Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only reason to think Moore's law is dead now, much less a decade ago, is if you don't know what Moore's law actually is.[1] I don't blame you for that though, it was incorrectly explained for decades. Moore's law refers to the number of transistors, not speed. We've consistently added more transistors to CPUs, but through separate cores,since there are problems related to doing that usefully with a single core. N…
ther perf gains you're seeing are from architectural and software advancements not pure silicon you cite nvidia as an example against it but nvidia itself clearly does is not of the same opinion http://www.techradar.com/news/computing/nvidia-vp-claims-tha... http://www.techdesignforums.com/blog/2015/12/11/iedm-arm-yer... http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=13298... http://www.extremetech.com/comput…
Poor reporting:
Moore's law describes that trend for computing performance – processing speed, memory capacity and the like - to double approximately every two years, named after Intel co-founder Gordon E. Moore, who first outlined his theory back in 1965.
That's not what Moore's law is, and is an example of what I meant when I said it was incorrectly explained for decades. The very first paragraph of the Wikipedia article I originally cited shows this.
The other articles seem to be about density scaling, which is only part of what goes into "how many transistors you can fit into a dense integrated circuit." Cores, obviously, allow us to mitigate this to some degree.
For example, in this[1] article, you'll find a graph that shows transistor count over time. It's fairly easy to see that as of a couple years ago, Moore's law was still going strong.
1: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/190946-stop-obsessing-...