Re: =?windows-1252?Q?Java's_Future_Lies_In_Mobile=3F?=
On 14-03-2011 17:33, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
On 03/14/2011 03:53 PM, Arne Vajh?j wrote:
I would not expect Moore's law broken i 2015.
They can still shrink a little bit, number of cores will
increase, size of caches will increase (the cost of a cache
miss is equivalent to a lot of instruction using cache), smarter
CPU's (maybe even more CISCy), fundamental new technologies
(even though I suspect they will not be generally available
as soon as 2015).
Moore's Law states simply that the *number of transistors* on a chip
doubles every 2 years (implicitly referring to roughly same-size chips,
so perhaps transistor density doubling would be a more precise wording).
Ah - You are correct.
I was really talking about the doubling of computing speed every 2 years
that so far has been a consequence of Moore's law, but does not
necesarrily need to be tied to it.
Arne
X-Hamster-Info: Score=0 ScoreLoad=0 ScoreSave=0 ReceivFrom ???@???????? Tue Mar 15 14:28:02 GMT+02:00 2011
rammer:23467
Path: news.ett.com.ua!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!nuzba.szn.dk!news.szn.dk!pnx.dk!dotsrc.org!filter.dotsrc.org!news.dotsrc.org!not-for-mail
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:35:53 -0400
From: =?windows-1252?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: =?windows-1252?Q?Java's_Future_Lies_In_Mobile=3F?=
References: <iir1uf$7te$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <MPG.27bb0f0bdba9e6fb9897d0@news.justthe.net> <8ssb6jFesbU3@mid.individual.net> <ikb0nt$ls7$1@news.albasani.net> <8t1qekFe1nU4@mid.individual.net> <4d6c4fd7$0$23762$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <8tt1j2Fs9bU2@mid.individual.net> <ilcu36$l1v$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <UL-dnQncCZFSnefQnZ2dnUVZ876dnZ2d@telenor.com> <8tui4bF3liU2@mid.individual.net> <ild7la$g20$1@news.eternal-september.org> <218fdcbe-95d3-4b61-833b-ac97cdbf38dc@l14g2000pre.googlegroups.com> <ildgc2$vqo$1@news.eternal-september.org> <41726fbc-75ee-4646-a623-8ffb80663aea@34g2000pru.googlegroups.com> <4d7ae368$0$23765$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <8u2cu2FckpU4@mid.individual.net> <ill6nh$g5$1@news.eternal-september.org> <4d7e722f$0$23759$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <ilm1j2$4u6$1@news.eternal-september.org>
In-Reply-To: <ilm1j2$4u6$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <4d7eb462$0$23764$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
Organization: SunSITE.dk - Supporting Open source
NNTP-Posting-Host: 72.192.23.157
X-Trace: news.sunsite.dk DXC=c1`fQQTMnZlJfJcgG;Q1FaYSB=nbEKnkkoj1@Y8@kn0f[3=]\_16Q0oTYcHEIhNcYhUJ[^3k1A0Ghnk@i@BP]QX`DC`[E^>a=1f
X-Complaints-To: staff@sunsite.dk
X-Old-Xref: news.ett.com.ua comp.lang.java.programmer:73296
On 14-03-2011 17:33, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
On 03/14/2011 03:53 PM, Arne Vajh?j wrote:
I would not expect Moore's law broken i 2015.
They can still shrink a little bit, number of cores will
increase, size of caches will increase (the cost of a cache
miss is equivalent to a lot of instruction using cache), smarter
CPU's (maybe even more CISCy), fundamental new technologies
(even though I suspect they will not be generally available
as soon as 2015).
Moore's Law states simply that the *number of transistors* on a chip
doubles every 2 years (implicitly referring to roughly same-size chips,
so perhaps transistor density doubling would be a more precise wording).
Ah - You are correct.
I was really talking about the doubling of computing speed every 2 years
that so far has been a consequence of Moore's law, but does not
necesarrily need to be tied to it.
Arne