SAN
FRANCISCO — For decades, the computer industry has been guided by a
faith that engineers would always find a way to make the components on
computer chips smaller, faster and cheaper.
But
a decision by a global alliance of chip makers to back away from
reliance on Moore’s Law, a principle that has guided tech companies from
the giant mainframes of the 1960s to today’s smartphones, shows that
the industry may need to rethink the central tenet of Silicon Valley’s
innovation ethos.
Chip
scientists are nearly at the point where they are manipulating material
as small as atoms. When they hit that mark within the next five years
or so, they may bump into the boundaries of how tiny semiconductors can
become. After that, they may have to look for alternatives to silicon,
which is used to make computer chips, or new design ideas in order to
make computers more powerful.
It
is hard to overstate the importance of Moore’s Law to the entire world.
Despite its official sound, it is not actually a scientific rule like
Newton’s laws of motion. Instead, it describes the pace of change in a
manufacturing process that has made computers exponentially more
affordable.
In 1965, the Intel
co-founder Gordon Moore first observed that the number of components
that could be etched onto the surface of a silicon wafer was doubling at
regular intervals and would do so for the foreseeable future.
When
Dr. Moore made his observation, the densest memory chips stored only
about 1,000 bits of information. Today’s densest memory chips have
roughly 20 billion transistors. To put it another way, the iPad 2, which
went on the market in 2011 for $400 and fits in your lap, had more computing power
than the world’s most powerful supercomputer in the 1980s, a device
called the Cray 2 that was about the size of an industrial washing
machine and would cost more than $15 million today.
That iPad 2, mind you, is slow compared to newer models.
Without
those remarkable improvements, today’s computer industry wouldn’t
exist. The vast cloud-computing data centers run by companies like
Google and Amazon would be impossibly expensive to build. There would be
no smartphones with apps that allow you to order a ride home or get
dinner delivered. And scientific breakthroughs like decoding the human
genome or teaching machines to listen would not have happened.
Signaling
their belief that the best way to forecast the future of computing
needs to be changed, the Semiconductor Industry Associations of the
United States, Europe, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan will make one final
report based on a chip technology forecasting system called the
International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors.
Nearly
every big chip maker, including Intel, IBM and Samsung, belongs to the
organization, though Intel says it is not participating in the last
report.
To
replace what the semiconductor industry has done for nearly 25 years, a
professional organization called the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers announced on Wednesday that it will a create a new
forecasting system, called the International Roadmap for Devices and
Systems, that is intended to track a wider range of computer
technologies.
One technology could be so-called quantum computing,
a cutting-edge reimagining of how computers work that taps quantum
physics — a branch of physics that explains how matter and energy
interact. Another could be graphene, a form of carbon and an alternative
to silicon that could produce smaller and faster transistors that use
less power.
“The
end of Moore’s Law is what led to this,” said Thomas M. Conte, a
Georgia Institute of Technology computer scientist and co-chairman of
the effort to draw up a new set of benchmarks to replace the
semiconductor reports. “Just relying on the semiconductor industry is no
longer enough. We have to shift and punch through some walls and break
through some barriers.”
Predicting
the end of Moore’s Law has for years been a parlor game in Silicon
Valley, and not everyone in the industry believes that what it has come
to represent is nearly over. Intel, the world’s largest chip maker, is a
notable contrarian and predicts it has the means and know-how to push
further into the atomic level.
In
a statement on his company’s website last month, Brian Krzanich,
Intel’s chief executive, played down concerns. “I have witnessed the
advertised death of Moore’s Law no less than four times,” he wrote.
Intel,
however, faces its own problems because of a long slump in PC sales and
an inability to sell many chips to smartphone makers. Last month, the
company announced plans to lay off 12,000 workers — roughly 11 percent
of its work force — and take a $1.2 billion charge.
The
industry saw signs that Moore’s Law was running out of steam as far
back as 2005, when researchers began to worry that computer processors
were becoming so hot that they would soon match the surface of the sun
in heat output.
But
the industry managed to fix the problem by worrying less about
increasing speed and instead splitting tasks among many processors. In
effect, it kept things cool by finding a way to share the load.
By
walking away from a task they have managed for so long, the chip makers
other than Intel — the Silicon Valley giant says it is no longer
formally contributing to the forecasting process — are posing broader
questions about their businesses.
“As
you look at Intel saying the PC industry is slowing and seeing the
first signs of slowing in mobile computing, people are starting to look
for new places to put semiconductors,” said David Kanter, a
semiconductor industry analyst at Real World Technologies in San
Francisco.
In
addition to the impending physical limits of transistors, other
barriers are looming. For example, most of the semiconductor industry
now insists that the per-transistor cost of computer chips has stopped
falling. That had been one of the factors leading to rapid development
of new computer technologies.
Many
executives and analysts in the computer industry are skeptical about
Intel’s ability to keep Moore’s Law going. They point out that if the
chip maker were able to continue to reduce costs, it would have been
able to make larger inroads into the mobile computing world of
smartphones. As part of its recent cutbacks, the company killed its Atom
microprocessors, which it had been unsuccessfully trying to sell to
smartphone makers.
“If your whole business was about Moore’s Law, and it was ending, how would you react?” Dr. Conte wrote in an email message.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/05/technology/moores-law-running-out-of-room-tech-looks-for-a-successor.html?WT.mc_id=SmartBriefs-Newsletter&WT.mc_ev=click&ad-keywords=smartbriefsnl&_r=0
No comments:
Post a Comment