Moore's Law/Discovery CHannel/Beer

[Space05us]

I'm watching the Discovery Science channel and they are saying that computing technology will come to a stand still at a certain point in accordance with Moore's Law. The only way that won't happen is if we can shrink transistors so that we can fit more onto an integrated circuit.

My question is why don't they just start growing the integrated circuit? Is it only the number of transistors or do they need to be smaller in order for computers to be more kick ass?

[snoopy369]

Larger IC = more distance between transistors = slower, IIRC. I think at a certain point (around 2-3cm on a side apparently) it becomes more efficient to have a second processor than to have a single processor be larger.

Unless you're massively oversimplifying, though, they aren't entirely explaining Moore's Law properly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moores_Law

Moore's Law is quite simply a statement by a guy that ICs would increase in power exponentially in a periodic fashion. In fact, he massively UNDERestimated it (originally saying every 10 years, only later altering that to every 2 years). Recently (probably what was talked about on your DC show) he said that it had to end eventually - we could not keep getting smaller indefinitely, we'd hit the atomic level. Of course, I'd suggest that quantum computing would just start at that point

[Space05us]

Larger IC = more distance between transistors = slower, IIRC. I think at a certain point (around 2-3cm on a side apparently) it becomes more efficient to have a second processor than to have a single processor be larger.

Unless you're massively oversimplifying, though, they aren't entirely explaining Moore's Law properly.

It's tv, they don't explain anything properly, which is part of the reason why I asked here. I've been drinking so I can't comprehend anything I read beyond a few sentences.

I'll definitely look it up tomorrow. Thank you for clarifying though.