Some view it as a doubling every 18 months, or a cost per transistor (this has gone up with the smallest nodes).
It is roughly an exponential curve in the number of transistors we can use to make a "thing" with.
It is both a capability (can we make things of a certain number of transistors) and is it economically viable to build things of that size.
You could stay at the current node size and halve the cost of that wafer every 18 months and you would still be on the same curve. But it is easier in a our economic system to decrease the node size, keeping the rest of the fixed wafer costs the same and get 2x or 4x the density on the same lines.
If I get nerd sniped, I'd find the two video presentations one by Krste and another by Jim Keller where they unambiguously explain Dennard Scaling and Moore's Law in a way that is congruent with what I just said.
> Moore's law ends when the whole universe is a computer (which it already is).
I find "Moore's Second Law" interesting. At least the version I'm familiar with says that the cost of a semiconductor chip fabrication plant doubles every four years. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_second_law
It's interesting to contrast that trajectory with global GDP. At some point, either global economic growth has to accelerate dramatically to even produce one fab; or we have to leave the 'globe', ie we go into space (but that's still universal GDP exploding), or that law has to break down.
It would be exceedingly funny (to me), if the one of the first two possibilities held true, and would accurately predict either an AI singularity or some Golden space age.
https://hasler.ece.gatech.edu/Published_papers/Technology_ov...
Some view it as a doubling every 18 months, or a cost per transistor (this has gone up with the smallest nodes).
It is roughly an exponential curve in the number of transistors we can use to make a "thing" with.
It is both a capability (can we make things of a certain number of transistors) and is it economically viable to build things of that size.
You could stay at the current node size and halve the cost of that wafer every 18 months and you would still be on the same curve. But it is easier in a our economic system to decrease the node size, keeping the rest of the fixed wafer costs the same and get 2x or 4x the density on the same lines.
If I get nerd sniped, I'd find the two video presentations one by Krste and another by Jim Keller where they unambiguously explain Dennard Scaling and Moore's Law in a way that is congruent with what I just said.