Slashdot Mirror


Andy Grove Says End Of Moore's Law At Hand

Jack William Bell writes "Intel chief Andy Grove says Moore's Law has reached its limit. Pointing to current leaks in modern chips, he says -- "Current is becoming a major factor and a limiter on how complex we can build chips," said Grove. He said the company' engineers "just can't get rid of" power leakage. -- But, of course, this only applies to semiconductor chips, there is no guarantee that some other technology will not take over and continue the march of smaller, cheaper and faster processors. I remember people saying stuff like this years ago before MOSFET." Update: 12/11 22:01 GMT by T : Correction: the text above originally mangled Andy Grove's name as "Andy Moore."

21 of 507 comments (clear)

  1. Andy Moore? by ikewillis · · Score: 5, Informative

    Shouldn't that be Andy Grove and Gordon Moore?

    1. Re:Andy Moore? by artemis67 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Neither of which is the chief at Intel...

  2. 15% ! by nogoodmonkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    The industry is used to power leakage rates of up to fifteen per cent, but chips constructed of increasing numbers of transistors can suffer power leakage of up to 40 per cent said Grove.

    No wonder my laptop only gets about a hour of runtime on its battery. :-)

  3. Great! by Lagged2Death · · Score: 5, Funny

    So, this means that anything that possibly can go wrong no longer will! Hey, I'm all for that!

    What? Moore's Law? Oh. Nevermind.

  4. Short sighted, or just playing it safe? by Marx_Mrvelous · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seeing as he is a big part of a major CPU firm Intel, is he being short-sighted (which I doubt) or is he trying to brace the market for a slowdown in CPU clock speed?

    It might help the company if expectations for new CPUs aren't higher than what they can produce.

    Personally, my vote goes for optical CPUs as the wave of the future. Larger than curent CPUs might not be a problem if they don't put off much heat.

    --

    Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
    1. Re:Short sighted, or just playing it safe? by Usquebaugh · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Optical CPUs are still only research projects and nobody is sure these things are going to work as well as silicon. I talked with somebody at Livermore regarding feasability and his take was never. 30+ years of chip evolution is not going to be beaten by a few research projects. The bar is set to high for optical to come in.

      I'm more hopeful that we might get away from the whole stupid clock idea and go asynchronos. This area seems to be opening up more and more. It's beena round for ever but nobody could find a reason to go to the extra expense.

      If Moores law fails then I guess SMP will become mainstream. I mean it's either that or software engineers write programs that are efficient. I expect to see an aerobatic display by flying pigs before I see an efficient program.

  5. Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now I can just buy a really fast computer and know that I'll never need to upgrade again!

  6. So, back to Don Knuth's Books? by sisukapalli1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope this means back to actually finding ways of optimizing code, and not the standard "We can throw money at it", or "Next year computers will be twice as fast".

    However, may be better processor architectures and clusters will keep the march going.

    Either way, I believe some progress would be made.

    S

  7. Newton? by pa3gvr · · Score: 5, Funny

    As long as Newton's law stays in effect I am not to worried.

    BTW do most of the users really need fast machines? I can do all my work without any problems on my 333Mhz PII

    CU :-) Sjaak

  8. Shucks... by swordboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    I was waiting for the commemorative Pentium XT running at 4.77GHz.

    --

    Life is the leading cause of death in America.
  9. Well maybe... by Chicane-UK · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ..if Intel and AMD hadn't got locked into that stupid GHz battle and instead concentrated on optimizing their CPU design (rather than just ramping up the speed silly amounts) then there might have still be a few more years left before it became such a problem.

    Maybe thats the way forward? Optimisations and improvements on the chips instead of raw clock speed....?

    --
    "Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
    1. Re:Well maybe... by dillon_rinker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If there'd been no competition, you're absolutely correct that we'd have had better CPU designs, and overall performance would likely have been orders of magnitude below what it is now.

      So, speed and feature size are as good as they're going to get, and they were easy to do. Now we can work on the hard stuff with the benefit of all the processor power we've got sitting around unused.

      Don't optimize the hard stuff until you've optimized the easy stuff.

  10. Re:sure sure... by grungebox · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Well...it's a little bit harder to manage this time around. As transistors get smaller, if I remember correctly, one of the main reasons for current leakage is quantum tunneling between the source and drain of a given transistor as the channel length decreases (I think). Also, you get leakage through electrons/holes tunneling though the gate of the MOSFET as the insulating material decreases in width. You can't really outmaneuver quantum mechanics.

    Of course, I think something else will pop up (like the aforementioned optoelectronic switch, perhaps), since companies are resourceful folks. Academia is good about researching ways to reduce current leakage, and my prof says high-K dielectric insulators are a good way to reduce leakage through the gate. Whatever...something will come up.

    My point is that the situation now is a lot more physically complex than that of, say, 1989 or something, where the limitation was "we can't go past 100 MHz because we haven't thought of a way to do it!" Now it's more "we can't go past [whatever]Ghz because of goddamn physics!"

    By the way, anyone else think Gordon Moore gets a little too much by having a "law" named after him? I mean, sheesh...all he did was draw a freakin' best-fit curve on a plot of easily-found data. And on top of that, Moore's Law isn't a law at all...it's a statistic.

  11. [ More Quotes Like This ] by ekrout · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How many times do we have to hear people put their foot in their mouth? I would have thought Intel would've known better!

    But what ... is it good for?
    - Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.

    I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.
    - Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.

    What can be more palpably absurd than the prospect held out of locomotives traveling twice as fast as stagecoaches?
    - The Quarterly Review, England (March 1825)

    The abolishment of pain in surgery is a chimera. It is absurd to go on seeking it. . . . Knife and pain are two words in surgery that must forever be associated in the consciousness of the patient.
    - Dr. Alfred Velpeau (1839) French surgeon

    Men might as well project a voyage to the Moon as attempt to employ steam navigation against the stormy North Atlantic Ocean.
    - Dr. Dionysus Lardner (1838) Professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy, University College, London

    The foolish idea of shooting at the moon is an example of the absurd length to which vicious specialization will carry scientists working in thought-tight compartments.
    - A.W. Bickerton (1926) Professor of Physics and Chemistry, Canterbury College, New Zealand

    [W]hen the Paris Exhibition closes electric light will close with it and no more be heard of.
    - Erasmus Wilson (1878) Professor at Oxford University

    Well informed people know it is impossible to transmit the voice over wires and that were it possible to do so, the thing would be of no practical value.
    - Editorial in the Boston Post (1865)

    That the automobile has practically reached the limit of its development is suggested by the fact that during the past year no improvements of a radical nature have been introduced.
    - Scientific American, Jan. 2, 1909

    Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.
    - Lord Kelvin, ca. 1895, British mathematician and physicist

    Radio has no future
    - Lord Kelvin, ca. 1897.

    While theoretically and technically television may be feasible, commercially and financially I consider it an impossibility, a development of which we need waste little time dreaming.
    - Lee DeForest, 1926 (American radio pioneer)

    There is not the slightest indication that [nuclear energy] will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.
    - Albert Einstein, 1932.

    Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 19,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and perhaps only weigh 1.5 tons.
    - Popular Mechanics, March 1949.
    (Try the laptop version!)

    There is no need for any individual to have a computer in their home.
    - Ken Olson, 1977, President, Digital Equipment Corp.

    I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't lastout the year.
    - The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957.

    [Quotes from this page.]

    --

    If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
    1. Re:[ More Quotes Like This ] by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Interesting
      OTOH, you could probably dig up thousands of quotes made in the 1960s that optimistically predict continual improvements in the speed and cost of airplanes. Most airliners will be supersonic, etc.

      From 1903 up until that point, aircraft design was on a curve almost impressive as Moore's law. In the 1960s, the rate of improvement hit a wall, and there have only been small incremental improvments since then. (And much of that has been achieved by "cheating": glomming onto Moore's law by cramming electronics into the aircraft.)

      Electronics technology is bound to hit a similar limit of economically feasible improvments sooner or later.

  12. Re:"The End" by tigertigr · · Score: 5, Funny

    I predict that, henceforth, these "The End of Moore's Law" articles will double in number every 18 months or so. Eventually all the posts we see on Slashdot will be about The End of Moore's Law. Furthermore, I propose we call this new law Les's Law.

  13. Moors Law by avandesande · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is an economic law, not a physical one. Lack of demand for high-powered processors is going to slow the progression in processor speeds.

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
  14. This is consistent with the SIA roadmap by Animats · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "Grove suggested that Moore Law regarding the doubling of transistor densities every couple of years will be redundant by the end of the decade." Not this year, eight years out.

    That's about right. It's a bit more pessimistic than the SIA roadmap, but it's close. Grove was just stating, for a general audience, what's accepted in the semiconductor industry. Optical lithography on flat silicon comes to the end of its run within a decade. Around that point, atoms are too big, and there aren't enough electrons in each gate.

    There's been a question of whether the limits of fabrication or the limits of device physics would be reached first. Grove apparently thinks the device problem dominates, since he's talking about leakage current. As density goes up, voltage has to go down, and current goes up. A Pentium 4 draws upwards of 30 amps at 1.2 volts. We're headed for hundreds of amps. It's hard to escape resistive losses with currents like that.

    There are various other technologies that could lead to higher densities. But none of them are as cheap on a per-gate basis.

  15. Re:Hmm.... by ez76 · · Score: 5, Funny
    well, a super-conductor will not be in my computer for a long time since high temp ones operate at 32k
    You underestimate the resolve of overclockers' cooling solutions.
  16. Re:Yes... -- was Re:Andy Moore? by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 5, Funny


    Well, don't worry. I'm sure one of the crack Slashdot editors will just go in and fix... oh yeah.

  17. Threshold Voltage by Erich · · Score: 5, Insightful
    One of the problems with "leaky" parts is that the threshold voltages are kept very low. This makes the transistors switch much faster, but makes them leak current quite a bit.

    You can fairly easily raise the threshold voltage (for a process). It makes the chip slower, but leaks less current (and therefore usually uses less power). This is one of the key elements of "Low Power" processes like CL013LP.

    For more information, the Britney Spears' Guide to Semiconductor Physics is sure to help.

    Interestingly, Using leaky transistors that switch faster has been a trick used for a very long time. One of the reasons the Cray computers took so much cooling was that they didn't use MOSFETs, their whole process was based on PNP and NPN junction transistors. For those who don't know much about transistors, FETs (or Field Effect Transistors) make a little capacitor that when you charge it up (or don't charge it up, depending), it lets current flow through on the other side. It takes a while to charge up the capacitor (time constant proportional to Resistance times Capacitance, remember!), but once it's charged there isn't any current (except the leakage current) that flows through.

    At least, that's what I recall from my classes. I didn't do so well in the device physics and components classes.

    --

    -- Erich

    Slashdot reader since 1997