Featured Articles

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

Research firm IHS got hold of Samsung’s new flagship smartphone and took it apart to the last bolt to figure out…

More...
Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Samsung’s Galaxy S5 has finally gone on sale and it can be yours for €699, which is quite a lot of…

More...
Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel has added a load of Haswell refresh parts to its official price list and there really aren’t any surprises to…

More...
Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

During his appearance at PAX East panel and confirmed on Twitter, Titanfall developer Respawn confirmed that the first DLC pack for…

More...
KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 gained a lot of overclocking experience with the GTX 780 Hall of Fame (HOF), which we had a chance to…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Friday, 30 August 2013 08:44

Economics could kill Moore’s Law

Written by Nick Farrell

Or Colonel Mustard with the pipe in the Library 

Pundits have made a number of predictions for the death of Moore’s Law but this one suggests that it is actually going to be the economy which bumps the idea off.

Moore’s Law, named for Intel co-founder Gordon Moore, states that the number of transistors contained on integrated circuits is doubled roughly every two years. However according to Robert Colwell of DARPA’s Microsystems Technology Office Moore’s Law could end as early as 2020, with economics, rather than physics, being the main reason for its demise.

He said that Moore’s Law will not have to end because of physics as a restriction on chip evolution. Instead, Colwell forecasts that economics would halt the rapid progression of technology, as more advanced chips become less likely to make profit.

“Chip companies don't make the bulk of their profits from the top-of-the-line chips, but instead from the huge numbers of run-of-the-mill follow-on chips that they peddle,” he said.

He thinks that Intel would lose interest in smaller and smaller chips if they failed to appeal to a consumer market.

Nick Farrell

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments