Slashdot Mirror


Intel Researchers See Moore's Law Becoming Obsolete

prostoalex writes "A paper, published by Intel researchers, claims we might be the witnesses of Moore's Law becoming obsolete, as the rate of shrinkage for transistors goes lower with each year. In 2018 we might be able to get the chips manufactured with 16-nanometer technology, then one or two more manufacturing processes will shrink it even further, but after that we're facing the physical limits."

7 of 396 comments (clear)

  1. Moore's law is NOT obsolete by __aavhli5779 · · Score: 5, Informative
    I think several upstarts are soon going to be ready to extend Moore's law for at least another few decades, thanks to diamond semiconductors.

    Silicon is, indeed, close to its limit, but that does not mean semiconductors are.

    This Wired article, which I'm sure many of you have read, details how new industrially-produced diamonds, thanks to their cheap price and purity (most importantly, being absolutely identical to each other), along with research done by both the government, several corporations, and possibly Intel, may make unbelievably fast systems powered by diamond semiconductors possible.

    Some interesting quotes:


    But the greatest potential for CVD diamond lies in computing. If diamond is ever to be a practical material for semiconducting, it will need to be affordably grown in large wafers. (The silicon wafers Intel uses, for example, are 1 foot in diameter.) CVD growth is limited only by the size of the seed placed in the Apollo machine. Starting with a square, waferlike fragment, the Linares process will grow the diamond into a prismatic shape, with the top slightly wider than the base. For the past seven years - since Robert Linares first discovered the sweet spot - Apollo has been growing increasingly larger seeds by chopping off the top layer of growth and using that as the starting point for the next batch. At the moment, the company is producing 10-millimeter wafers but predicts it will reach an inch square by year's end and 4 inches in five years. The price per carat: about $5.


    Also, a rather ironic one from Intel themselves:


    Indeed, Intel's top materials executives weren't aware of the latest research breakthroughs when I spoke to them in June, although they certainly understood the potential for diamonds in computing. "Diamonds represent a seismic change in semiconductors," says Krishnamurthy Soumyanath, Intel's director of communications circuits research. "It takes us about 10 years to evaluate a new material. We have a lot of investment in silicon. We're not about to abandon that."


    Silicon is dead. Long live diamonds!
    1. Re:Moore's law is NOT obsolete by IvyMike · · Score: 5, Informative

      There's nothing fundamental about diamond that will change electron tunnelling. The Intel paper was not silicon specific--to quote the article itself:

      The tunneling effects, Gargini said, will occur regardless of the chemistry of the transistor materials. Several researchers over the years have predicted the end of Moore's Law but made the mistake of extrapolating on the basis of existing materials.
      The concept behind the Intel researchers' paper was, "why don't we do something based entirely on fundamental principles?" Gargini said. "The beauty of our paper is that it is independent of materials."
    2. Re:Moore's law is NOT obsolete by Zeinfeld · · Score: 4, Informative
      This is assuming that De Beers doesn't push these people off a high rise first. :/

      This would be a thin layer of synthetic diamond, not the mined type that deBeers has a monopoly in.

      The fundamental limits are reached sooner in some technologies than others, but there is no technology that is immune from any sort of limit.

      Even if there is an alternative technology the transition from silicon to a totally different substrate is something the industry has tried before and conspicuously failled at. There was a time when Galium Assenide was the bees knees, these days it is an important niche (direct band gap and all that) but nobody is building GaAs computers.

      The other factor is that there seems to be a tradeoff between the point where you hit the quantum limit in a given technology and electron mobility that bites you in the a**.

      I suspect that we see Moore's law start to slow before it comes to a halt.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    3. Re:Moore's law is NOT obsolete by akuma(x86) · · Score: 4, Informative

      The reason that this calculation is material independent is that there is an additional constraint of power-density on the shape of the energy barrier.

      As you mentioned, the tunneling probability is a function of width, barrier height and effective mass of the tunneling particle. We are trying to construct a switch where we can control the flow of the particle from one side of the barrier to the other. In the "on" state, there is no energy barrier, the electron can move freely, and in the "off" state, the barrier is erected. We need to control the tunneling probability such that we can distinguish on from off.

      Consider that the Shannon-Von-Neumann-Landauer (SNL) limit for the smallest energy required to process a bit is k_b * T * ln(2) ~= 0.017eV where k_b is the Boltzmann constant and T is temperature. For width > 5nm, this holds as a good approximation for the minimum height of the barrier to maintain a coherent switch. For a 5nm the energy increases as (1/w)^2 where w is the barrier width.

      This is a LOT of power when summed over the entire chip area.

      They invoke power density arugments that say that it is impractical to have 5-10 MEGAWatt! / cm^2 power density. The rate at which this thermal energy can be removed from a solid is limited -- and THIS is the reason why we can't scale smaller.

      Fundamentally, we are power limited.

      I am not a physicist, but I do design microprocessors for a living and I did study semiconductor physics in school.

  2. mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    looks like they're gotting slashdotted like Kathleen Fent on her wedding night...

    Dec. 1 -- Moore's Law, as chip manufacturers generally refer to it today, is coming to an end, according to a recent research paper.

    GRANTED, THAT END likely won't come for about two decades, but Intel researchers have recently published a paper theorizing that chipmakers will hit a wall when it comes to shrinking the size of transistors, one of the chief methods for making chips that are smaller, more powerful and cheaper than their predecessors.
    Manufacturers will be able to produce chips on the 16-nanometer manufacturing process, expected by conservative estimates to arrive in 2018, and maybe one or two manufacturing processes after that, but that's it.
    "This looks like a fundamental limit," said Paolo Gargini, director of technology strategy at Intel and an Intel fellow. The paper, titled "Limits to Binary Logic Switch Scaling -- A Gedanken Model," was written by four authors and was published in the Proceedings of the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) in November.
    Although it's not unusual for researchers to theorize about the end of transistor scaling, it's an unusual statement for researchers from Intel, and it underscores the difficulties chip designers currently face. The size, energy consumption and performance requirements of today's computers are forcing semiconductor makers to completely rethink how they design their products and are prompting many to pool design with research and development.
    Resolving these issues is a major goal for the entire industry. Under Moore's Law, chipmakers can double the number of transistors on a given chip every two years, an exponential growth pattern that has allowed computers to get both cheaper and more powerful at the same time.
    Mostly, the trick has been accomplished through shrinking transistors. With shrinkage tapped out, manufacturers will have to find other methods to keep the cycle going.
    These issues will likely be widely discussed this week, when the International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors is unveiled in Taiwan. The ITRS, which is comprised of several organizations, including the Semiconductor Industry Association, outlines the challenges and rough timetable for the industry for 15 years. A new version of the plan will be released in Taiwan on Dec. 2.
    Still, Gargini said, researchers are exploring a variety of ideas, such as more efficient use of electrons or simply making bigger chips, to surpass any looming barriers. Other researchers likely will dispute these conclusions.
    "We cannot let physics beat us," he said, laughing.

    THE DISTINGUISHED CIRCUIT
    The problem chipmakers face comes down to distinction and control. Transistors are essentially microscopic on/off switches that consist of a source (where electrons come from), a drain (where they go) and a gate that controls the flow of electrons through a channel that connects the source and the drain.

    IT Jobs
    Free It Downloads
    Learn Software
    Harry Potter Gifts

    When current flows from the source to the drain, a computer reads this as a "1." When current is not flowing, the transistor is read as a "0." Millions of these actions together produce the data inside PCs. Strict control of the gate and channel region, therefore, are necessary to produce reliable results.
    When the length of the gate gets below 5 nanometers, however, tunneling will begin to occur. Electrons will simply pass through the channel on their own, because the source and the drain will be extremely close. (A nanometer is a billionth of a meter.)
    Gargini likens the phenomenon to a waterfall in the middle of a trail. If a person can't see through it, they will take a detour around it. If it is only a thin veil of mist, people will push through.
    "Where you have a barrier, the electrons penetrate a certain distance," he said. "Once

  3. Re:Again? by gregorio · · Score: 5, Informative
    You are aware that Moore's Law is about the doubling of density of transistors and not "computing power" or some such undefinable quantity? Moore's law will be broken simply because physical entities cannot follow an exponential growth for very long. Computing power will still increase.
    Nope, Moore's law is about transistor count.

    From Intel's website: "Moore observed an exponential growth in the number of transistors per integrated circuit and predicted that this trend would continue. "
  4. Re:Again? by Hoser+McMoose · · Score: 5, Informative

    To be a tiny bit pedantic, Moore's original paper talked about the number of transistors per integrated circuit at any given price point. You can always stick more transistors on the chip if you're willing to throw sufficient amounts of money at the problem, but to get those transistors for a reasonable price is another matter.

    FWIW, Moore's original hypothesis was that the transistors/$ would double every 12 months, so his "law" hasn't been correct for quite some time. We had been seeing a doubling of transistors about every 18 months for a while, but now it's more like every 24 months. With the current troubles that Intel, AMD and IBM all seem to be having at implementing their new 90nm manufacturing process, it seems likely that the pace will continue to slow.