Presented by

Muhammad Jawad IkramPhD Student Computer Science, KAU,

Jeddah, KSADated: 19thMarch’2014

Gordan E. Moore

Gordon E. Moore, “Cramming More Components onto Integrated Circuits,”Electronics, pp. 114–117, April 19, 1965.

A manifesto about the promise of integrations

Gordon Moore predicts a huge range of applications

And a bunch of advantages

He is selling hard!!

The advantages of integration will bring about a proliferation of electronics, pushing this science into many new areas.

Scientific advancement

Home Computers

Automatic Auto Control

Telephones Phones

Electronic Wrist Watches

Large Scale Data Processing

Communication Networks

Reliability

Compactness

Weight

Power efficiency

Simpler designs -- see 8008 to 8086 evolution.

Moore’s LawThe number of transistors that can be placed inexpensively on an integrated circuit has doubled approximately every 18 months[1]. The trend has continued for more than half a century and is not expected to stop until 2015 or later [2].

Comparison (Past and Present)

An Osborne Executiveportable computer, from1982, and an iPhone,released 2007. TheExecutive weighs 100times as much, hasnearly 500 times thevolume, cost 10 times asmuch, and has a 100ththe processing power ofthe iPhone.

The paper noted that number of components in integrated circuits had doubled every year from the invention of the integrated circuit in 1958 until 1965 and predicted that the trend would continue "for at least ten years".

His prediction has proved to be uncannily accurate, in part because the law is now used in the semiconductor industry to guide long-term planning and to set targets for research and development.

W. Wayt gibbs

Moore was overoptimistic

65000 transistors didn’t appear till 1981

But his fundamental insights held true for so long

Moore’s Law

Moore observe that his prediction has self-fulfilling prophecy

Chipmakers know they have to stay on that curve to remain competitive

So, they make effort to make it happen

Moore had accidental entry to semiconductor business

Had PhD in Physical Chemistry in 1954 from Caltech.

William Shockley was looking for a chemist to work in his company.

Moore having no experience in semiconductor but Shockley offered him job anyway.

In 1971, the first Microprocessor was born

Four Intel Engineers under Moore’s direction.

Took nine months

But a Problem!!!

“Busicom paid a portion of the development costs and therefore owned the rights to design.”

But Fortune was with Moore.

Busicom slipped into financial straits.

Moore’s company return there 65000 dollars and got the rights to the chips back for all uses.

Moore predictions

Tweaking the lenses, robots and ultraviolet lasers used to etch circuits onto silicon will extract perhaps two more generation of processors.

With features 0.18, then 0.13 microns across from optical techniques.

Three equally unattractive alternatives◦ X-rays, with their smaller wavelength could carve

out wires just a handful of atoms across

◦ Electron beam to draw circuit design line by line onto silicon

◦ The smart money is on soft X-rays (low frequency x-rays)

On 13 April 2005, Gordon Moore stated in an interview that the law cannot be sustained indefinitely:

"It can't continue forever. The nature of exponentials is that you push them out and eventually disaster happens."

He also noted that transistors would eventually reach the limits of miniaturization at atomic levels

“We have another 10 to 20 years before we reach a fundamental limit. By then they'll be able to make bigger chips and have transistor budgets in the billions [3]”

Gene M. Amdahl

Single VS Multiple

Interconnection of computers

Validity of the single processor approach

Weakness of the multiple processor approach

Statistical characteristics of computation

1. The fraction of the computational load is constant (~40%).

2. Sequential ( unlikely to be amenable to parallel processing technique)

Physical Problems

1. Irregular boundaries2. Inhomogeneous interior3. Computation maybe dependent on the

states of the variables at each point4. Propagation rate may be quite different5. The rate of convergence may be strongly

dependent on sweeping through array.

Amdahl’s Law Amdahl's law, also known as Amdahl's argument, is used tofind the maximum expected improvement to an overall systemwhen only part of the system is improved.

where rs represents the ratio of the sequential portion in one program

1

1

p

s

s p

Speedupr

rn

r r

Potential speed up of program using multiple processors

Concluded that:◦ Code needs to be parallelizable

◦ Speed up is bound, giving diminishing returns for more processors

Task dependent◦ Servers gain by maintaining multiple connections

on multiple processors

• For program running on single processor—Fraction f of code infinitely parallelizable with no

scheduling overhead

—Fraction (1-f) of code inherently serial

—T is total execution time for program on single processor

—N is number of processors that fully exploit paralelportions of code

Conclusionsf small, parallel processors has little effectN ->∞, speedup bound by 1/(1 – f)

Diminishing returns for using more processors

[1] Although originally calculated as a doubling every year, (ftp:/ / download. intel. com/ museum/ Moores_Law/ Articles-Press_Releases/ Gordon_Moore_1965_Article. pdf) Moore later refined the period to two years. (ftp:/ / download. intel. com/ museum/ Moores_Law/ Video-Transcripts/ Excepts_A_Conversation_with_Gordon_Moore. pdf) It is often incorrectly quoted as a doubling of transistors every 2 years, as David House, an Intel executive, gave that period to chip performance increase.

[2] The trend begins with the invention of the integrated circuit in 1958. See the graph on the bottom of page 3 of Moore's original presentation of the idea (ftp:/ / download. intel. com/ museum/ Moores_Law/ Articles-Press_Releases/ Gordon_Moore_1965_Article. pdf). The limits of the trend are discussed here: Kanellos, Michael (19 April 2005). "New Life for Moore's Law" (http:/ / news. cnet. com/ New-life-for-Moores-Law/ 2009-1006_3-5672485. html

[3] Manek Dubash (2005-04-13). "Moore's Law is dead, says Gordon Moore" (http:/ / www. techworld. com/ opsys/ news/ index. cfm?NewsID=3477). Techworld. .

?

?

?

?