises like Quantum Computing etc...

kramer1 wrote: ↑ Most CPU tech is recycled, and most generations normally have only incremental improvements. The reason Intel fell behind is they failed to launch a new Arch after the success of Centrino. The Core series are based on tech from Laptop CPUs. The Ryzen AFAIK was a complete rewrite of the AMD Microcode and a completely new architecture. Them integrating the memory controller is part of the reason also.

CPUs today spend most of their time waiting for the RAM to catchup, and so the mem controller helps quite a bit.

This is also done in GPUs. The 1070, 2070, 3070, are normally the 980, 1080 & 2080, just rebadged. Only the leader is the one using the new tech. I'm sure there are exceptions to this, but AMD/Nvidia have been doing this since a very very long time. Infact, AMD often repackages there old GPU designs to sell them again, as new cards.

For example an r9 290x will beat a RX460, by almost 50%, even though that card is based on an "older generation" and is 3 years older

PS: I could be wrong about some of the details, so don't hold me up to them, but in general this should be a pretty accurate overview

What in the world are you talking about? Nearly everything you've written is wrong. It's as if you randomly put a bunch of "computer words" into sentences.

Everything I underlined ranges from totally wrong to complete and utter nonsense.

board123 wrote: ↑ What in the world are you talking about? Nearly everything you've written is wrong. It's as if you randomly put a bunch of "computer words" into sentences.

Everything I underlined ranges from totally wrong to complete and utter nonsense.

Tichi wrote: ↑ Thank you, Folks, for all your illuminating responses! I refreshed my (rather rusty) undestanding of it.

It looks like Moore's is not over yet. My own experience might be just because of my personal needs/habits.. It is good, because Moore's was a major driver of progress in the last few decades...

However, the threats to Moore's (and hopes for it to continue) are on the horizon.. 2nm fabrication is promised in a couple of years.. Wow. Imagine, it is just about 10 atoms thick! Quantum Physics is gonna have its square dance! But also there are good promises like Quantum Computing etc...

So, is threatening and violating Moores make you feel better?

mucat wrote: ↑ So, is threatening and violating Moores make you feel better?

Not at all. Actually, I was very sad. I thought.. Ohhhh... Nooooo ... The progress is over...
But, apparenlty, not. It is just me.. my personal demands..

Exponential growth of computer power will continue!

No moore's law



Performance per Watt Is the New Moore’s Law
The need to decarbonize compute for the sake of our planet means the technology roadmap can no longer prioritize processing power, says Rob Aitken
By Rob Aitken, Fellow & Director of Technology, Arm
https://www.arm.com/blogs/blueprint/per ... e-per-watt


Arm Says Performance Per Watt Is the New Moore's Law
Efficiency becomes the primary goal.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/arm-p ... new-metric


Koomey's law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koomey%27s_law

No human-level AI, no running simulations of our ancestors, no real ray tracing. I think 4k gaming with ultra settings will be the high point, we will never get to 8k ultra.

GPU tech has improved by leaps and bounds and GPGPU has changed the game in terms of raw processing power, you cannot evaluate moore's law by looking at CPU's. Our model of computing is flawed really with the way we shuffle data from the CPU to GPU and back for the type of computing we want to do.

As for comments above about 4k, 8k and AI; this is evolving so fast that it's insane what we've been able to achieve in a few short years since the genie was let out of the bottle for neural networks. With AI hallucinated super sampling we don't even need to do the ridiculous amount of per pixel calculations it takes to do 4k, 8k, 16k or however many pixels you fancy. We don't need to do physics calculations; neural networks can approximate them well enough. Soon enough we won't need animators, voice actors, writers, programmers etc., there is already prototype working software to replace each and every function in the media creation pipeline and this will be mainstream easily in 5 years time. AI is about to turn the world of computing on it's head in terms of how we think about processing power since it takes a fraction of the computing ability for it to create good enough approximations vs brute forcing a difficult task.

Regarding human level AI, if you want to see the future in scary vision then google GPT3 and see what it can already do.

board123 wrote: ↑ What in the world are you talking about? Nearly everything you've written is wrong. It's as if you randomly put a bunch of "computer words" into sentences.

Everything I underlined ranges from totally wrong to complete and utter nonsense.

I mean he is kramer.

Intel says it will work to outpace Moore's Law and create new processors that first catch up to its competitors in 2024 before eclipsing them in 2025, according to the company's chief executive.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/10 ... 5-ceo-says

Moore's Law, a term describing the steady pace of processor progress, was coined by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore. Although the law has been called into question in recent years, Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger said it is "alive and well."

"Today we are predicting that we will maintain or even go faster than Moore's law for the next decade," said Gelsinger at Intel's Innovation event Wednesday. "We as the stewards of Moore's Law will be relentless in our path to innovate."

Moore's Law originally applied to the number of transistors on a chip. More specifically, it was an observation that the number of transistors on a processor doubles every two years. However, the term has since shifted toward referring to performance and power consumption.

On Wednesday, Gelsinger appeared to shift that definition back to transfers, stating that Intel expects "to even bend the curve faster than a doubling every two years."

Intel is confident that it can catch up to TSMC and Samsung by 2024. Through investments and upgrades into more advanced chipmaking technology, it hopes to surpass them in 2025.

Dhanushan wrote: ↑ No moore's law



Performance per Watt Is the New Moore’s Law
The need to decarbonize compute for the sake of our planet means the technology roadmap can no longer prioritize processing power, says Rob Aitken
By Rob Aitken, Fellow & Director of Technology, Arm
https://www.arm.com/blogs/blueprint/per ... e-per-watt


Arm Says Performance Per Watt Is the New Moore's Law
Efficiency becomes the primary goal.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/arm-p ... new-metric


Koomey's law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koomey%27s_law

I wanted to say this. Performance per watt has increased a lot. We have increased power greatly with a significant reduction in power costs.

There are outliers, but in general this seems to be the case. More threads, more cores, more power and less power to run it all.

You are not violating Moore law. You are violating the law of heat and cooling. Materials burn and melt at high heat. Always been the limiting factor in faster computing.

Also code optimization is important. This is why Mac is always laughing at Microsoft. You don't need top of the line hardware if your software is more optimized. Just coders are so lazy to optimize since computing power keeps going up year over year in the 90s.