Design Con 2015
Breaking News
News & Analysis

The Limits of Moore's Law Limits

8/13/2014 02:40 PM EDT
20 comments
NO RATINGS
2 saves
Page 1 / 2 Next >
More Related Links
View Comments: Threaded | Newest First | Oldest First
daleste
User Rank
CEO
Moore's what?
daleste   8/13/2014 10:02:58 PM
NO RATINGS
The first problem is that Moore's law is not a law, but only an observation.  We have reduced the cost of integrated circuits over the years and we will continue to do that with many inovations.  But there is no guarantee that it will continue forever and we all knew that.

R_Colin_Johnson
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Moore's what?
R_Colin_Johnson   8/13/2014 10:54:18 PM
NO RATINGS
You are absolutely right. I think Markov is trying to enumerate those areas whose areas where innovations can be most effective.

daleste
User Rank
CEO
Re: Moore's what?
daleste   8/13/2014 11:00:47 PM
NO RATINGS
Wow.  Feels good to be called absolutely right!

seaEE
User Rank
CEO
Re: Moore's what?
seaEE   8/14/2014 12:16:18 AM
NO RATINGS
I wish Moore's law held for improving automobile efficiency.

Kevin Neilson
User Rank
Manager
Re: Moore's what?
Kevin Neilson   8/14/2014 2:11:33 AM
NO RATINGS
I've always called it "Moore's Observation" myself.

Or_Bach
User Rank
Rookie
Re: Moore's what?
Or_Bach   8/14/2014 3:08:47 AM
NO RATINGS
For many decades it was the "law of the semiconductor game" those that didn't obey had to leave the game !

Clearly the game have changed.

Looking forward we will see a period when there will be more the one game being played.

The one I believe will emerge as the most interesting one will be monolithic 3D.

alex_m1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Moore's what?
alex_m1   8/14/2014 7:20:28 AM
NO RATINGS
Sure there will be more than one game played.

While we could probably improve current manufacturing techniques,  i personally set my eyes on  one of the crazy options promising orders of magnitude improvment: Quantum computing, Optical computing(like optalysys does) , Analog brain like computing, etc.

alex_m1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Moore's what?
alex_m1   8/14/2014 5:05:10 PM
NO RATINGS
Zvi, i want to ask you a historical question as a semi expert:


I read somewhere, that in the 50's we could have had 250nm/180nm. It wasn't that far technically. But moore came,  set the pace of the industry with his law and we got 250nm only in 97. Does it make sense ?

Or_Bach
User Rank
Rookie
Re: Moore's what?
Or_Bach   8/14/2014 5:18:54 PM
NO RATINGS
Well, I was just born than, so I was more busy with milk than with silicon (I know things are different now ;-)

And yes, it does not make any sense.

 

alex_m1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Moore's what?
alex_m1   8/14/2014 5:34:18 PM
NO RATINGS
Ok. History is fine.

And Or_Bach, with moore's law ending, you might have another chance at milk :)

 

TanjB
User Rank
Rookie
Re: Moore's what?
TanjB   8/15/2014 1:09:07 AM
NO RATINGS
Folks, it is a law not a theorem.  No surprise if a law breaks.  Lapses from enforcement.

@Zvi, you may find this quick survey of optical projection for lithography will give you perspective on your question:

http://spie.org/x22914.xml

 

jeremybirch
User Rank
CEO
Re: Moore's what?
jeremybirch   8/15/2014 9:31:10 AM
NO RATINGS
1) it is definitely an observation not a law (like Boyles law) or a theorem (like evolution)

2) it is a tradeoff between economics and technology ie essentially balancing 'how much better do we need to make something in order to sell it?' and 'how much will it cost to make that change?', with a liberal complication of how long it takes to make the change versus where the market expectation will be at the time

3) so yes we could have stepped processes at a faster pace BUT the cost of the steps would have been too high to justify taking them. Who needed a microprocessor with a billion transistors in the 1970's, for instance? If no one needed it then there would be no point in getting the technology necessary to produce it at that time. Alternatively if you produced a 4004 on a modern process it would be so tiny that would in itself cause problems for instance it would not be able to drive any sensible load at the 15v it was supplied with.

4) look at the costs of going to larger wafers today - we are delaying going to 450mm because the incremental cost is too high - and that change looks to an outsider as if it is relatively simple but it does mean redesigning every machine that carries the wafers.

 

alex_m1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Moore's what?
alex_m1   8/15/2014 6:46:11 PM
NO RATINGS
@jeremi: you raise good points but:


2. At the early stages(1975-1997) - where research was cheaper than today - It might have been the economic tradeoff, or it might have been the regulatory effects of moore's law. We'll need to dig deeper to know which is which. But maybe one hint that we could've done better is the fact that there were 20 companies all keeping up with moore's law, versus today's few companies struggling to keep with the law, being late ,etc.


3. Yes i do believe we could have build useful stuff earlier. If you look at the applications people had at the research level at 1975 or earlier in basic form, you'll see lots of the stuff we use today: computer mouse/windows/printers/games/personal computers/3d cad/simulation/high-level-languages. I'm sure visionary people at that time have seen the potential.Surely more transistors would have greatly helped.

As to the question of how - At the time they had the ibm system/360 , so i guess they could've managed to design an interesting chips with a few million transistors(which fits 250nm) ,even if it's mostly lots of memory(maybe with a basic cache) and wider buses and fast transistors and floating point ALU's - stuff known at the time. And reasonable charactereization of transistors seems possible at that time. 

 

 

TanjB
User Rank
Rookie
Re: Moore's what?
TanjB   8/17/2014 9:25:32 PM
NO RATINGS
Remember, those early days had problems not just with lithography.  They were learning a lot about materials, too, and the scaling down produced multiple changes in the understanding and behavior of devices.   In 1975 I'm not sure if they had even discovered the problems of sodium traces in equipment poisoning the integrated circuits.  They had to learn to grow uniform thin layers of many materials, change to copper wires (copper is also tricky if it gets in the wrong places), invent new kinds of insulator, investigate various regimes of impurity, .. etc.  Every generation of shrink has been a broad learning problem, it is not simply optics.

alex_m1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Moore's what?
alex_m1   8/15/2014 9:49:57 AM
NO RATINGS
@TanjB: Thanks , that's a great article.

It appears that they could have built 250nm chips(a 1997 tech) in 1986 or earlier, and 500nm images were demonstrated by 1975.

Jessica Lipsky
User Rank
Author
Re: Moore's what?
Jessica Lipsky   8/14/2014 11:09:10 AM
NO RATINGS
Where's the line between law and self-fulfilling prophecy?

R_Colin_Johnson
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Moore's what?
R_Colin_Johnson   8/14/2014 12:19:35 PM
NO RATINGS
Good question. The whole semiconductor industry is working to fulfill the the prophecy of Moore's Law.

alex_m1
User Rank
CEO
Re: Moore's what?
alex_m1   8/14/2014 4:59:38 PM
NO RATINGS
> The whole semiconductor industry is working to fulfill the the prophecy of Moore's Law.


So why didn't he aim higher? why???

resistion
User Rank
CEO
Let's revisit in 5 years
resistion   8/15/2014 10:20:54 AM
NO RATINGS
Don't sweat now.

POET FAN
User Rank
Rookie
MOORES LAW IS DEAD
POET FAN   8/17/2014 1:55:53 PM
NO RATINGS
The chip makers have found the solution, you just dont know about it as yet

 

http://poet-technologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/POET-Technologies-Corporate-Overview.pdf

Flash Poll
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Top Comments of the Week