The Moore's Law blowout sale is ending

The problem here is a bit more insidious than you might assume at first glance. The reason you can buy a motherboard for $100 which has close to a thousand individual components soldered to a 16 layer board is because a manufacturer invested tens of millions of dollars in a highly automated manufacturing line that could turn out millions of them a month, and all the connectors on them had injection molds made because billions of connectors would be needed, and testing companies built amazing bed-of-nails testers that can run 25,000 tests on that board.

When I was at NetApp our partners built systems for us (so called ODMs) to our specifications but in the thousands, not the millions, and our motherboards that had a similar complexity to the ones that Gigabyte or ASUSTek could sell cost us $800 each. Smaller runs, those in the hundreds, are like $2,500 to $3,000 each.

The lack of buying is taking the oxygen out of the system. These guys are cutting costs where they can, but there will come a time in your lifetime where buying a cost effecting "PC" class machine out of parts will be very very hard to do, they just won't have the volume. A new TV with similar smarts? Still cheap. But a desktop machine?

They call them economies of scale, when there is a scale, when there isn't they don't work so well. Factories in China are starting to switch over to making systems for server farms, not individuals. Amazon, Google, Microsoft might by 50,000 at a time. You and I, not so much.

We are on the leading edge of that change. I have a sense that it is going to be a fairly dramatic change.

Historically, scaling provided a few benefits. As transistors got smaller, they went faster and used less power. They also got cheaper. The first benefit, going faster and more efficient dried up back in the early 2000s when leakage currents because a problem. This is why transistors have been stuck at 3 GHz for so long. The second benefit, cost reduction, is now disappearing. The cost per transistor actually went up with the last node! These days, lithography costs dominate all else. The only way for chips to start getting cheaper is if EUV pans out (so far it's not looking great, but we'll see) or if we radically change the fabrication process and turn transistors sideways (this requires extreme etch control).

Even if it is technically feasible to go smaller, unless EUV costs go down it may not be financially feasible.

(1) Scaling will be technically feasible for many more years. (Intel's roadmap goes to 5 nm, and researchers have already made transistors as small as 3 nm.)

(2) However, even if scaling is technically feasible, it may not be financially feasible. Quadruple patterning may get you smaller feature sizes, but at a very high cost. The alternative to quadruple patterning, x-ray lithography (called EUV), is also quite expensive, but at least there's some hope that its costs will drop.

(3) Only if scaling is both technically feasible and financially feasible, we will continue to scale. But even then, the benefits of scaling will diminish (as they've been diminishing for years). Traditional scaling hasn't done much for silicon performance in years: recently most improvements in CMOS have come from straining the silicon with germanium. And the other beneficial side of scaling, cost, is also ending. Shrinking transistors gets you more chips per exposure/wafer, but at the same time it raises the costs of each exposure/wafer. We're finally reaching the point now where the increasing costs of each exposure/wafer are matching the savings of scaling.

In light of all this, it's hard for me to see performace per dollar per year (which is not technically Moore's law I grant you) continue at the rapid pace of the past, even if technologies like x-ray lithography, III-V semiconductors, optical interconnects, and whatever end up panning out.