this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
202 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
59322 readers
5123 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No. If you're thinking Moore's Law, all that says is that semiconductors would double their number of transistors every 2 years (or so) for a given price point. This is basically making a really big package while keeping the price the same.
BTW, that price limit is one that isn't really talked about, but it's in Moore's original paper (unlike things people usually bring up, like clock rates or single threaded speed), and it skewers Moore's Law dead. If you take the price of the old 8086, adjust for inflation, and double its transistors every 2 years since, there's nothing that comes close to the numbers you get. IIRC, it's about an order of magnitude too few transistors for CPUs on offer at that price.
I think the point they were wondering was that a larger computer chip doesn't seem like progress. The overall density of transistors is the same, so how exactly does scaling that up do anything? Or why does using glass make it better?
Granted, reading the article answers exactly that (though I'll admit, I don't entirely understand it). The current material limits how much of the computer chip somehow, this new material allows for more... something.