Moore's Law Nearing Collapse, Says Physicist



+ Add a Comment


While Moore's law as stated only applies to transister count, it's more generally applicable to overall performance. Anyone with the brains to figure out that a literal interpretation isn't always necessary or proper can see that Moore's law will continue to apply to new technologies both in transistors and in future transistor-less technology. Furthermore, while I do predict a few MAJOR leaps in defiance of moore's law, such as to Quantum Computing, I believe that Moore's law will still be applicable to newer technology.
It's already aparent that Moore's law applies to pretty much any unit that can be said to be atomic. It's recently begun to apply to processor cores and cache sizes instead of simply to bare transister count as well. Moore expressed his law in terms that applied at the time, that is all.



Clarke's First Law: "When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong."



you know this seems like the same old story over an over every couple of years.

every year they improve the process or come up with a new one



Oh really?

Ten years for Moore's Law eh?

Surely this guy is smart enough to know they've been saying exactly this continuously for 20 years. The end of Moore's Law has ALWAYS been 10 years away. Yet every year, the end keeps getting pushed back another year.

Performance is another matter. It seems we have reached a point of diminishing returns...more transistors is giving us ever smaller increases in perceived computing power.



It does seem like Moore's Law is stuck lately. After all, neither Bulldozer, nor Ivy Bridge have offered any real big performance improvements forward (although Ivy Bridge is hopefully laying the groundwork for this, and an outside chance that Bulldozer did as well). Still, we all got used to linear progress over the last two decades, and as the limits if lithography get hit, and max out the number of cores, there will definitely need to be a shift from silicon to new substances. Not sure if proteins will ever be workable as a computer though.



Moore's law concerns the number of transistors we can fit in a given area, not performance.



Geez, and not a word about graphene. It can be used as a semiconductor, it is one the best conductors or electricity AND it is one of the best conductors of heat. It has been made literally in sheets one atom thick. Its better than silicon is so many ways.
People trying to prophesy the future always fail as it is impossible to predict what they cannot possibly know in advance of new ideas. All they are really doing is taking what they DO know and extending it into the future. Take graphene, it was only a theoretical idea and no one believed it could be a real thing. Two scientists in 2004 came up with the idea of using scotch tape and a block of graphite (pencil lead is graphite) to see if they could tease out something. They won the 2010 Nobel prize for it. Scotch tape, pencil lead. Nobel prize.

Now ask Kaku if he predicted graphene or what the NEXT break-thru will be.



What about graphene? Unless individual graphene molecules are transistors, it's not going to help Moore's law keep going.

Moore's law is about transistor density. Not processing speed.



And here IS the next break-thru. I dod not see this coming, how about you Kaku? I rest my case.



Well, I think his point still stands that the manufacturing process is eventually going to bottom out... Intel is predicting having a 4nm process by 2022 ( ). Exactly 10 years from now, as Kaku says in the video.

There's only so far you can go getting thinner and thinner until eventually you're working with single atoms, after which point quantum mechanics come into play as he says in the video.



Quantum mechanics are already in play. Quantum tunneling is already resulting in current leakage issues and it's only going to get worse the smaller you go.



Yep, never say never! I was thinking the same thing about graphene - especially since it's been in the spotlight so much recently as a possible replacement for silicon.

People were predicting Moore's law would end a lot sooner than 10 years from now, and other advances have proved them wrong so far.



Yep, this physicist seems like someone who just wanted his 15 minutes of fame and was willing to use/risk his professional image to get it.

Even if he is right, how does he know that the law won't apply to whatever computational method we "evolve" to? If we jump into molecular, quantum, or DNA (reminds me of Jonny Quest) computers, couldn't Moore's law hold true with just a little tweaking of the language? Replace "transistor" with "cell" and "chip" with "petri dish", for instance? ;)



Don't you mean 40 years of fame? Give or take a few, of course.



I think he's right on the end if you are talking about current silicon-based technology, but I wonder how much the multiple core technology, which is really just starting out, can keep silicon going.

Kaku of course isn't the only genius around (he didn't imply he was, far from it I think), and there are some really smart teams working on silicon.

What I think is that there may be kind of a lag in the Moore's Law-type effect, and then we'll see a jump forward - one that may shatter the Moore's Law rate of progress. If we can actually develop quantum computing to the point where it is workable, it will make silicon look like chiseling on stone.


Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.