
First 3D Nanotube and RRAM ICs Come Out of Foundry - wglb
https://spectrum.ieee.org/nanoclast/semiconductors/devices/first-3d-nanotube-and-rram-ics-come-out-of-foundry
======
nicoburns
3D circuits make a lot of sense. I'd be interested to know how they plan to
cool this though. My understand was that the in current chips, the 3rd
dimension is largely used for heat dissipation, and that heat is the primary
constraint on faster processors.

~~~
agumonkey
time for volumetric cooling vias

~~~
sp332
IBM did some work in microfluidics to move heat out of the hottest parts of a
chip to the surface. After that you can use more conventional cooling tech to
carry the heat away.

------
RobertoG
Does this mean that the news of Moore's law demise are greatly exaggerated?

~~~
sgift
Moore's law is dead right now. Maybe there will be a successor, maybe not, but
at the moment one does well to not assume that we will get another free lunch
of processing power soon.

~~~
xorfish
It just slowed down a bit.

transistor density is still improving logarithmic.

Moore's law is about the number of transistors on a chip, not about
performance.

~~~
sgift
> Moore's law is about the number of transistors on a chip, not about
> performance.

People talking about Moore's law talk about the "more transistors means more
performance" aspect. That part hasn't held for a while now. No one cares if
you have ten times as many transistors if it doesn't improve performance.

~~~
xorfish
Performance of GPUs has increased quite well over the last 10 years. Number of
Cores on CPUs have also increased.

Even if performance didn't improve, that wouldn't make moore's law dead.

You might say that Dennard scaling is dead. But Dennard scaling isn't Moore's
law even thought is gets conflated a lot.

Edit:

Compare a GTX 285 to a RTX 2080 ti, the performance has increases more than 9
times over the last decade.

~~~
sgift
> Number of Cores on CPUs have also increased.

Correct, though number of cores is far harder to use in software than the
higher Mhz/Ghz we enjoyed before. Same for GPUs. If you can use them you still
enjoy a noticable increase in performance, but not all programs (or rather
algorithms) can be changed to benefit from more cores and even less commercial
ones.

> You might say that Dennard scaling is dead. But Dennard scaling isn't
> Moore's law even thought is gets conflated a lot.

Fair enough. I looked this up and the combination of Dennard scaling and
Moore's law seems to be called Koomey's law - I've never heard that term
before, but it fits the definition of what people usually attribute to Moore's
law:

> Jonathan Koomey articulated the trend as follows: "at a fixed computing
> load, the amount of battery you need will fall by a factor of two every year
> and a half."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koomey%27s_law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koomey%27s_law)

