Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (48849)	7/8/2001 12:39:39 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Brian, I read about the "7 years left" in Moore laws in one of INTC pieces, I believe, I did not "catalogue it, so I have no URL. As for vertical vs horizontal signal traveling, are you telling me that these signals are sensitive to the "gravity vector". I can put my computer on its side and it will still work fine (g). I am not sure what IBM is talking about in that respect. 10 or so atomic layers are between 40 to 50 angstroms, whether these atoms are stacked vertically or horizontally. Zeev

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (48849)	7/8/2001 3:01:51 PM
From: Katherine Derbyshire	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

The SIA International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors foresees the end of Moore's Law within its horizon. (The full document is at public.itrs.net Reasonable people disagree about whether the Roadmap is as visionary as it might be, but it's hardly the work of crackpots. Regarding IBM's SiGe breakthrough, I don't believe Moore's Law says anything about transistor speed, just density. The density is what ultimately makes computers more powerful, and is also what gives the semiconductor industry its phenomenal economics of scale. Put another way, an 8086 running at 210 GHz wouldn't beat a 1.8GHz P4, because the P4 architecture can do so much more in each clock cycle. Katherine