ie8 fix

Has Moore's Law finally hit the wall?

By | December 1, 2010, 8:48am PST

Used to be you could buy a new computer every 3 years and get 2x the performance. Not anymore. Performance has hit a wall - or at least a steep hill. What’s this mean for the industry?

Moore’s law
Moore’s Law says that the number of transistors on a chip will double every 18 to 24 months. But Moore’s Law has been simplified to mean a doubling of performance every 18 to 24 months.

Not anymore.

Transistors ≠ performance. Yes, clock speeds have improved from the 1 MHz 6502 processor in the original Apple II to over 3 GHz today. But clock speeds have leveled out: in a third of a nanosecond light moves about 4 inches or 10 cm - and electricity is slower than light.

Another big piece of improved performance has come from wider data paths. Chips now move data in 64 and 128-bit chunks, rather than the 6502’s 8-bit bytes. Not much more growth there, either.

We’ve thrown transistors at performance issues: more and wider registers; bigger caches; deeper pipelines; intelligent branch prediction; smarter I/O management; and thousands of other enhancements.

More RAM? We’ve also been adding ever-larger on-chip caches that improve performance. SSDs further improve I/O through lower latency, an area we’re still learning about.

Multicore
We can’t make processors go faster. We can’t process more data per clock cycle. So how do we put twice as many transistors to work?

Stuffing more processors on a chip. And right now many of the brightest minds in computer science are struggling with the problem of getting usable work out of 8, 12 or 16 core CPUs.

Dual and quad core processors work pretty well because multitasking runs a lot of background threads. Those threads can use multiple cores and improve performance.

But outside video, image, voice and scientific apps, most personal apps - don’t need multicore architectures. Humans aren’t good multi-taskers.

The wall
We’ve hit a wall. We can still double the number of transistors. We can still double disk drive capacity. We can build faster interconnects, such as QuickPath, Light Peak and 10 Gb Ethernet. And SSDs also help performance.

But the easy wins are over. Going forward performance gains will be measured in single digit percents each year.

Implications
Information technology is driven by consumers, not the enterprise. What happens when a new PC is only 20% faster than your fully paid for three-year-old PC?

If it is a notebook, it can be smaller, lighter, more stylish and more rugged. But the desktop?

Future model differentiation will have to move on. Here’s where:

  • Power. The server space is making greater power efficiency a differentiator. Mobile’s been pushing this for 15 years. You’ll see more.
  • Integration. Open up in iPad or a MacBook Air and you see a tiny PC board, a few chips and a huge set of batteries. Battery life makes products convenient.
  • Functionality. Integrating multiple applications, each with their own dedicated core, may enable consumer devices to collapse multistep workflows into a single devices. Capture, voice-edit, compress and upload video from a single candy bar sized device?
  • Cost. The first low-res digital cameras cost hundreds of dollars and now they’re almost free. Huge market among the billions who live on less than $2500 a year.

The Storage Bits take
Moore’s Law driven market growth isn’t over. We can use our still growing technical capabilities to refine what we already do.

But the days of newer=faster are over. It’s newer=better: less power; smaller; cheaper; and - in cases like SSDs - overall system performance will improve too.

The good news for storage is that data production will continue to grow. Always on, always available consumer data systems will create ever more demand for storage.

In the enterprise this will affect storage architectures as well. When you can’t scale up, you have to scale out. Decomposable storage architectures will come to the fore.

Comments welcome, of course. The Apple ]['s motherboard style was the same as today's MacBook Air: a few chips on a PC board. Friends were always startled to see empty my Apple ]['s case was.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Robin Harris has been messing with computers for over 30 years and selling and marketing data storage for over 20 in companies large and small.

Disclosure

Robin Harris

Robin Harris is a president of TechnoQWAN, a consulting and analyst firm in northern Arizona. He also writes StorageMojo.com, a blog which accepts advertising from companies in the storage industry, and has a 25 year history with IT vendors. He has many industry contacts, many of whom are friends and all of whom he has opinions about. Robin has relationships with many companies in the technology industry. Every company he writes about may have sought to influence his opinion through carefully-crafted marketing messages and self-serving white papers, gifts ranging from desk calendars, t-shirts, lunches and trips as well as analyst or consulting assignments. He also invests in some technology companies. He may accept payment for services in stock as well. Robin discloses financial investments in or client relationships with companies named in Storage Bits. To help readers sort out the gold from the dross in his writings, Robin tries to communicate his reasons as clearly as he can. If you agree, you are intelligent and discerning. If you disagree, well, you disagree. In all cases, Robin encourages readers to subject everything they read, see or hear on the internet or from politicians to some simple questions: * What assumptions are implicit in the world view and judgments of the author? * What, if any, is the factual basis for the opinions the author expresses? * Is it reasonable, logical and clear? Your critical faculties: use ‘em or lose ‘em!

Biography

Robin Harris

Harris has been messing with computers for over 30 years and selling and marketing data storage for over 20 in companies large and small. He introduced a couple of multi-billion dollar storage products (DLT, the first Fibre Channel array) to market, as well as a many smaller ones. Earlier he spent 10 years marketing servers and networks. After leaving corporate life he founded TechnoQWAN, a consulting and analyst firm. He also developed StorageMojo into one of the top storage industry blogs.

Robin writes, consults, coaches and lives among the mountains of northern Arizona.

49
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Moore's Wall
erik.soderquist 7th Dec 2010
@snorkleface

we would also see a much greater understanding of the human brain, which could also lead to better ways to heal brain damage, prevent dementia, etc
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
Gavello 1st Dec 2010
Interesting points, will definitely remember this next time i upgrade, which might be farther away now than normal!
0 Votes
+ -
The wall for electronics in general...
jasonp@... 1st Dec 2010
is the use of electrons. Eventually this wall will be removed when someone finally discovers the key to move us from the age of electronics into the age of photonics.
0 Votes
+ -
@jasonp@...

Digital computing requires bi-static devices to make and store ones and zeros. Devices or junctions with two stable states are inherently non-linear like most semi-conductor materials. The big problem with photonics and optical photons is that these give extremely linear physics. Non-linear optics exist, but take tremendous instantaneous power levels to be manifest. Also, you cannot store a photon (zero mass boson particle). It has to move to exist.

The use of photonics for computing requires a wholly different approach to what computing means. Many specialized optical "computing" architectures have been proposed and built (I was involved with 3 different architectures) but none of these would ever be "programmed" by a general purpose computing language.

The next step in computing will be a quantum jump (no pun intended) over our current notions regarding what a "computer" is or does.
0 Votes
+ -
but the keyword there is "yet". It was literally last month that scientists were able to figure out and execute the storage of antimatter (antihydrogen atoms, specifically). Current technology still only allows for "storage" of antihydrogen atoms for 1/10th of a second before they are destroyed, but prior to this breakthrough the lifespan of these atoms was measured in single-digit microseconds. I believe that if scientists can figure out how to store particles whose existence a decade ago was purely theoretical, they'll be able to figure out how to store zero mass boson particles. If there's on constant in science, it's that we're always proving false ideas that have been assumed true and proving true ideas that started off as science fiction musings. I certainly don't assume that future "computing" architectures would even be recognizable as such today or that they would utilize general computing languages we're familiar with. I also don't assume that they wouldn't. What I do assume is that huge breakthroughs in technology are in our future. If the theory of singularity bears out, the middle of this century could be a very interesting time indeed for the scientific community.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
wizoddg 2nd Dec 2010
@jacarter3 "Digital computing requires bi-static devices to make and store ones and zeros. "

Actually, it doesn't. There's nothing that says a digital computer can't function with multiple states.There's nothing that strictly requires these states to be 'stable' either...statistically based systems are conceivable.

Second, we don't know HOW to store photons, but 'storing them' may not be necessary. We store LOTS of photonic information without storing the photons, merely the information about their states. Magnetic storage doesn't store electrons., it stores an energy state induced in another substance.

And merely because they must move to exist doesn't mean they can't be stored--storage can be dynamic. Even stored electrons don't stop moving!

"The next step in computing will be a quantum jump (no pun intended) over our current notions regarding what a "computer" is or does."

Probably true for 'the majority of people," but then, the majority of people have no real concept of what a computer 'does' anyway. Most of the world, to most people is a set of black boxes which do certain things when you do certain things to them.

A GP computer is like no other device we've created--it's uses are open-ended.

Basically, it manipulates information. Data storage is another concept, which, while related, is not strictly part of a computer.

While the technology required to continue the acceleration we've experienced may well require a major leap and a change in technology, the end result may be invisible to the users. There's a thousand ways to implement a NAND gate, but the electronic digital computer doesn't care which you use.
0 Votes
+ -
Storing photons amd "statistically based systems"
jacarter3 Updated - 3rd Dec 2010
@jacarter3

Maybe in Star Trek Next Generation, they can store photons but quantum physics provides no way to store energy quanta in a photon state. You can always convert that energy but you lose the photon. Photons can be slowed to very low velocities but the devices required to do that feat are the size of a small mobile home, use more power than your entire neighborhood and don't scale to nanometer dimensions needed used by silicon transistors.

Every system is statistically based unless you can achieve absolute zero thermal energy (absolute 0K). In fact the the state of a transistor is statistically based due to random thermally induced electron transitions in the semiconductor lattice energy bands. This appears as noise that must be over come to reduce errors.

What is an error? First off, we must have some sort of information that we are trying to store or process. Basically, some sort of decision making device must decide the state of the system to infer that information. Noise gives random processes that give rise to errors in that decision making process. This is true of bi-state or multi-state systems. It's our ability to infer information from the system in spite of these these statistics that provides the means to process information in any sort of computation device, including a "GP"" computer.

Back to photons, there are no photon only based physical processes that can make "decisions." A decision is inherently a non-linear process and as
I have said, the nondestructive interaction of photons (with energy quanta greater than thermal state transitions) with matter are very very linear. Further, photons do not interact with photons. They do not collide, combine or interact in any way. We only observe mutli-photon interactions when we destroy them by colliding or absorbing them using mass based matter and generally all collision that affect the photon will destroy it. A new photon may be emitted but the original is lost. Multiple photons do not interact with the same atom either. In all cases, any decision relying on photonic based information requires detecting it which in turns requires destroying it.

At AT&T (what was once Bell) Labs, they experimented with optical computing and Self Electro-optical Effect Device (SEED) computing. The power required per decison was huge compared to a transistor. Further, the biggest problem was that each SEED stage could accept fan-in and fan-out numbers in the range of 2-4. Far to low to create the interconnection density required by even a silicon CPU. There ave been recent announcements from AT&T about "break throughs" but my assessment of these "advances" are the product of a researcher trying to garner excitement and further research funding.

If we ever do achieve true genralo purpose optical computing, I have no doubt that anyone reading this in 2010 will be alive to see it happen, unless you believe in Futurama.
0 Votes
+ -
I couldn't agree moore .. i mean more
thx-1138_@... Updated - 2nd Dec 2010
@jasonp@... and i truly believe you are the only person replying on this blog that has grasped what the Moore's Wall plateau really means to x86 and x64 system architectures.

"The wall for electronics in general is the use of electrons. Eventually this wall will be removed when someone finally discovers the key to move us from the age of electronics into the age of photonics. "

I was thinking along the same lines - except that i can't see any major vendors continuing with existing hardware form factors. If, indeed, the 'critical mass' is close to being reached for existing chip conceptualization and design architectures, this can only mean:

(1) x86 and x64 based, system design - and the desktop (as we know it) - is heading the way of the Dodo. (..that or increase m/b's to the size of tennis courts.)

(2) Mobile architectures, *are* indeed the logical progression / evolution for computing (.. so as much as i hate to say it .. seems like great foresight at Cupertino on taking a gamble)

(3) Moore's Law slogan changed to "Less is Moore" ??

0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
hoaxoner 1st Dec 2010
Jasonp is right for the most part. The other way to do this is through quantum mechanics and quantum leaps and differentials. Quantum computing is "in the works" and we'll see if that or something else becomes the new standard.
0 Votes
+ -
Shift in focus.
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 1st Dec 2010
While what you write is true, the industry as a whole has shifted it's focus to smaller, more efficient and cheaper. There was always a need for faster faster faster especially in the consumer space which is not really true anymore. As an example, Microsoft missed the refocus with Vista, and Windows 7 reversed course to be more efficient. Intel and AMD are focused on power and efficiency as the world looks for smaller and better battery life. Where it comes to gaming, the high end can already render 3D FPS is super high resolution. On the supercomputing front, just throw more CPUs into the mix.

So, I believe, the industry simply started Moore's law in another direction, shrining existing technology into smaller, lighter and more efficient forms. With even the weakest desktop today good for gaming and the most modest laptops today able to handle pretty much anything a user wants to do, heck, even smartphones offering a complete computer experience, the need to be uber fast is not what it once was. Let's face it, hardware finally caught up with the incredibly inefficient (and easy, powerful) programming languages we use today, lol.

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
JamesCAbel 1st Dec 2010
Hi Robin,
As you state, manufacturing process improvements will continue to reduce power and provide higher integration (such as graphics integration with the regular processor ? which also provides performance and power improvements). Moore?s Law and House?s Law (for performance) are observations of human ingenuity and I expect them to continue. There are interesting products on the horizon but, yes, it's not just GHz any more. happy
0 Votes
+ -
Bigger die...
Tommy S. 1st Dec 2010
Just give me a twin CPU or a 1KW 5inch wide die for a GPU. I dont care as long the performance is there. Electricity is no object. Anyway, people have been predicting this for the last 20 years...
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
CrazySaint 1st Dec 2010
Moore's Law hasn't hit a wall, its just found a different playground - mobile.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
Big_Belly_Bob 1st Dec 2010
Interesting but I suspect cleaver ways will be found to improve hardware beyond things that we currently see as limiting, my main thoughts on this are that it's software that's lagging behind, I remember back when you had to worry about having a pc that was high spec enough to run something, Now I'm running things like folding@home in the background because there's not much out there that utilizes more than a fraction of my pc's potential.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
Mythos7 1st Dec 2010
The striving for energy efficiency is definitely slowing down the power curve some at this time. A lot of time and money is being spent on making CPUs, video card and hard disks more energy efficient and that is effort not being put into more power.

Energy efficiency is becoming an increasingly important factor in buying decisions of businesses and individuals. Server farms are leading the call for energy efficiency but it effecting decisions across the board. It affected the CPU and hard disk in my latest desktop and greatly affected my video card choice. I also have the quietest computer I ever had and that is a nice bonus.
0 Votes
+ -
Software EFFICIENCY?
kd5auq 1st Dec 2010
Software is at the stage of development of the early gas guzzlers of the 1920's. Look at the memory and cpu hog Windows is!
I DON'T NEED OR USE 90% OF WHAT IT CONTINUOUSLY DOES on a daily basis yet Windows Embeded is a nich market. We are getting to the "1973 gas shortage" of computing power. We have to learn to do more with less. (... and YES, Linux, OS-X and Unix are in the same boat. Does anybody program in machine language any more?)
0 Votes
+ -
No, and for good reason
Richard Flude 1st Dec 2010
"Does anybody program in machine language any more?"

With today's complex CPU it is near impossible for developers to optimize code to run a quickly as an optimize compiler from the manufacturer for all but the simPliest tasks.

For someone who started out on assembler this is a good thing.

Maybe you'd like to nominate the features you'd like dropped from a modern OS like mac OS x?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
bmonsterman 2nd Dec 2010
@Richard Flude,

Why don't we just drop Mac OSX? (just kidding...couldn't resist) happy
@Richard Flude
In fact today's automobiles have even more features unheard of in the 70's. The point is that software (especially OSes) need to become MORE EFFECIENT in using CPU resources. With ever more powerfull and faster CPUs this has not been a priority til now.
0 Votes
+ -
Bloatware sucks up all available power
terry flores 2nd Dec 2010
@kd5auq

I have a nine year old PC that can boot up and open a Word document faster than my slick new multi-core with 8 times the memory. The SOC implementation of that entire system (including disk storage!) would cost less than $50 today in volume.

Microsoft is the biggest culprit in software inefficiency, but they are not by any means alone in that failing. Windows 7 loads up drivers, libraries, and runs programs for thousands of "features" that I will never use. The wasted time and resources boggles the mind.
0 Votes
+ -
Win 7, etc
kd5auq 2nd Dec 2010
@terry flores
Precisely why I made a reference to Windows Embedded that uses ONLY the resources specified. Unix and Linux can also be configured to delete unneeded stuff. I have no experience with OS-X.
Of course I realize that this is not for the average home PC.
0 Votes
+ -
Slow OS's
SMparky 2nd Dec 2010
@kd5auq I've found that no matter how fast the computer hardware is along comes the latest OS and software to slow it right down. I loaded Win 95 on an old box a while back just for fun and wow - it was super fast. The best way to get a huge performance increase on any box is to load a relatively ancient OS on it.

I think a lot of hardware advancements are really hurt by slow software. Almost everything you install now days comes with hidden little updaters and features that kill performance. And security software - particularly anti-virus offerings - can really put a dent in the speed of your shiny new computer. What we really need is much faster hard drives and much faster software.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
gates_2_point_0 1st Dec 2010
Great article. However, from what I understand Lightwave Logic has developed electro-optical and 3rd order light-switching-light polymers to be used stand-alone or in conjunction with silicon that promise continuation of Moore's law for many years to come using less power and increasing speed by orders of magnitude.

The conference call on December 8th discussing the new 3rd order materials tested by Lehigh University and professor Biaggio should prove to be very interesting at the least
0 Votes
+ -
bad grammar
bmeacham98@... 1st Dec 2010
> The Apple ]['s motherboard ....
This literally means "The Apple ][ is motherboard...." Remove the apostrophe. It should read "The Apple ][s motherboard...."
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
SteveCarr 1st Dec 2010
@bmeacham98@... Nope - the apostrophe indicates the possessive case - as in the motherboard that belongs in/to the Apple ][.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
Tigertank 1st Dec 2010
@SteveCarr
Fascinating topic for discussion guys.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
Playdrv4me Updated - 2nd Dec 2010
@bmeacham98@...

Wow... Seriously? Time to go back and school yourself on the possessive case.

Perhaps most amusing, you managed to completely overlook an entire omitted word ("how") in the immediately following sentence.

Grammar Nazi fail really is the best kind.
0 Votes
+ -
Computer science used to be about getting the most efficient program to work with the least amount of resources. The epitome of this was the Psion handheld computers which had bullet proof multitasking. Their whole office suite was less than a couple hundred kilobytes, but offered what you see is what you get and autoupdated graphs and spreadsheet elements in the word program. The uninformed stress about processor speed, and even today crow about the gigahertz processor in the Droid 2 which I own -it takes up to 20 seconds to look up a contact if it gets gummed up by errant processes which I have to either manage or kill. The macbook air is panned by the same geeks for having a "old" dual core processor when in fact in combination with an SSD, the system screams.

The Lotus sports car is an example -it runs a tiny Toyota motor but because the frame and body have been slimmed and optimized, the car still zips in sub 5 seconds time from 0-60.

Moore's Law has always been an invitation to hack and kludge your way through difficult problems. Bloat, instability, and inefficiencies just caused demand for the next generation of hardware rather than a look at what you've got.

I was able to resuscitate my mom's 5 year old laptop to modern conditions merely by adding a gig of ram and loading Ubuntu. So please think a bit before you wet your pants over the 256mB of RAM on an iPad -it forces app developers to think hard about programming rather than assume that it will run okay on a supercomputer.
0 Votes
+ -
One of my buddies
oncall 1st Dec 2010
@docpark

Told me "Your lifestyle expands to match your available income", I have found this to be very true. Maybe this applies to software as well happy
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
erik.soderquist 2nd Dec 2010
@oncall

it most certainly does!!
0 Votes
+ -
Back in the day I owned an Apple IIE
James Quinn 1st Dec 2010
I put a memory card from a company I believe was called Applied Engineering and I put a lot of memory into that old Apple IIE such that I could create a ram disk and on that I loaded my AppleWorks. That program ran so fast on my 1 mhz Apple IIE that a modern computer system with a state of the art OS would be hard pressed to match it's speed. In fact I think my Apple IIE would prove to be faster even today.

Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
Not news
jigzat 1st Dec 2010
Actually the whole industry knew this after the Pentium 4 / G4 era, the thing is no one has been very vocal about it because it will take sales down.
0 Votes
+ -
You know you are wrong don't you ?
s_souche 2nd Dec 2010
"most personal apps - don?t need multicore architectures"
email : one thread for the display of the application, you can even have multiple thread to draw different parts of the application. One thread to retrieve email, one thread to send email, one or multiple thread to index you existing email, one or multiple thread to execute agents to filter and organize mails, one or multiple threads to manage grammar and spell correction. One or multiple threads to cache links within email you might be interested in, so that pages and email content is already ready in case you select associated items. result ? email program can be written with tens of threads without the need for a complex compiler to parallelize automatically.

word processor, as above, multiple threads for display, multiple threads for grammar and spell checks, threads to update tables and indices.


spreadsheet: parallel cell updates to take into account dependency graph, multiple thread for display, each graph with its own set of threads to update according to data, massively multithreaded optimization and consolidation function, the limit is memory here.

Presentation : multi threaded for display, multithreded for checks, multitrheaded for animations

browser : multithreaded or multiprocess for each tab, with with one thread or process for each control displayed, threads for predictive caching, for cache mgt...

games : do I need to describe here ? multithreaded display, multithreaded IA, threaded for IO, network, sound video physics..... games are inherently multiagents

and all of this in a multitask environment. each single application described here can take advantage of a multicore environment, and we are talking of tens of active threads here, not just one or two.

There is room for a lot of cores, software just have to take it into account, but modern software architecture will lead naturally to multithreaded applications.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
batpox 2nd Dec 2010
@s_souche
I think you are confusing multi-core with multi-thread.

I think he addressed this somewhat in the article. While we know (pretty well) how to program multi-threaded apps, the parallel processing software/patterns (needed to utilize the multi-cores) is still struggling/emerging.

And a different - but related - issue is how the CPU(s) and GPU play together. Again, the software for dealing with this is in its infancy.

There are some great articles on parallel coding on wikipedia, and if you want to do some practical coding, head to either Intel's or Microsoft's sites to get some nice free SDKs.
0 Votes
+ -
I don't think I am confusing
s_souche 2nd Dec 2010
@batpox Multithread application scaled naturally well on multicore architectures. Saying we don't need multicore architecture while using one single application is exactly the same thing as saying we don't need multithreaded application, or at least we don't need application with multiple active threads, most thread beeing only background low level activities.

General purpose multicore CPU, i-e 12 and more x64 cores can be used easilly with everyday types of applciations,a s I described. Of course, with existing software beeing developped at the time of poor multithreaded support and of monocore or few core, current applications wouldn't take profit of manycores architectures. But we are talking perspectives here, and in the near future, every days software can make use of manycores to everybody advantage. No need of compexe compilers or of hybrid CPU/GPU environments here, only clear and simple architecture with exxisting programming techniques and tools.


taking advantage of heterogeneous many cores ( i-e a dozen x64 general purpose core plus hundreds of GPU cores ) is another matter. that is more a paradigm shift from today architecture, with SIMD units moving from general purpose in core to specific purpose cores. This will require real improvements in compiler technologies, and will of course apply only to SIMD intensive applications, mainly audio, video and 3D graphics for average Joe.

Hope I made my mind clear
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
Evil(er) Overlord 2nd Dec 2010
You think that what people on $2,500/yr really want is a digital camera?
0 Votes
+ -
The current wall is the software.
linux for me 2nd Dec 2010
With a few exceptions, most of the available software was, and still is, written for a single core.

The operating systems have caught on to using multiple cores or processors, with Unix/Linux being the early adopters, and Windows much later (With a rare exception, almost all of the top 500 fastest super computers run linux, is just scales better). However, most of the daily applications used today, are still programmed for single core use. Until development systems can help developers write the necessary code and compile these applications for use in parallel processing, no matter how many cores are on a system, your standard apps will not take advantage of those extra cores, so the wall will continue to exist.
@linux for me There are actually different kinds of parallelization, or more precisely of multitheading for application.

You can have architectural multithreading, where different architectural component run natively on different threads of execution. the application was simply designed to do multiple things at the same time. developing such application is suppler than developing monothreaded applications, because code execution respect components segregation.

part of this first category is the management of background activity. These are components run by the application with lower priority. they were the first parallel improvement to old monothreaded application because they do not necessitate complete re architectures of applicationt o be implemented, but they produce applications with one main thead doing most of the work and a bunch of very low level activity threads. the result is an application that mostly use one single core

You then have parallelization of units of execution which at the architectural level are seen as atomic. One example is parallelization of an operation on a set of object : many time the same operation to be applied to different objects. This parallelization is difficult to perform manually and usually reduce portability of the code. this is the kind of operations that have to be dealt with by compilers. But this is a small amount of paralleliztion to be prformed on sofwtares to adapt them to manycore environemnts. Architectural multithreading is ware most gain is....
0 Votes
+ -
right now mos chips purchased today are in the 45~42NM range. The benefits are less heat generated from the chip and less power required to power the processor. Sure, we haven't gone past 3Ghz in processor speed, but have added multiple cores (6 now for consumer retail). The result, greater multi-tasking and animation of our desktop environments.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
cmwade1977 2nd Dec 2010
How many times have we head that Moore's law is dead in the past? Here is an article from 2005: http://news.techworld.com/operating-systems/3477/moores-law-is-dead-says-gordon-moore/

It makes for good headlines, but that is about it....we always seem to find a way to double performance every 18 to 24 months.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
james347 2nd Dec 2010
A big, giant, thick, bloated, evil, wide, huge, gianormous wall!
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
wizoddg 2nd Dec 2010
No. The wall has not been hit. The 'law' is merely an observation, we may hit a plateau, but new technology will eventually continue the trend.

Frankly, at this point, for consumers it's irrelevant. Software (other than games) for home & business applications is several generations behind the hardware--for most purposes, faster machines are meaningless unless people actually use them to run more or more complex applications.

Most processing capacity sits idle most of the time.

Of course, nothing is static.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
gtbest 2nd Dec 2010
Most cpus are now multicore but few apps are designed to use them. Why not allow apps to be assigned to a specific core? The OS in core 1, browser in core 2, office apps in core 3, etc. If this were standard then cores could be optimized for their assigned app.
0 Votes
+ -
Robotics
winddrift03 2nd Dec 2010
Has anyone considered what this means for robotics and artificial intelligence? Certainly, several orders of magnitude of increased computing power is still required.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
GBC2 2nd Dec 2010
It was always pretentious to call it a "law", being maybe an example of the industry taking itself too seriously.

It was an observation of history by a leading manufacturer.

Current events are now becoming history, so the observation will no longer be valid.
0 Votes
+ -
So what?
kidtree 2nd Dec 2010
It's a nice fantasy to imagine computers getting faster and more powerful in an infinite logarithmic progression, but do we need it? Sure, I get annoyed when my computer takes several seconds to do a big job, but it does it. This urgency to maintain an infinite cycle of improvement smells more of consumerism than need.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
erik.soderquist 3rd Dec 2010
@kidtree

if we can successfully put a man on the moon with less processing power than my daughter's current calculator has (we did), then i don't think more-faster-more-faster is an absolute requirement

on the flip side, with as dependent as we have become on computers of all sorts, i've met many who are in desperate need of classes in basic logic and deductive reasoning
0 Votes
+ -
When the AWACS was first introduced...
Gaius_Maximus 2nd Dec 2010
(that got ya, eh?) ... it was, for the most part, the same old hardware, but under new management, the management of revolutionary software.

The chips may have hit a wall, but 'hardware' is far from any barriers, as Robin himself indicates with references to network, power, integration, and SSDs. (LOVE your column, Robin!) And using multiple CPUs isn't really all that daunting, either. There are clustering options that can gang the resources of whole PCs into ultra-high-performance systems masquerading as single systems, and then virtualization tools to divvy up those combined resources into multiple, virtual systems again that are much faster, more reliable, and easier to manage as a result of the cluster hosting them. (Although I prefer to use a multi-seat/user OS instead of multiple, virtual PCs.)

And mobile isn't the panacea. Neither is the cloud. But, imagine if, instead of having to buy a new PC every few years to realize barely perceptible gains for hundreds of dollars, you could expand the performance of your current system by simply stacking on another $50 'module' that the OS would automatically integrate into the whole, boosting your overall performance. Now, imagine your home super-computer were your own private 'cloud', serving as home automator, financial manager, media center, communications hub, etc., and that your tablet, laptop, phone, brain implant, etc. were really nothing more than a thin-client, connecting over necessarily more modest means to your home system in order to use its much faster and more reliable connection(s) (redundant and multiplexed DSL and Cable?) and 'CPU' to download and store movies, music, etc.

Imagine your home system in constant contact with your car via your cell (which is also required to start and run it), monitoring charge, performance, maintenance, navigation, even monitoring nearby vehicles. All the most beneficial electronics could be moved from your vehicle to your home, not only rendering the vehicle useless to thieves, but also making it more easily 'improved' (and less easily 'obsoleted' into irrelevance by the manufacturer), just like the old flying radome became the AWACS through a simple software upgrade.

I still see an awful lot of room for performance improvement.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
snorkleface 6th Dec 2010
I believe we have hit a soft wall. The big problems I see as impediments to getting through that wall are indifference. I don't think companies are willing to put out the necessary research funds to think outside the box and develop something new. Why should they? The general public isn't screaming for more powerful desktops? Anyone that needs more power, simply builds a cluster.

All attention seems to be on mobile computing right now.

I believe that if we really want to take the next quantum step in improving 'computers', it must be in the direction of biological form. I believe we need to figure out how to build a computer based on how the human brain works. I'm not saying that's the only way, but if we do that, I believe we'll see a fantastic improvement in speed and power, while reducing the carbon footprint of computers.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Moore's Wall
erik.soderquist 7th Dec 2010
@snorkleface

we would also see a much greater understanding of the human brain, which could also lead to better ways to heal brain damage, prevent dementia, etc

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix