> If you plot the line it's probably still curving up and I'm not clear at which point (if ever) it would start bending the other way.
I suspect when Moore‘s law ends and we cannot build substantially faster machines anymore.
I suspect when Moore‘s law ends and we cannot build substantially faster machines anymore.
The systems people worry more about memory usage for this reason, and prefer manual memory management.
This is overly simplified. To a first approximation, bandwidth has kept track with CPU performance, and main memory latency is basically unchanged. My 1985 Amiga had 125ns main-memory latency, though the processor itself saw 250ns latency - current main memory latencies are in the 50-100ns range. Caches are what 'fix' this discrepancy.
You would need to clarify how manual memory management relates to this... (cache placement/control? copying GCs causing caching issues? something else?)
We're adding transistors at ~18%/year. That's waaaaay below the ~41% needed to sustain Moore's law.
Even the "soft" version of Moore's law (a description of silicon performance vs. literally counting transistors) hasn't held up. We are absolutely not doubling performance every 24 months at this point.
Which most programs don't take advantage of.