Considerations about "Moore's Law"

[Brumby]

Ohms law is an observation that has been found to be true in many circumstances.  It is not universally true.  Try operating your SMD resistor at 1 million volts and comparing the results to an ohms law prediction.

Last I knew, Ohms Law doesn't cover vaporisation.

[shadow_2609]

Moores law was an observation that turned into a plan.  The entire semi industry guides it's R&D, marketing and whatever by what is required to make this true.  It is a convenient form of collaberation.  Calling it a law is convenient, but has the psychological benefit of making it easier to justify sales plans, R&D budgets and the like.  Unfortunately it is a plan that is harder and more expensive to follow each year.  The death of Moores law has been projected since the late 1980s.  There is no real telling when it when we will finally depart from Moores law, but it does seem likely in the next decade or so.

There is nothing wrong with calling it a law.  Ohms law is an observation that has been found to be true in many circumstances.  It is not universally true.  Try operating your SMD resistor at 1 million volts and comparing the results to an ohms law prediction.

So is more convenient to say that is a law for marketing puropise? I don't get it  but maybe is because I'm not into electronic marketing hehehe.
One thing, may I ask where Ohm's Law fail? Cause I don't really think that 1000000 V vs 1 ohm resistor will be a wrong calculation... obviously, in high current you have to take care of copper resistance and internal ESR of the power supply... but I cannot see where it could fail  am I ignoring something?
Thanks for the reply

[shadow_2609]

Last I knew, Ohms Law doesn't cover vaporisation.

Tell this to my 1 ohm resistor erroneously taken from the bin of 1k resistor 

[Richard Crowley]

So is more convenient to say that is a law for marketing puropise? I don't get it  but maybe is because I'm not into electronic marketing hehehe.

No.  The term was popularized by Carver Mead, a professor at Caltech. 
Hardly seems like anything to do with marketing, electronic or otherwise.

[MK14]

So is more convenient to say that is a law for marketing puropise? I don't get it  but maybe is because I'm not into electronic marketing hehehe.
One thing, may I ask where Ohm's Law fail? Cause I don't really think that 1000000 V vs 1 ohm resistor will be a wrong calculation... obviously, in high current you have to take care of copper resistance and internal ESR of the power supply... but I cannot see where it could fail  am I ignoring something?
Thanks for the reply

To be more accurate, it would be called, something like,

Moore's Approximation or Moore's Estimation.

Ohms Law does not always work.

E.g. What is the resistance of a normal diode at 0.2 Volts ?
0.5 Volts ?
1 Volt ?
Can you even get to 2 Volts with one ? (please don't ask Mike'ElectricStuff, PhotoInduction or even someone who works at an electricity generating plant that question though). (You can get to 2 Volts but the current needed, does not follow Ohms law, and the diode might explode).

Consider CDs as being similar to Moore's law, which (in simple terms) use various light frequencies to store data on them.
We had CDs approx 0.65 GB
Later DVDs approx 4.7 GB
Later Blu-Rays which can go up to 50 GB, maybe more now or later.

But eventually these CDs/DVDs/Blu-Rays run out of light frequency and/or practical limit on multiple layers, to reach a limit for affordable discs.
I.e. The Laws of Physics, can't be defeated, as far as we know, at the moment.

Moore's Law has reached a huge slow down, with current Silicon Chips, especially cpus.

But sooner or later, technologies will hopefully be invented which will further progress the Moore's Law for computer circuitry.

Another problem/limiting factor of Moore's Law is that it needs the market to continually spend a huge amount of money, for buying the devices. Unfortunately the PC/Chips market has been declining over recent years, as people moved over to other formats. Such as Tablets and mobile phones.
So with less and less money available to create ever faster cpu chips, Intel has had to lay off staff, and spend less and less on developing future cpu chips. That also slows down Moore's Law.

tl;dr
If someone with $100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 said give me a faster cpu, and they were given a few years, we could probably make faster chips. But at the moment ever decreasing money resources are available.

[CatalinaWOW]

Moores law was an observation that turned into a plan.  The entire semi industry guides it's R&D, marketing and whatever by what is required to make this true.  It is a convenient form of collaberation.  Calling it a law is convenient, but has the psychological benefit of making it easier to justify sales plans, R&D budgets and the like.  Unfortunately it is a plan that is harder and more expensive to follow each year.  The death of Moores law has been projected since the late 1980s.  There is no real telling when it when we will finally depart from Moores law, but it does seem likely in the next decade or so.

There is nothing wrong with calling it a law.  Ohms law is an observation that has been found to be true in many circumstances.  It is not universally true.  Try operating your SMD resistor at 1 million volts and comparing the results to an ohms law prediction.

So is more convenient to say that is a law for marketing puropise? I don't get it  but maybe is because I'm not into electronic marketing hehehe.
One thing, may I ask where Ohm's Law fail? Cause I don't really think that 1000000 V vs 1 ohm resistor will be a wrong calculation... obviously, in high current you have to take care of copper resistance and internal ESR of the power supply... but I cannot see where it could fail  am I ignoring something?
Thanks for the reply

Ohm's law assumes/postulates linear behavior of materials.  It literally says that the ratio of volts to amps for a segment of conducter is constant.  All materials behave non-linearly when you are far enough from room ambient conditions.  The causes of the non-linearity vary.  It may be simple self heating which changes the temperature.  It may be a phase change.  It may be strange quantum things that happen at low temperature.   Some materials depart from linearity very close to standard operating conditions.  These properties are exploited to make devices like surgistors.

So ohms law fails whenever you get out of the linear region.  A significant part of engineering is making sure that the assumptions apply, which is why we select resistors with a high enough watt rating to stay in the linear operating region.  My example of a SMD resistor with a million volts across it was supposed to convey the idea of a material operating outside the linear region.  There obviously was not enough depth in the explanation.

It is over simplification to think of Moore's law as just marketing.  Just about every segment of the industry for several decades used it as a roadmap.  Mask makers knew what feature size they needed to be able to make over the next few years.  Resist makers knew how they would have to modify their formulations to pattern at finer and finer sizes.  Clean room vendors knew the particle sizes that would need to be controlled.  The marketers knew what they would be selling.  There are an unbelievable number of pieces to the puzzle, and they all used Moore's law to guide when they achieved goals in their own piece of the technology.  They still do to some extent.

[hamster_nz]

One thing, may I ask where Ohm's Law fail?

Basically anywhere where the thing under test is non linear. A simple example could be an light bulb where the resistance changes as the filament gets hot. If you halve the voltage across a glowing bulb you will not half the current, which is against the prediction of Ohm's Law....

[tatus1969]

Ohms Law does not always work.

It's somehow getting philosophical here, and I will be happy if someone can negate my position here:

Everything created by us humans is an approximation based on observation. The more through the observation the better the approximation. It is our human arrogance giving them the suffix "law". For example: Newton found that a mass accelerates linearly under constant force. Einstein then improved this formula for high velocities. As our methods of observing the universe constantly evolve, maybe we will find a more complete formula in an even greater context, who knows?

In a way we can then compare Ohms Law with Newton, and quantum mechanical electron gas theory would at least go in the direction of Einstein's general theory of relativity. I prefer using Ohms Law whenever it gives me an acceptable approximation :-)

[shadow_2609]

So is more convenient to say that is a law for marketing puropise? I don't get it  but maybe is because I'm not into electronic marketing hehehe.
One thing, may I ask where Ohm's Law fail? Cause I don't really think that 1000000 V vs 1 ohm resistor will be a wrong calculation... obviously, in high current you have to take care of copper resistance and internal ESR of the power supply... but I cannot see where it could fail  am I ignoring something?
Thanks for the reply

To be more accurate, it would be called, something like,

Moore's Approximation or Moore's Estimation.

Ohms Law does not always work.

E.g. What is the resistance of a normal diode at 0.2 Volts ?
0.5 Volts ?
1 Volt ?
Can you even get to 2 Volts with one ? (please don't ask Mike'ElectricStuff, PhotoInduction or even someone who works at an electricity generating plant that question though). (You can get to 2 Volts but the current needed, does not follow Ohms law, and the diode might explode).

Consider CDs as being similar to Moore's law, which (in simple terms) use various light frequencies to store data on them.
We had CDs approx 0.65 GB
Later DVDs approx 4.7 GB
Later Blu-Rays which can go up to 50 GB, maybe more now or later.

But eventually these CDs/DVDs/Blu-Rays run out of light frequency and/or practical limit on multiple layers, to reach a limit for affordable discs.
I.e. The Laws of Physics, can't be defeated, as far as we know, at the moment.

Moore's Law has reached a huge slow down, with current Silicon Chips, especially cpus.

But sooner or later, technologies will hopefully be invented which will further progress the Moore's Law for computer circuitry.

Another problem/limiting factor of Moore's Law is that it needs the market to continually spend a huge amount of money, for buying the devices. Unfortunately the PC/Chips market has been declining over recent years, as people moved over to other formats. Such as Tablets and mobile phones.
So with less and less money available to create ever faster cpu chips, Intel has had to lay off staff, and spend less and less on developing future cpu chips. That also slows down Moore's Law.

tl;dr
If someone with $100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 said give me a faster cpu, and they were given a few years, we could probably make faster chips. But at the moment ever decreasing money resources are available.

Let's keep this example about the diode, ohm's law doesn't define that a resistance is constant for types of devices, it gives just relationship between current, voltage and resistance, in fact we could calculate the resistance of that diode at 0,2 volts if we know the current, for ohm's law R=V/I, let's say 200nA, R=0.5/0.0000002= 2.5Mohm, so it does respect the law.
And, like we said, it will take a lot of times to reach to an end, it's just slowed down
Thanks for the reply!

[shadow_2609]

Moores law was an observation that turned into a plan.  The entire semi industry guides it's R&D, marketing and whatever by what is required to make this true.  It is a convenient form of collaberation.  Calling it a law is convenient, but has the psychological benefit of making it easier to justify sales plans, R&D budgets and the like.  Unfortunately it is a plan that is harder and more expensive to follow each year.  The death of Moores law has been projected since the late 1980s.  There is no real telling when it when we will finally depart from Moores law, but it does seem likely in the next decade or so.

There is nothing wrong with calling it a law.  Ohms law is an observation that has been found to be true in many circumstances.  It is not universally true.  Try operating your SMD resistor at 1 million volts and comparing the results to an ohms law prediction.

So is more convenient to say that is a law for marketing puropise? I don't get it  but maybe is because I'm not into electronic marketing hehehe.
One thing, may I ask where Ohm's Law fail? Cause I don't really think that 1000000 V vs 1 ohm resistor will be a wrong calculation... obviously, in high current you have to take care of copper resistance and internal ESR of the power supply... but I cannot see where it could fail  am I ignoring something?
Thanks for the reply

Ohm's law assumes/postulates linear behavior of materials.  It literally says that the ratio of volts to amps for a segment of conducter is constant.  All materials behave non-linearly when you are far enough from room ambient conditions.  The causes of the non-linearity vary.  It may be simple self heating which changes the temperature.  It may be a phase change.  It may be strange quantum things that happen at low temperature.   Some materials depart from linearity very close to standard operating conditions.  These properties are exploited to make devices like surgistors.

So ohms law fails whenever you get out of the linear region.  A significant part of engineering is making sure that the assumptions apply, which is why we select resistors with a high enough watt rating to stay in the linear operating region.  My example of a SMD resistor with a million volts across it was supposed to convey the idea of a material operating outside the linear region.  There obviously was not enough depth in the explanation.

It is over simplification to think of Moore's law as just marketing.  Just about every segment of the industry for several decades used it as a roadmap.  Mask makers knew what feature size they needed to be able to make over the next few years.  Resist makers knew how they would have to modify their formulations to pattern at finer and finer sizes.  Clean room vendors knew the particle sizes that would need to be controlled.  The marketers knew what they would be selling.  There are an unbelievable number of pieces to the puzzle, and they all used Moore's law to guide when they achieved goals in their own piece of the technology.  They still do to some extent.

Well, even if we experience non-linearity or resistance drift, ohm's law always apply, an example could be the varistor, it changes his resistance so can drop the current surge, so the voltage don't spike and the load is safe... but ohm's law always apply, that is why this varistor works, more resistance, less current, and dhte voltage can be determined by this 2 other parameter.
It will be impossible in NEVER that 1v applied to 1 ohm will generate 2 amps or 0.5 amps... ohm's law.
Thanks for the reply

[shadow_2609]

One thing, may I ask where Ohm's Law fail?

Basically anywhere where the thing under test is non linear. A simple example could be an light bulb where the resistance changes as the filament gets hot. If you halve the voltage across a glowing bulb you will not half the current, which is against the prediction of Ohm's Law....

Like I said before, it will be impossible to get 2 amps with 1 volts applied to 1 ohm... this will always apply, even in inductors: at high frequency we have a high resistance (or impedence) which limits the current through the inductor.
As you said the resistance change, and if we measure the current at a given times we can see this resistance rising, inducing more voltage drop on the component for the increased current.
Thanks for the reply

[MK14]

Let's keep this example about the diode, ohm's law doesn't define that a resistance is constant for types of devices, it gives just relationship between current, voltage and resistance, in fact we could calculate the resistance of that diode at 0,2 volts if we know the current, for ohm's law R=V/I, let's say 200nA, R=0.5/0.0000002= 2.5Mohm, so it does respect the law.
And, like we said, it will take a lot of times to reach to an end, it's just slowed down
Thanks for the reply!

We seem to have gone off topic. But to answer, anyway.

Ohms Law falls to pieces, because it can no longer predict the answer.

If I give you a specific FET or bipolar transistor (a diode was used above, because it is a semiconductor), and there is precisely 10 volts between the collector and emitter (Bjt), but I refuse to tell you what the base/gate's voltage/current etc are. Tell me what current will flow (between C and E), using Ohms law ?

You probably CAN'T because the Fet/Bjt is not an ohmic device. (With base/gate voltage/current unknown, you don't have enough information to work it out).

Moore's Law has similar problems with it. It basically falls to pieces, once the fundamental laws of Physics, limits have been reached, and/or it is no longer affordable to develop new and better devices.

Toilets kind of stopped developing about 100 years or more ago. I think it is a similar concept.

The other problem/fault with Moore's Law. Is that for many people. We have reached the "Good Enough" as regards performance/speed for a modern day PC. Since many people are only browsing the internet, watching Youtube etc etc. Creating Emails.
Modern days PCs are "Good Enough", so why go and buy a better/faster PC, as it already does everything they want.
Hence lack of funding/market for future ever faster cpus.

tl;dr
We may need killer applications, which could be future VR (virtual Reality) and/or gaming systems (but much realistic), or maybe even very smart AI.
But currently, modern PCs are good enough for most people, most of the time. If it ain't broke why fix it ?
Which sadly (if you like super fast cpus), damages Moore's Law, at least as regards cpus/PCs.

[hamster_nz]

But currently, modern PCs are good enough for most people, most of the time. If it ain't broke why fix it ?

But the current CPUs are only just good enough... everybody wants more cores, more memory bandwidth and greater consolidation for less space and power.

Currently we have 2xCPUs, each with  12 cores, 512GB RAM, and would like more per blade.

[MK14]

But currently, modern PCs are good enough for most people, most of the time. If it ain't broke why fix it ?

But the current CPUs are only just good enough... everybody wants more cores, more memory bandwidth and greater consolidation for less space and power.

Currently we have 2xCPUs, each with  12 cores, 512GB RAM, and would like more per blade.

But that is the thing. Some people (especially me, typing this on my 6 core computer), want the latest/fastest/greatest cpu ever. But sadly these days, we are more of a minority, rather than the main people who go out and buy $299 PCs.

Look at the success of the latest Intel Atom (and similar) cpus, with terrible performance. But which sell like hot cakes, because they are priced at $249 each, rather than $999 or $1,999, for the latest overclockable, decent graphics carded PC.

The market has shifted, which is another significant reason why Moore's Law is not performing well these days.

Also Intel seem to have a somewhat crazy price to the highly prized, 10 core Broadwell-E processor, at almost £1500 (i7 -6950X), just for the cpu. Not many enthusiasts would be willing to pay that much.

EDIT:
I was mainly talking about the consumer market.
With businesses (servers), they often want much more capabilities, every year. So as regards that I fully agree. More cores and memory, etc etc.
But even in business, some server use (e.g. a gentle web server), is fine, even on a slower, older cpu. So again, they may leave upgrading for a long time. Until it starts failing and/or the repair contracts are too expensive or something.

[tatus1969]

Look at the success of the latest Intel Atom (and similar) cpus, with terrible performance. But which sell like hot cakes, because they are priced at $249 each, rather than $999 or $1,999, for the latest overclockable, decent graphics carded PC.

The market has shifted, which is another significant reason why Moore's Law is not performing well these days.

You somewhat contradict yourself here. Moores Law predicts the ratio between performance and price to increase squared. This can be achieved by making faster and faster CPUs, but also by making them cheaper and cheaper. So even if we are about to reach the physical limits there is still way to keep that development (although as I think at a reduced rate).

[MK14]

Look at the success of the latest Intel Atom (and similar) cpus, with terrible performance. But which sell like hot cakes, because they are priced at $249 each, rather than $999 or $1,999, for the latest overclockable, decent graphics carded PC.

The market has shifted, which is another significant reason why Moore's Law is not performing well these days.

You somewhat contradict yourself here. Moores Law predicts the ratio between performance and price to increase squared. This can be achieved by making faster and faster CPUs, but also by making them cheaper and cheaper. So even if we are about to reach the physical limits there is still way to keep that development (although as I think at a reduced rate).

I covered that in my earlier post (before the one you quoted). When I said that Moore's Law was continuing, via things like 3D stacked dies, and very large number of cored cpus. But it remains to be seen whether such technologies can keep the price the same or less, while simultaneously increasing the number of cores as well. So far it just about has kept the price down or the same.

But getting past around 4 GHz or so, for consumer priced cpus, seems to be an apparent bottle neck these days. Taking IPC (Instructions Per Clock) into account as well, there has only been a moderate improvement (e.g. 5%), per generation from Intels last few releases.

tl;dr
Moore's Law, Maximum performance for a single core, has hit the buffers (massively slowed down or stopped), these days.

But Moore's Law as regards ever cheaper cores, more cores per die/chip, and lower cost overall SoC/cpus/Gpus-low-end (at lower ends of the performance market), are to an extent, still carrying on with some head room, before the limits of Moore's Law hit them as well.

Graphics cards already can have thousands (and maybe tens of thousands, now or later) of "small" graphic cores. They are not full cpus in the PC sense. But can usually do floating point stuff, and handle a huge number of threads. They are usually at a lower frequency (e.g. 1 GHz), but there are so many of them, they become extremely powerful when used in parallel.

The techniques for making extremely small feature sized integrated circuits, these days, has become increasingly expensive. This is damaging Moore's Law, unfortunately. It use to be that ever smaller transistors were cheaper and cheaper to make. But the price has stabilized (very approximately), nowadays. It might even go up in the future, for even smaller feature sizes, as very expensive techniques have to be used, in order to make the chips in the first place.

But lower performance chips, can still become cheaper and cheaper, but it might take a longer period of time to achieve in the future. As cheaper methods of making less tiny featured chips, are invented.

tl;dr2
Moore's Law is mixed up these days. It depends on specifically what you are talking about. Some things are still partially following it (e.g. Flash memory, maybe graphics, core count and cheap cpus), but others have slowed or almost stopped (e.g. Cpu max GHz frequency).

[MK14]

Maybe a better way of looking at it, is to look at the "Moore's Law" of op-amps, over the years.

Originally, approx 1960's, IC op-amps were extremely expensive. Something like $50 each, so considerably more in today's money. The price went down, and down over the years, and since the 741 (especially), they have been perfectly usable and useful in electronics.
But since the late 1970's (I'm not sure of the exact date), they basically stopped getting any cheaper.

Also they got better and better, in various respects. But again, by and large in the 1980's, you could basically get ones, which are perfectly usable, even today, specs wise. But there probably has been the odd improvement here and there.

tl;dr
Moore's Law seemed to apply to op-amps, price and capabilities, from the 1960's till about 1980 (again, I'm not 100% sure of the exact dates). Then it mostly stopped. With some exceptions in some areas, if you want to nit pick.

Digital logic gates, had a sort of Moore's Law, initially being very expensive and not as fast, as they were to end up being.
Approx 1960's first available, dropping in price and increasing in speed and/or lower power consumption.

These days, although they are cheap, they are partially obsolete, because they have been mainly replaced by MCU's, PALs/CPLDs and of course FPGAs. Some sources suggest that if you need more than one logic IC and/or might want to make later firmware changes, then CPLDs/FPGAs are the way to go. Certainly logic boards with fifty or a hundred logic gate series ICs, are mostly a thing of the past. Except some vintage builders etc.

Maybe one day instead of cpus as such, we will have some kind of massive FPGA and/or million or a billion or more cored calculation monsters.

[shadow_2609]

Let's keep this example about the diode, ohm's law doesn't define that a resistance is constant for types of devices, it gives just relationship between current, voltage and resistance, in fact we could calculate the resistance of that diode at 0,2 volts if we know the current, for ohm's law R=V/I, let's say 200nA, R=0.5/0.0000002= 2.5Mohm, so it does respect the law.
And, like we said, it will take a lot of times to reach to an end, it's just slowed down
Thanks for the reply!

We seem to have gone off topic. But to answer, anyway.

Ohms Law falls to pieces, because it can no longer predict the answer.

If I give you a specific FET or bipolar transistor (a diode was used above, because it is a semiconductor), and there is precisely 10 volts between the collector and emitter (Bjt), but I refuse to tell you what the base/gate's voltage/current etc are. Tell me what current will flow (between C and E), using Ohms law ?

You probably CAN'T because the Fet/Bjt is not an ohmic device. (With base/gate voltage/current unknown, you don't have enough information to work it out).

Moore's Law has similar problems with it. It basically falls to pieces, once the fundamental laws of Physics, limits have been reached, and/or it is no longer affordable to develop new and better devices.

Toilets kind of stopped developing about 100 years or more ago. I think it is a similar concept.

The other problem/fault with Moore's Law. Is that for many people. We have reached the "Good Enough" as regards performance/speed for a modern day PC. Since many people are only browsing the internet, watching Youtube etc etc. Creating Emails.
Modern days PCs are "Good Enough", so why go and buy a better/faster PC, as it already does everything they want.
Hence lack of funding/market for future ever faster cpus.

tl;dr
We may need killer applications, which could be future VR (virtual Reality) and/or gaming systems (but much realistic), or maybe even very smart AI.
But currently, modern PCs are good enough for most people, most of the time. If it ain't broke why fix it ?
Which sadly (if you like super fast cpus), damages Moore's Law, at least as regards cpus/PCs.

Sorry my fault for this off-topic hehe.
By the way now I understand a lil better what you are saying, we misunderstood each other... but this thing about Ohm's law make me tingle for some reason hahaha.
And yes, the market now point to an average between performance/price, of course with some exceptions (you know, pc player tend to go berserk on powerful pc hardware, like for example alienware, or even 3d designer which have to a powerful gpu/cpu for working).
For the killer app I hope it will not be another IOT thing (or IOS like our dave says, which has a really good point).
Thanks and sorry for the off topic 

[MK14]

Sorry my fault for this off-topic hehe.
By the way now I understand a lil better what you are saying, we misunderstood each other... but this thing about Ohm's law make me tingle for some reason hahaha.
And yes, the market now point to an average between performance/price, of course with some exceptions (you know, pc player tend to go berserk on powerful pc hardware, like for example alienware, or even 3d designer which have to a powerful gpu/cpu for working).
For the killer app I hope it will not be another IOT thing (or IOS like our dave says, which has a really good point).
Thanks and sorry for the off topic 

No problem, it is very easy to go off-topic, I seem to do it all the time.

Because Arm have been a lot below the performance of Intel cpu chips, there has been quite a climb in Arm's performance, capabilities and number of cores. So Arm has not necessarily hit the end of Moore's Law, but I think they are getting ever closer.
MCUs we use in electronics, such as PIC/Arm etc, are a long way from the Moore's Law partial-end point.
Since embedded cpus are easily/cheaply up to about 200 MHz (I know you can get much faster ones, such as >500 MHz), so a long way from 4 GHz (although limited power dissipation also limits the frequency).

Also most are only single core (I know there are some with more than one core in the MCU), so there is a long way to go, as Arms (in mobile phones) are already at about 8 cores.

tl;dr
Most PICs/STarms (mainstream electronics use ones, NOT mobile phone high end ones) and such like, are using relatively ancient technology, so are miles and miles from reaching the ends of Moore's Law.
By the time they reach the end, the price of making the Silicon will hopefully be really cheap by that time. For typical MCUs.
They are already considerably better than they were, about twenty years ago.
MCUs have probably easily got 10 .. 20 or more years, before they hit the solid Moore's Law wall. By then, better technologies might have been invented, allowing further advancements, anyway.

[Assafl]

Moore's law came from Intel ...

Moore's editorial was published on April 19, 1965 when Moore worked at Fairchild.
Intel did not exist at the time. It was founded on July 18, 1968

I am humbled and stand corrected...

That is what happens when one assumes anything - even things one is sure of for 30 years... Thank you from making me less ignorant!

On a few side notes after reading the original Electronics article (for the first time!):
1. It actually came from digital systems IC fabrication - so not even Microprocessors....
2. He specifically states that Analog circuits will not gain as much as digital.
3. He defines the IC as an User Irreducible Unit (hence one that cannot be split - unlike a circuit).
4. Not limited to ICs. Also thin film technologies...
5. These were the days of ceramic and gold packages - so he states packaging is so high cost nobody cares about yield (hilarious)
6. Presently the optimum was 50 parts per IC - so this is squarely RTL TTL and OpAmp days..


https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By83v5TWkGjvQkpBcXJKT1I1TTA/view