all 23 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 102 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Lucky it's not an actual law of physics, just a business phrase.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 20 points 9 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Eventually to maintain the law we would have to make the item bigger so it can contain more transistors. Which defeats the spirit of the law which is miniaturisation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    Reading Moore's paper (which is the reference of the marketing person who coined the term), Moore's law isn't just miniaturisation, it was also an observation that's the economics would improve. ie that building N transistors is cheaper on the next smaller node than the previous.

    And without the economics working, the shrinking would never have occurred at the rate it did for so long.

    So yes, it getting bigger would be against the spirit of the law.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [+] 30 points 9 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 25 points 9 months ago

    Since March 24 2023. That's when he passed away so he can't come kick our ass if we're not following his law.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    You can only get smaller for so long until you run up against the limits of physics

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 15 points 9 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Weeeeeeell it does and it doesn't. The trend in chip design this days is to fabricate in three dimensions, which is more complex and expensive but does allow to pack more computing power onto a single chip. The old standard MOSFET transistor architecture hit the wall way back in like 2012, but chips are still getting smaller, just maybe not at the same rate

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah, physical issues on micro devices is a hard cap. I read someone believing we'll make things bigger, not by a lot, but to allot more space to reach greater speeds. So don't expect the old Pentium 1/2 big chip designs but more just being 25% increase in size of the chip. This might not have an effect on circuit boards but don't be surprised to see them getting a bit larger to compensate as well.

    Needless to say, I believe we'll reach a point of that in my lifetime.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    That definitely possible. There is still a lot of ongoing research into new transistor architectures and nanolithography techniques tho, so I wouldn't count out the possibility of moore's law continuing for a couple more decades. It's honestly astonishing how good at this stuff the tech industry really is, it's beyond anything that sci-fi could imagine.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    There should be a campaign to rename it to "Moore's Suggestion" or "Moore's Guideline"

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    (Moore's law also never was a law)

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    I remember when Moore’s law was going strong. Every year or so computers got cheaper and cheaper. Good times.

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago

    Appreciate you not using fedopedia.

  • source
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago

    It physically can't, from what I can tell.

  • source