In The Art of Doing Science and Engineering, Hamming gives this amazing sigmoidal formulation for the growth rate of computing power: e^(22(1-e^(-t/20))), with t=0 in 1943. That predicts 2.2 GHz for 2019, with is rather remarkably close to where we are.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @patrickc
And also remarkably close to the irritating fact that clock speeds seem to have just barely moved over the past 10 years.
7 replies 0 retweets 33 likes -
Replying to @michael_nielsen
There's a lot of what-aboutism in the replies. Saying "but what about parallel computing / pipelining / GPUs / ASICs" etc isn't a response. Ideally, we want faster clock speeds _and_ all those things. Clock speed stagnation isn't something to brush off.
4 replies 1 retweet 28 likes -
Replying to @michael_nielsen
Is there a hard bound on clock speed other than Planck’s time?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Replying to @rmcwhorter99
It's not even entirely clear that the Planck time is a hard bound, though I guess a lot of physicists would say so.
6:37 PM - 7 Nov 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.