Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It wasn't until the last few years CPU's had more than 4 cores or 8.
It doesn't make sense to spend time on writing multi threaded
software for only 2, 4 or 8 cores.
Context switching will kill some of the performance on single or
dual core systems.
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 2:37:57 AM UTC+1,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in
news:46638391-8249-4ab6-b0a6-b56ec485cdbc@googlegroups.com:
Multi-threaded software will become the norm instead of the
exception. This will automatically create even more demand for
even more cores.
You are lost. Multi-threaded processing has been around for
decades.
And so too the software.
Plenty of examples and proofs. Hell even graphics subsystems
do
it. Ever heard of CUDA?
You been the one sleepin' and you think you are giving us a
wake
up...
Bwuahahahaha!
Please also take apart and break the computer you are on now so
we
do not have to see this crap for at least a while.
2 threads at best, one for gui, for for engine.
Name 10 tools that use more than 10 threads.
So far I only see games use lots of threads.
So stop trying to a be smart ass you motherfucking fool.
I WATCH TASK MANAGER FOR 14 YEARS SINCE I BOUGHT THIS SYSTEM.
Only windows runs 100's of threads, most programs NOPE.
Recently firefox MULTI PROCESS, It wasn't until recently it became
multi-threading, I also asked for it.
I bet you can't mention 10 programs !HAHA
FUCKING RETARD FOOL.
It wasn't until the last few years CPU's had more than 4 cores or
8.
It doesn't make sense to spend time on writing multi threaded
software for only 2, 4 or 8 cores.
Context switching will kill some of the performance on single or
dual core systems.
Bye,
Skybuck.
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in
news:1db8f0f8-02af-4805-aba7-7a4b88cd7923@googlegroups.com:
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 5:31:36 AM UTC+1,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote in
news:r1qdk9$1pkl$1 @gioia.aioe.org:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in news:46638391-8249-4ab6-b0a6-
b56ec485cdbc@googlegroups.com:
At the very least it should go from:
7 nanometers now, 64 to:
3.5 nanometers, 128
1.75 nanometers, 256
0.97 nanometers, 512
And maybe even 0.5 nanomenters 1024.
5 x 1.5 = 7 years.
You are a true idiot.
For one thing it was hard enough to get to 64 bit, and it is
the
rest of the gear not just the CPU. MAYBE go to 128, but not
much need to go further and by then we will have optical
computers and quantum computers kicking their asses. A 4 bit
optical computer
can
kick any silicon switches ass. Once we get there, transistor
based switching will get surpassed
We are down near atom sized features now. Elements 50 atoms
wide
and less. We will not likely be going much smaller than say
3.5nm. There are limits to how small a switch can be made and
I do not simply refer to our optical limitations.
Likely be a while before we even get to much less past this
node.
The chips look cool. But this nears the limit. READ UP.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/07/ibm-unveils-industrys-fir
st- 7nm-chip-moving-beyond-silicon/?itm_source=parsely-api
LOL 7 NM RETARD.
0.5 is already done.
You are stupid, boy. 7nm multi-billion element chips are being
made.
Some lab made a single element 0.5 nm transistor. NOT a CHIP.
Proof of concept, at best.
BIG DIFFERENCE, you retarded child.
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 3:02:55 AM UTC+1, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in news:46638391-8249-4ab6-b0a6-
b56ec485cdbc@googlegroups.com:
At the very least it should go from:
7 nanometers now, 64 to:
3.5 nanometers, 128
1.75 nanometers, 256
0.97 nanometers, 512
And maybe even 0.5 nanomenters 1024.
5 x 1.5 = 7 years.
You are a true idiot.
For one thing it was hard enough to get to 64 bit, and it is the
rest of the gear not just the CPU. MAYBE go to 128, but not much
need to go further and by then we will have optical computers and
quantum computers kicking their asses. A 4 bit optical computer can
kick any silicon switches ass. Once we get there, transistor based
switching will get surpassed
We are down near atom sized features now. Elements 50 atoms wide
and less. We will not likely be going much smaller than say 3.5nm.
There are limits to how small a switch can be made and I do not
simply refer to our optical limitations.
Fucking idiot, I read the news. TECH NEWS.
Researches did 0.5 nanometer transistors.
If you don't believe me, them or google that's fine. JUST FUCK OFF.
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 11:28:27 PM UTC+1, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Sunday, February 9, 2020 at 7:34:34 PM UTC-5, skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
I will write one more post for now with my thoughts on where the PC is going and also processors and software.
We know where it's going. The PC market peaked eight years ago and
has been declining ever since.
Nuff said.
NOPE, sales are increasing for the first time in a few years ! HAHA.
If you had ben paying attention, the general feeling is thatOn Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:52:37 AM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 3:02:55 AM UTC+1,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in news:46638391-8249-4ab6-b0a6-
b56ec485cdbc@googlegroups.com:
At the very least it should go from:
7 nanometers now, 64 to:
3.5 nanometers, 128
1.75 nanometers, 256
0.97 nanometers, 512
And maybe even 0.5 nanomenters 1024.
5 x 1.5 = 7 years.
You are a true idiot.
For one thing it was hard enough to get to 64 bit, and it is
the
rest of the gear not just the CPU. MAYBE go to 128, but not
much need to go further and by then we will have optical
computers and quantum computers kicking their asses. A 4 bit
optical computer can kick any silicon switches ass. Once we
get there, transistor based switching will get surpassed
We are down near atom sized features now. Elements 50 atoms
wide
and less. We will not likely be going much smaller than say
3.5nm. There are limits to how small a switch can be made and
I do not simply refer to our optical limitations.
Fucking idiot, I read the news. TECH NEWS.
Researches did 0.5 nanometer transistors.
If you don't believe me, them or google that's fine. JUST FUCK
OFF.
It's not that he doesn't believe you. It's that it's like he
said, they built one experimental transistor in a lab that's
0.5nm. That is a glimpse into the future of what may be possible.
Today 7nm is state of the art for actual PRODUCTION of chips. If
Moore's Law continues to hold true, we may see production of 0.5nm
in about 8 years. But it could take much longer, it gets
increasingly difficult to continue to decrease size, we've already
had to substantially modify fab processes to get where we are and
the further we push, the more complex it gets. I'd say we've been
extremely lucky that we've been able to overcome all the obstacles
so far. But the chances of that continuing diminish the further
we go.
Just because you can use a dime to turn a screw head doesn't make
a dime a screwdriver. Can I run my x86 PC app software on a cell
phone?
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:54:44 AM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 11:28:27 PM UTC+1, Whoey Louie
wrote:
On Sunday, February 9, 2020 at 7:34:34 PM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
I will write one more post for now with my thoughts on where
the PC is going and also processors and software.
We know where it's going. The PC market peaked eight years ago
and has been declining ever since.
Nuff said.
NOPE, sales are increasing for the first time in a few years !
HAHA.
It's the fist increase in EIGHT years. You do know what a trend
is, don't you? And analysts attribute that to MSFT end of support
for Win 7.
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:428264c7-bf1b-4575-
8a42-b6de21590e64@googlegroups.com:
A phone is not a PC stupid.
Oh, they most certainly are, stupid child.
There are phones with micro-HDMI output, and nearly all can stream
OUT. That means they can be put on a display and then used no
differently than a PC. One is already able to add things like
keyboards, POS attachments.
You be blind traitor boy.
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:93205fbb-6f00-46b8-9ad1-44c8797a82f4@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:52:37 AM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 3:02:55 AM UTC+1,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in news:46638391-8249-4ab6-b0a6-
b56ec485cdbc@googlegroups.com:
At the very least it should go from:
7 nanometers now, 64 to:
3.5 nanometers, 128
1.75 nanometers, 256
0.97 nanometers, 512
And maybe even 0.5 nanomenters 1024.
5 x 1.5 = 7 years.
You are a true idiot.
For one thing it was hard enough to get to 64 bit, and it is
the
rest of the gear not just the CPU. MAYBE go to 128, but not
much need to go further and by then we will have optical
computers and quantum computers kicking their asses. A 4 bit
optical computer can kick any silicon switches ass. Once we
get there, transistor based switching will get surpassed
We are down near atom sized features now. Elements 50 atoms
wide
and less. We will not likely be going much smaller than say
3.5nm. There are limits to how small a switch can be made and
I do not simply refer to our optical limitations.
Fucking idiot, I read the news. TECH NEWS.
Researches did 0.5 nanometer transistors.
If you don't believe me, them or google that's fine. JUST FUCK
OFF.
It's not that he doesn't believe you. It's that it's like he
said, they built one experimental transistor in a lab that's
0.5nm. That is a glimpse into the future of what may be possible.
Today 7nm is state of the art for actual PRODUCTION of chips. If
Moore's Law continues to hold true, we may see production of 0.5nm
in about 8 years. But it could take much longer, it gets
increasingly difficult to continue to decrease size, we've already
had to substantially modify fab processes to get where we are and
the further we push, the more complex it gets. I'd say we've been
extremely lucky that we've been able to overcome all the obstacles
so far. But the chances of that continuing diminish the further
we go.
If you had ben paying attention, the general feeling is that
Moore's Law is done. We are at very near the limit of what can be
fashioned into switches.
Maybe we will get atom scale transistor switches laid out on
graphene lattice layers.
Till then, we are pretty darn close to about as far as Silicon and
Germanium can get. Rememeber, it is not just the optical node we are
at, but the interconnects and such. SkyTard Chihuahua barked about
how Intel is making a mistake by stacking chips, yet memory chip
makers have been doing it for years.
7 is small.
5 is likely the cost / chip over size limit.
3.5 is
dreamland.
And his 0.5 will end up as a special seen in Quantum dot making or
such.
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:30:24 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:93205fbb-6f00-46b8-9ad1-44c8797a82f4@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:52:37 AM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 3:02:55 AM UTC+1,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in news:46638391-8249-4ab6-b0a6-
b56ec485cdbc@googlegroups.com:
At the very least it should go from:
7 nanometers now, 64 to:
3.5 nanometers, 128
1.75 nanometers, 256
0.97 nanometers, 512
And maybe even 0.5 nanomenters 1024.
5 x 1.5 = 7 years.
You are a true idiot.
For one thing it was hard enough to get to 64 bit, and it is
the
rest of the gear not just the CPU. MAYBE go to 128, but not
much need to go further and by then we will have optical
computers and quantum computers kicking their asses. A 4 bit
optical computer can kick any silicon switches ass. Once we
get there, transistor based switching will get surpassed
We are down near atom sized features now. Elements 50 atoms
wide
and less. We will not likely be going much smaller than say
3.5nm. There are limits to how small a switch can be made and
I do not simply refer to our optical limitations.
Fucking idiot, I read the news. TECH NEWS.
Researches did 0.5 nanometer transistors.
If you don't believe me, them or google that's fine. JUST FUCK
OFF.
It's not that he doesn't believe you. It's that it's like he
said, they built one experimental transistor in a lab that's
0.5nm. That is a glimpse into the future of what may be possible.
Today 7nm is state of the art for actual PRODUCTION of chips. If
Moore's Law continues to hold true, we may see production of 0.5nm
in about 8 years. But it could take much longer, it gets
increasingly difficult to continue to decrease size, we've already
had to substantially modify fab processes to get where we are and
the further we push, the more complex it gets. I'd say we've been
extremely lucky that we've been able to overcome all the obstacles
so far. But the chances of that continuing diminish the further
we go.
If you had ben paying attention, the general feeling is that
Moore's Law is done. We are at very near the limit of what can be
fashioned into switches.
Well, that depends on who you listen to. For example from over a
year ago:
https://www.cnet.com/news/moores-law-is-dead-nvidias-ceo-jensen-huang-says-at-ces-2019/
"At least that's what Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang believes. The executive, who co-founded graphics-chip maker Nvidia, on Wednesday declared that "Moore's Law isn't possible anymore.
Moore's Law used to grow at 10x every five years [and] 100x every 10 years," Huang said during a Q&A panel with a small group of reporters and analysts at CES 2019. "Right now Moore's Law is growing a few percent every year.. Every 10 years maybe only 2s. ... So Moore's Law has finished."
What the hell was he talking about? We just went from 10nm being state
of the art to 7nm and 5 nm will roll out later this year. That's
a few percent? ROFL He sure can't do math.
And what does Intel say?
"Intel, for its part, doesn't think Moore's Law is dead. Companies are just finding new ways to keep it going, like Intel's new 3D chip stacking. The manufacturing technology it calls Foveros stacks different chip elements directly on top of each other, a move that should dramatically increase performance and the range of chips Intel can profitably sell.
"Elements of this debate have been going on since the early 2000s," Intel Chief Technology Officer Michael Mayberry said in an EETimes post in August. "Meanwhile, technologists ignore the debate and keep making progress."
And he's right. From MIT Technology Review, 2000, here is where they were
saying it was over back then:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/400710/the-end-of-moores-law/
The End of Moore's Law?
Maybe we will get atom scale transistor switches laid out on
graphene lattice layers.
Till then, we are pretty darn close to about as far as Silicon and
Germanium can get. Rememeber, it is not just the optical node we are
at, but the interconnects and such. SkyTard Chihuahua barked about
how Intel is making a mistake by stacking chips, yet memory chip
makers have been doing it for years.
7 is small.
They said that in the 80s at 3 microns too. Small isn't a tech term.
5 is likely the cost / chip over size limit.
Funny thing then that the largest chip manufacturer in the world is
rolling production on 5 nm out later this year. By 2021 it will be
in cell phones and computers.
3.5 is
dreamland.
Who should we believe? You or Intel? From a recent presentation of
the roadmap from Intel/ASML. One builds em, the other makes the fab
gear:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15217/intels-manufacturing-roadmap-from-2019-to-2029
1.4nm in 2029
Intel expects to be on 2 year cadence with its manufacturing process node technology, starting with 10nm in 2019 and moving to 7nm EUV in 2021, then a fundamental new node in each of 2023, 2025, 2027, 2029. This final node is what ASML has dubbed '1.4nm'. This is the first mention on 1.4nm in the context of Intel on any Intel-related slide. For context, if that 1.4nm is indicative of any actual feature, would be the equivalent of 12 silicon atoms across.
And his 0.5 will end up as a special seen in Quantum dot making or
such.
Maybe so, but Intel has a roadmap to 1.4, which is getting close.
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 1:59:37 PM UTC-5, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:30:24 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:93205fbb-6f00-46b8-9ad1-44c8797a82f4@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:52:37 AM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 3:02:55 AM UTC+1,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in news:46638391-8249-4ab6-b0a6-
b56ec485cdbc@googlegroups.com:
At the very least it should go from:
7 nanometers now, 64 to:
3.5 nanometers, 128
1.75 nanometers, 256
0.97 nanometers, 512
And maybe even 0.5 nanomenters 1024.
5 x 1.5 = 7 years.
You are a true idiot.
For one thing it was hard enough to get to 64 bit, and it is
the
rest of the gear not just the CPU. MAYBE go to 128, but not
much need to go further and by then we will have optical
computers and quantum computers kicking their asses. A 4 bit
optical computer can kick any silicon switches ass. Once we
get there, transistor based switching will get surpassed
We are down near atom sized features now. Elements 50 atoms
wide
and less. We will not likely be going much smaller than say
3.5nm. There are limits to how small a switch can be made and
I do not simply refer to our optical limitations.
Fucking idiot, I read the news. TECH NEWS.
Researches did 0.5 nanometer transistors.
If you don't believe me, them or google that's fine. JUST FUCK
OFF.
It's not that he doesn't believe you. It's that it's like he
said, they built one experimental transistor in a lab that's
0.5nm. That is a glimpse into the future of what may be possible.
Today 7nm is state of the art for actual PRODUCTION of chips. If
Moore's Law continues to hold true, we may see production of 0.5nm
in about 8 years. But it could take much longer, it gets
increasingly difficult to continue to decrease size, we've already
had to substantially modify fab processes to get where we are and
the further we push, the more complex it gets. I'd say we've been
extremely lucky that we've been able to overcome all the obstacles
so far. But the chances of that continuing diminish the further
we go.
If you had ben paying attention, the general feeling is that
Moore's Law is done. We are at very near the limit of what can be
fashioned into switches.
Well, that depends on who you listen to. For example from over a
year ago:
https://www.cnet.com/news/moores-law-is-dead-nvidias-ceo-jensen-huang-says-at-ces-2019/
"At least that's what Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang believes. The executive, who co-founded graphics-chip maker Nvidia, on Wednesday declared that "Moore's Law isn't possible anymore.
Moore's Law used to grow at 10x every five years [and] 100x every 10 years," Huang said during a Q&A panel with a small group of reporters and analysts at CES 2019. "Right now Moore's Law is growing a few percent every year. Every 10 years maybe only 2s. ... So Moore's Law has finished."
What the hell was he talking about? We just went from 10nm being state
of the art to 7nm and 5 nm will roll out later this year. That's
a few percent? ROFL He sure can't do math.
And what does Intel say?
"Intel, for its part, doesn't think Moore's Law is dead. Companies are just finding new ways to keep it going, like Intel's new 3D chip stacking. The manufacturing technology it calls Foveros stacks different chip elements directly on top of each other, a move that should dramatically increase performance and the range of chips Intel can profitably sell.
"Elements of this debate have been going on since the early 2000s," Intel Chief Technology Officer Michael Mayberry said in an EETimes post in August. "Meanwhile, technologists ignore the debate and keep making progress."
And he's right. From MIT Technology Review, 2000, here is where they were
saying it was over back then:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/400710/the-end-of-moores-law/
The End of Moore's Law?
Maybe we will get atom scale transistor switches laid out on
graphene lattice layers.
Till then, we are pretty darn close to about as far as Silicon and
Germanium can get. Rememeber, it is not just the optical node we are
at, but the interconnects and such. SkyTard Chihuahua barked about
how Intel is making a mistake by stacking chips, yet memory chip
makers have been doing it for years.
7 is small.
They said that in the 80s at 3 microns too. Small isn't a tech term.
5 is likely the cost / chip over size limit.
Funny thing then that the largest chip manufacturer in the world is
rolling production on 5 nm out later this year. By 2021 it will be
in cell phones and computers.
3.5 is
dreamland.
Who should we believe? You or Intel? From a recent presentation of
the roadmap from Intel/ASML. One builds em, the other makes the fab
gear:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15217/intels-manufacturing-roadmap-from-2019-to-2029
1.4nm in 2029
Intel expects to be on 2 year cadence with its manufacturing process node technology, starting with 10nm in 2019 and moving to 7nm EUV in 2021, then a fundamental new node in each of 2023, 2025, 2027, 2029. This final node is what ASML has dubbed '1.4nm'. This is the first mention on 1.4nm in the context of Intel on any Intel-related slide. For context, if that 1.4nm is indicative of any actual feature, would be the equivalent of 12 silicon atoms across.
And his 0.5 will end up as a special seen in Quantum dot making or
such.
Maybe so, but Intel has a roadmap to 1.4, which is getting close.
It's interesting what is on the market. I bought one of these a couple months ago, to get a newer version of Android.
10-1-Tablet-8G-128G-Android-8-0-bluetooth-3G-WiFi-PC-Dual-Camera-GPS-Phablet
https://www.ebay.com/itm/352837784631
Ten core tablet, 8GB of RAM, 128GB of Flash. Will take 64GB MicroSD Card ant two SIMM cards for cellular service for $58.
I think you are fucking lost. Have you ever even seen a serverOn Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 2:57:14 PM UTC-5, Michael
Terrell wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 1:59:37 PM UTC-5, Whoey Louie
wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:30:24 PM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@d
ecadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:93205fbb-6f00-46b8-9ad1-44c8797a82f4@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:52:37 AM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 3:02:55 AM UTC+1,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in
news:46638391-8249-4ab6-b0a6-
b56ec485cdbc@googlegroups.com:
At the very least it should go from:
7 nanometers now, 64 to:
3.5 nanometers, 128
1.75 nanometers, 256
0.97 nanometers, 512
And maybe even 0.5 nanomenters 1024.
5 x 1.5 = 7 years.
You are a true idiot.
For one thing it was hard enough to get to 64 bit, and
it is the
rest of the gear not just the CPU. MAYBE go to 128, but
not much need to go further and by then we will have
optical computers and quantum computers kicking their
asses. A 4 bit optical computer can kick any silicon
switches ass. Once we get there, transistor based
switching will get surpassed
We are down near atom sized features now. Elements 50
atoms wide
and less. We will not likely be going much smaller than
say 3.5nm. There are limits to how small a switch can
be made and I do not simply refer to our optical
limitations.
Fucking idiot, I read the news. TECH NEWS.
Researches did 0.5 nanometer transistors.
If you don't believe me, them or google that's fine. JUST
FUCK OFF.
It's not that he doesn't believe you. It's that it's like
he said, they built one experimental transistor in a lab
that's 0.5nm. That is a glimpse into the future of what may
be possible.
Today 7nm is state of the art for actual PRODUCTION of
chips. If Moore's Law continues to hold true, we may see
production of 0.5nm in about 8 years. But it could take
much longer, it gets increasingly difficult to continue to
decrease size, we've already had to substantially modify
fab processes to get where we are and the further we push,
the more complex it gets. I'd say we've been extremely
lucky that we've been able to overcome all the obstacles
so far. But the chances of that continuing diminish the
further we go.
If you had ben paying attention, the general feeling is
that
Moore's Law is done. We are at very near the limit of what
can be fashioned into switches.
Well, that depends on who you listen to. For example from over
a year ago:
https://www.cnet.com/news/moores-law-is-dead-nvidias-ceo-jensen-
huang-s
ays-at-ces-2019/
"At least that's what Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang believes. The
executive,
who co-founded graphics-chip maker Nvidia, on Wednesday declared
that "Moore's Law isn't possible anymore.
Moore's Law used to grow at 10x every five years [and] 100x
every 10 ye
ars," Huang said during a Q&A panel with a small group of
reporters and analysts at CES 2019. "Right now Moore's Law is
growing a few percent every year. Every 10 years maybe only 2s.
... So Moore's Law has finished."
What the hell was he talking about? We just went from 10nm
being state of the art to 7nm and 5 nm will roll out later this
year. That's a few percent? ROFL He sure can't do math.
And what does Intel say?
"Intel, for its part, doesn't think Moore's Law is dead.
Companies are
just finding new ways to keep it going, like Intel's new 3D chip
stacking. The manufacturing technology it calls Foveros stacks
different chip elements directly on top of each other, a move that
should dramatically increase performance and the range of chips
Intel can profitably sell.
"Elements of this debate have been going on since the early
2000s," Int
el Chief Technology Officer Michael Mayberry said in an EETimes
post in August. "Meanwhile, technologists ignore the debate and
keep making progress."
And he's right. From MIT Technology Review, 2000, here is
where they w
ere
saying it was over back then:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/400710/the-end-of-moores-law/
The End of Moore's Law?
Maybe we will get atom scale transistor switches laid out
on
graphene lattice layers.
Till then, we are pretty darn close to about as far as
Silicon and
Germanium can get. Rememeber, it is not just the optical
node we are
at, but the interconnects and such. SkyTard Chihuahua barked
about
how Intel is making a mistake by stacking chips, yet memory
chip makers have been doing it for years.
7 is small.
They said that in the 80s at 3 microns too. Small isn't a tech
term.
5 is likely the cost / chip over size limit.
Funny thing then that the largest chip manufacturer in the
world is rolling production on 5 nm out later this year. By
2021 it will be in cell phones and computers.
3.5 is
dreamland.
Who should we believe? You or Intel? From a recent
presentation of the roadmap from Intel/ASML. One builds em,
the other makes the fab gear:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15217/intels-manufacturing-roadma
p-from-
2019-to-2029
1.4nm in 2029
Intel expects to be on 2 year cadence with its manufacturing
process no
de technology, starting with 10nm in 2019 and moving to 7nm EUV in
2021, then a fundamental new node in each of 2023, 2025, 2027,
2029. This final node is what ASML has dubbed '1.4nm'. This is the
first mention on 1.4nm in the context of Intel on any
Intel-related slide. For context, if that 1.4nm is indicative of
any actual feature, would be the equivalent of 12 silicon atoms
across.
And his 0.5 will end up as a special seen in Quantum dot
making or
such.
Maybe so, but Intel has a roadmap to 1.4, which is getting
close.
It's interesting what is on the market. I bought one of these
a couple
months ago, to get a newer version of Android.
10-1-Tablet-8G-128G-Android-8-0-bluetooth-3G-WiFi-PC-Dual-Camera-G
PS-Phab
let
https://www.ebay.com/itm/352837784631
Ten core tablet, 8GB of RAM, 128GB of Flash. Will take 64GB
MicroSD Card
ant two SIMM cards for cellular service for $58.
That's an example of why the PC market is declining. And it
doesn't have an X86 CPU in it either. Bad news for Intel and AMD.
I guess the question is how fast the business PC market continues
to grow as the consumer market declines.
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:28d3ad0c-cf5d-46b1-8d47-a5ed3f35e897@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 2:57:14 PM UTC-5, Michael
Terrell wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 1:59:37 PM UTC-5, Whoey Louie
wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:30:24 PM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@d
ecadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:93205fbb-6f00-46b8-9ad1-44c8797a82f4@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:52:37 AM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 3:02:55 AM UTC+1,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in
news:46638391-8249-4ab6-b0a6-
b56ec485cdbc@googlegroups.com:
At the very least it should go from:
7 nanometers now, 64 to:
3.5 nanometers, 128
1.75 nanometers, 256
0.97 nanometers, 512
And maybe even 0.5 nanomenters 1024.
5 x 1.5 = 7 years.
You are a true idiot.
For one thing it was hard enough to get to 64 bit, and
it is the
rest of the gear not just the CPU. MAYBE go to 128, but
not much need to go further and by then we will have
optical computers and quantum computers kicking their
asses. A 4 bit optical computer can kick any silicon
switches ass. Once we get there, transistor based
switching will get surpassed
We are down near atom sized features now. Elements 50
atoms wide
and less. We will not likely be going much smaller than
say 3.5nm. There are limits to how small a switch can
be made and I do not simply refer to our optical
limitations.
Fucking idiot, I read the news. TECH NEWS.
Researches did 0.5 nanometer transistors.
If you don't believe me, them or google that's fine. JUST
FUCK OFF.
It's not that he doesn't believe you. It's that it's like
he said, they built one experimental transistor in a lab
that's 0.5nm. That is a glimpse into the future of what may
be possible.
Today 7nm is state of the art for actual PRODUCTION of
chips. If Moore's Law continues to hold true, we may see
production of 0.5nm in about 8 years. But it could take
much longer, it gets increasingly difficult to continue to
decrease size, we've already had to substantially modify
fab processes to get where we are and the further we push,
the more complex it gets. I'd say we've been extremely
lucky that we've been able to overcome all the obstacles
so far. But the chances of that continuing diminish the
further we go.
If you had ben paying attention, the general feeling is
that
Moore's Law is done. We are at very near the limit of what
can be fashioned into switches.
Well, that depends on who you listen to. For example from over
a year ago:
https://www.cnet.com/news/moores-law-is-dead-nvidias-ceo-jensen-
huang-s
ays-at-ces-2019/
"At least that's what Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang believes. The
executive,
who co-founded graphics-chip maker Nvidia, on Wednesday declared
that "Moore's Law isn't possible anymore.
Moore's Law used to grow at 10x every five years [and] 100x
every 10 ye
ars," Huang said during a Q&A panel with a small group of
reporters and analysts at CES 2019. "Right now Moore's Law is
growing a few percent every year. Every 10 years maybe only 2s.
... So Moore's Law has finished."
What the hell was he talking about? We just went from 10nm
being state of the art to 7nm and 5 nm will roll out later this
year. That's a few percent? ROFL He sure can't do math.
And what does Intel say?
"Intel, for its part, doesn't think Moore's Law is dead.
Companies are
just finding new ways to keep it going, like Intel's new 3D chip
stacking. The manufacturing technology it calls Foveros stacks
different chip elements directly on top of each other, a move that
should dramatically increase performance and the range of chips
Intel can profitably sell.
"Elements of this debate have been going on since the early
2000s," Int
el Chief Technology Officer Michael Mayberry said in an EETimes
post in August. "Meanwhile, technologists ignore the debate and
keep making progress."
And he's right. From MIT Technology Review, 2000, here is
where they w
ere
saying it was over back then:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/400710/the-end-of-moores-law/
The End of Moore's Law?
Maybe we will get atom scale transistor switches laid out
on
graphene lattice layers.
Till then, we are pretty darn close to about as far as
Silicon and
Germanium can get. Rememeber, it is not just the optical
node we are
at, but the interconnects and such. SkyTard Chihuahua barked
about
how Intel is making a mistake by stacking chips, yet memory
chip makers have been doing it for years.
7 is small.
They said that in the 80s at 3 microns too. Small isn't a tech
term.
5 is likely the cost / chip over size limit.
Funny thing then that the largest chip manufacturer in the
world is rolling production on 5 nm out later this year. By
2021 it will be in cell phones and computers.
3.5 is
dreamland.
Who should we believe? You or Intel? From a recent
presentation of the roadmap from Intel/ASML. One builds em,
the other makes the fab gear:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15217/intels-manufacturing-roadma
p-from-
2019-to-2029
1.4nm in 2029
Intel expects to be on 2 year cadence with its manufacturing
process no
de technology, starting with 10nm in 2019 and moving to 7nm EUV in
2021, then a fundamental new node in each of 2023, 2025, 2027,
2029. This final node is what ASML has dubbed '1.4nm'. This is the
first mention on 1.4nm in the context of Intel on any
Intel-related slide. For context, if that 1.4nm is indicative of
any actual feature, would be the equivalent of 12 silicon atoms
across.
And his 0.5 will end up as a special seen in Quantum dot
making or
such.
Maybe so, but Intel has a roadmap to 1.4, which is getting
close.
It's interesting what is on the market. I bought one of these
a couple
months ago, to get a newer version of Android.
10-1-Tablet-8G-128G-Android-8-0-bluetooth-3G-WiFi-PC-Dual-Camera-G
PS-Phab
let
https://www.ebay.com/itm/352837784631
Ten core tablet, 8GB of RAM, 128GB of Flash. Will take 64GB
MicroSD Card
ant two SIMM cards for cellular service for $58.
That's an example of why the PC market is declining. And it
doesn't have an X86 CPU in it either. Bad news for Intel and AMD.
I guess the question is how fast the business PC market continues
to grow as the consumer market declines.
I think you are fucking lost. Have you ever even seen a server
farm or data center?
Home folks still buy and use PCs too, just not dweebtards like you.
That doesn't make you the expert on the market... By far.
Your phone and that tablet ARE PCs.
And even without a hard coded x86, they can still emulate it in a
VDM.
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:d8ee9ff1-878e-4cfb-8c30-3f2321b7c5e0@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:54:44 AM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 11:28:27 PM UTC+1, Whoey Louie
wrote:
On Sunday, February 9, 2020 at 7:34:34 PM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
I will write one more post for now with my thoughts on where
the PC is going and also processors and software.
We know where it's going. The PC market peaked eight years ago
and has been declining ever since.
Nuff said.
NOPE, sales are increasing for the first time in a few years !
HAHA.
It's the fist increase in EIGHT years. You do know what a trend
is, don't you? And analysts attribute that to MSFT end of support
for Win 7.
You are a true idiot. OS sales and PC sales are not the same
thing.
Your phone and that tablet ARE PCs.
Now they aren't stupid. Industry terms have meaning. Even kids
no that a cell phone isn't a PC.
No, dumbfuck, but a 'smartphone' sure as fuck is.
You are just an idiot unaware as usual of what the hardware in theAnd even without a hard coded x86, they can still emulate it
in a
VDM.
And cite for us the smartphones that do emulate it and that will
run X86 apps for a PC.
Wrong, always wrong.
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 9:26:13 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:28d3ad0c-cf5d-46b1-8d47-a5ed3f35e897@googlegroups.com:
It's interesting what is on the market. I bought one of these
a couple
months ago, to get a newer version of Android.
10-1-Tablet-8G-128G-Android-8-0-bluetooth-3G-WiFi-PC-Dual-Camera-G
PS-Phab
let
https://www.ebay.com/itm/352837784631
Ten core tablet, 8GB of RAM, 128GB of Flash. Will take 64GB
MicroSD Card
ant two SIMM cards for cellular service for $58.
That's an example of why the PC market is declining. And it
doesn't have an X86 CPU in it either. Bad news for Intel and AMD.
I guess the question is how fast the business PC market continues
to grow as the consumer market declines.
I think you are fucking lost. Have you ever even seen a server
farm or data center?
Servers aren't PCs either stupid.
Home folks still buy and use PCs too, just not dweebtards like you.
That doesn't make you the expert on the market... By far.
I know the PC market peaked 7 years ago and it's been declining because
people are using smartphones and tablets.
Your phone and that tablet ARE PCs.
Now they aren't stupid. Industry terms have meaning. Even kids no
that a cell phone isn't a PC.
And even without a hard coded x86, they can still emulate it in a
VDM.
And cite for us the smartphones that do emulate it and that will
run X86 apps for a PC.
A server node (cloud) can run x86 code, the user interface is moved
to the smart phone.
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 2:57:14 PM UTC-5, Michael Terrell wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 1:59:37 PM UTC-5, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:30:24 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:93205fbb-6f00-46b8-9ad1-44c8797a82f4@googlegroups.com:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 12:52:37 AM UTC-5,
skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 3:02:55 AM UTC+1,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
skybuck2000@hotmail.com wrote in news:46638391-8249-4ab6-b0a6-
b56ec485cdbc@googlegroups.com:
At the very least it should go from:
7 nanometers now, 64 to:
3.5 nanometers, 128
1.75 nanometers, 256
0.97 nanometers, 512
And maybe even 0.5 nanomenters 1024.
5 x 1.5 = 7 years.
You are a true idiot.
For one thing it was hard enough to get to 64 bit, and it is
the
rest of the gear not just the CPU. MAYBE go to 128, but not
much need to go further and by then we will have optical
computers and quantum computers kicking their asses. A 4 bit
optical computer can kick any silicon switches ass. Once we
get there, transistor based switching will get surpassed
We are down near atom sized features now. Elements 50 atoms
wide
and less. We will not likely be going much smaller than say
3.5nm. There are limits to how small a switch can be made and
I do not simply refer to our optical limitations.
Fucking idiot, I read the news. TECH NEWS.
Researches did 0.5 nanometer transistors.
If you don't believe me, them or google that's fine. JUST FUCK
OFF.
It's not that he doesn't believe you. It's that it's like he
said, they built one experimental transistor in a lab that's
0.5nm. That is a glimpse into the future of what may be possible.
Today 7nm is state of the art for actual PRODUCTION of chips. If
Moore's Law continues to hold true, we may see production of 0.5nm
in about 8 years. But it could take much longer, it gets
increasingly difficult to continue to decrease size, we've already
had to substantially modify fab processes to get where we are and
the further we push, the more complex it gets. I'd say we've been
extremely lucky that we've been able to overcome all the obstacles
so far. But the chances of that continuing diminish the further
we go.
If you had ben paying attention, the general feeling is that
Moore's Law is done. We are at very near the limit of what can be
fashioned into switches.
Well, that depends on who you listen to. For example from over a
year ago:
https://www.cnet.com/news/moores-law-is-dead-nvidias-ceo-jensen-huang-says-at-ces-2019/
"At least that's what Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang believes. The executive, who co-founded graphics-chip maker Nvidia, on Wednesday declared that "Moore's Law isn't possible anymore.
Moore's Law used to grow at 10x every five years [and] 100x every 10 years," Huang said during a Q&A panel with a small group of reporters and analysts at CES 2019. "Right now Moore's Law is growing a few percent every year. Every 10 years maybe only 2s. ... So Moore's Law has finished."
What the hell was he talking about? We just went from 10nm being state
of the art to 7nm and 5 nm will roll out later this year. That's
a few percent? ROFL He sure can't do math.
And what does Intel say?
"Intel, for its part, doesn't think Moore's Law is dead. Companies are just finding new ways to keep it going, like Intel's new 3D chip stacking.. The manufacturing technology it calls Foveros stacks different chip elements directly on top of each other, a move that should dramatically increase performance and the range of chips Intel can profitably sell.
"Elements of this debate have been going on since the early 2000s," Intel Chief Technology Officer Michael Mayberry said in an EETimes post in August. "Meanwhile, technologists ignore the debate and keep making progress.."
And he's right. From MIT Technology Review, 2000, here is where they were
saying it was over back then:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/400710/the-end-of-moores-law/
The End of Moore's Law?
Maybe we will get atom scale transistor switches laid out on
graphene lattice layers.
Till then, we are pretty darn close to about as far as Silicon and
Germanium can get. Rememeber, it is not just the optical node we are
at, but the interconnects and such. SkyTard Chihuahua barked about
how Intel is making a mistake by stacking chips, yet memory chip
makers have been doing it for years.
7 is small.
They said that in the 80s at 3 microns too. Small isn't a tech term.
5 is likely the cost / chip over size limit.
Funny thing then that the largest chip manufacturer in the world is
rolling production on 5 nm out later this year. By 2021 it will be
in cell phones and computers.
3.5 is
dreamland.
Who should we believe? You or Intel? From a recent presentation of
the roadmap from Intel/ASML. One builds em, the other makes the fab
gear:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15217/intels-manufacturing-roadmap-from-2019-to-2029
1.4nm in 2029
Intel expects to be on 2 year cadence with its manufacturing process node technology, starting with 10nm in 2019 and moving to 7nm EUV in 2021, then a fundamental new node in each of 2023, 2025, 2027, 2029. This final node is what ASML has dubbed '1.4nm'. This is the first mention on 1.4nm in the context of Intel on any Intel-related slide. For context, if that 1.4nm is indicative of any actual feature, would be the equivalent of 12 silicon atoms across.
And his 0.5 will end up as a special seen in Quantum dot making or
such.
Maybe so, but Intel has a roadmap to 1.4, which is getting close.
It's interesting what is on the market. I bought one of these a couple months ago, to get a newer version of Android.
10-1-Tablet-8G-128G-Android-8-0-bluetooth-3G-WiFi-PC-Dual-Camera-GPS-Phablet
https://www.ebay.com/itm/352837784631
Ten core tablet, 8GB of RAM, 128GB of Flash. Will take 64GB MicroSD Card ant two SIMM cards for cellular service for $58.
That's an example of why the PC market is declining. And it doesn't have
an X86 CPU in it either. Bad news for Intel and AMD. I guess the
question is how fast the business PC market continues to grow as the
consumer market declines.