The J Curve

Sunday, September 26, 2004

Transcending Moore’s Law with Molecular Electronics

The future of Moore’s Law is not CMOS transistors on silicon. Within 25 years, they will be as obsolete as the vacuum tube.

While this will be a massive disruption to the semiconductor industry, a larger set of industries depends on continued exponential cost declines in computational power and storage density. Moore’s Law drives electronics, communications and computers and has become a primary driver in drug discovery and bioinformatics, medical imaging and diagnostics. Over time, the lab sciences become information sciences, and then the speed of iterative simulations accelerates the pace of progress.

There are several reasons why molecular electronics is the next paradigm for Moore’s Law:

• Size: Molecular electronics has the potential to dramatically extend the miniaturization that has driven the density and speed advantages of the integrated circuit (IC) phase of Moore’s Law. For a memorable sense of the massive difference in scale, consider a single drop of water. There are more molecules in a single drop of water than all transistors ever built. Think of the transistors in every memory chip and every processor ever built, worldwide. Sure, water molecules are small, but an important part of the comparison depends on the 3D volume of a drop. Every IC, in contrast, is a thin veneer of computation on a thick and inert substrate.

• Power: One of the reasons that transistors are not stacked into 3D volumes today is that the silicon would melt. Power per calculation will dominate clock speed as the metric of merit for the future of computation. The inefficiency of the modern transistor is staggering. The human brain is ~100 million times more power efficient than our modern microprocessors. Sure the brain is slow (under a kHz) but it is massively parallel (with 100 trillion synapses between 60 billion neurons), and interconnected in a 3D volume. Stan Williams, the director of HP’s quantum science research labs, concludes: “it should be physically possible to do the work of all the computers on Earth today using a single watt of power.”

• Manufacturing Cost: Many of the molecular electronics designs use simple spin coating or molecular self-assembly of organic compounds. The process complexity is embodied in the inexpensive synthesized molecular structures, and so they can literally be splashed on to a prepared silicon wafer. The complexity is not in the deposition or the manufacturing process or the systems engineering.

Biology does not tend to assemble complexity at 1000 degrees in a high vacuum. It tends to be room temperature or body temperature. In a manufacturing domain, this opens the possibility of cheap plastic substrates instead of expensive silicon ingots.

• Elegance: In addition to these advantages, some of the molecular electronics approaches offer elegant solutions to non-volatile and inherently digital storage. We go through unnatural acts with CMOS silicon to get an inherently analog and leaky medium to approximate a digital and non-volatile abstraction that we depend on for our design methodology. Many of the molecular electronic approaches are inherently digital and immune to soft errors, and some are inherently non-volatile.

For more details, I recently wrote a 20 page article expanding on these ideas and nanotech in general (PDF download). And if anyone is interested in the references and calculations for the water drop and brain power comparisons, I can provide the details in the Comments.

5 Comments:

  • Paul: Thanks. A few quick thoughts:

    1) D-Wave’s response to your P.S.: “Our qubits are made of aluminum. Only the control/readout circuits are made of niobium.” Full disclosure: I also have “reasons to see them being around” as I am on the Board. =)

    2) RSFQ is interesting, and there are several groups in Europe working on it, but I don’t think it’s the “next phase of Moore’s Law” in any mainstream sense. As we look at the list of needs in my original post, you seem to agree that “size” is a problem; interconnected SQUID loops, each with two or more Josephson junctions will not be pushing the envelope on size. The main problem is manufacturing cost and complexity. RSFQ involves esoteric manufacturing that is deeply embedded within the current process flow. Look how long it took something as “simple” as copper wiring to be adopted by the semi industry (given the interdependence with other process steps and materials). Reliability and capital cost concerns will retard the pace of progress, as it has for the last 30 years (e.g., the U.S. petaflop project).

    Molecular memories, in contrast, have a much more pragmatic path to near-term revenue. They are a “late binding” addition, like a low-temp passivation layer, that does not need to introduce change to the earlier process steps. These products are also well down the path to commercialization. Megabit test chips have been cycled to a trillion read/write cycles. Manufacturing partners are working to prepare for volume production.

    3) QC: I am not sure if I understand your concern about quantum computers. There have been a number of “software” breakthroughs in the past five years, from Shor to Grover to molecular modeling with adiabatic approaches, and most recently, for the solving of any partial differential equation. There appears to be a Moore’s Law-like doubling in the number of solid state entangled qubits over time. It is early still, like when Moore made his first observation in 1965. In the future, quantum computers will have a major impact on materials simulation and high end computing, but they are not a near term substitute for the dirt-cheap proliferation of computation that is driving so much of the economy today. You might like this discussion of quantum computation.

    By Blogger Steve Jurvetson, at 10:42 AM  

  • > The future of Moore’s Law is not CMOS
    > transistors on silicon. Within 25 years, they
    > will be as obsolete as the vacuum tube.

    You're clearly not an electric guitarist!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:04 PM  

  • or a tube-amp audiophile.... =)

    That's why I said "as obsolete." There will still be some applications for CMOS silicon transistors (and vacuum tubes), but they won't be the mainstream or the majority.

    By Blogger Steve Jurvetson, at 8:48 AM  

  • This is very interesting. I can only imagine how this will change our society. Hopefully, this will be better for the planet (only 1 watt to power all the Earth's computers! wow!) and will drop down prices, allowing third world countries to adquire more technology.

    Industrial desing would change a lot too.

    The water drop comparison is impressive. Thanks for the link, Steve.

    By Blogger Nell, at 1:08 AM  

  • Nell: thanks. Here are some further thoughts on the societal impacts of these advances.

    And for those who missed it: In a wonderfully symbolic nod to the future, Moore recently made a sizable donation to Caltech to “establish the Nanoscale Systems Initiative (NSI). The grant will support one of the scientific and technological community's promising research avenues--the creation of extremely tiny devices to augment and in some cases displace the state-of-the-art electronic systems of today.” (press release)

    All this, and he’s a great Salmon fisherman too. Here’s a photo of the catch.

    By Blogger Steve Jurvetson, at 11:21 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home