Second Moore's Law proposed

— 2:40 AM on April 6, 2004

Wired is running a great article on the consequences of Moore's Law that takes a decidedly different approach to the subject:

Moore's first law is a two-edged sword - more transistors for the same price is great for computers, but it's hell on batteries: As the processor power doubles, the power consumption also rises. An inability to run the next generation of chips at their full capability will play havoc with the semiconductor business, consumer electronics, telecommunications, the PC industry, and ultimately the world's economy. Moore's law could come to an ironic end - not because we can't build the next generation of chips, but because we can't run them.
The article suggests that a second law is needed to inspire designs that improve overall system efficiency, and that improving efficiency will require a great deal of cooperation between those who design chips, interconnects, and batteries, and even those who write software. Has the time come to pursue greater system efficiency rather than superior overall performance?
Like what we're doing? Pay what you want to support TR and get nifty extra features.
Top contributors
1. BIF - $340 2. Ryu Connor - $250 3. mbutrovich - $250
4. YetAnotherGeek2 - $200 5. End User - $150 6. Captain Ned - $100
7. Anonymous Gerbil - $100 8. Bill Door - $100 9. ericfulmer - $100
10. dkanter - $100
Tip: You can use the A/Z keys to walk threads.
View options

This discussion is now closed.