b) Moore’s law is the observation that on average, the number
of transistors in a dense integrated circuit doubles every two years. The table
shows the number of transistors in Intel processors from 1971 to 1999. The general
trend of the table seems to corroborate with Moore’s Law. How quickly is the
number of transistors in a processor increasing in 1989?
c)
Year
|
# of Transistors
|
1971
|
2,300
|
1974
|
4,500
|
1978
|
29,000
|
1982
|
134,000
|
1985
|
275,000
|
1989
|
1,200,000
|
1993
|
3,100,000
|
1995
|
5,500,000
|
1997
|
7,500,000
|
1999
|
9,500,000
|
d)
e) I want to know the rate of change at (1989, 1,200,000). The
three points I will use for the secant lines are (1993, 3,100,000), (1995,
5,500,000) and (1997, 7,500,000).
Using slope formula Y2 - Y1 / X2 - X1
(1989, 1,200,000) to (1993, 3,100,000): Average Rate of
Change: 475,000 transistors per year.
(1989, 1,200,000) to (1995, 5,500,000): ARC: 716,667
transistors per year.
(1989, 1,200,000) to (1997, 7,500,000): ARC: 787,500
transistors per year.
As the year increases, so does the ARC. This would mean that
the rate of change is increasing as the years go on, which supports Moore’s
Law. As the points get closer to 1989, the ARC decreases and gets closer to the
instantaneous rate of change (IRC) of that point.
f)
From the two points (1989, 1,200,000) and (1993, 2,500,000), the slope is 325,000 transistors per year. This is the instantaneous rate of change, or the slope specifically at the chosen point. In this case, this means that in 1989, the number of transistors in a processor was increasing at a rate of 325,000 transistors per year.
h) The rate of change between the years calculated in part e got smaller as they approached 1989. This would mean that they are getting closer to the IRC in 1989. The tangent line is just like the secant lines, but it just touches the point. It shows the slope/IRC at that point.
I like the Moore's law, but researchers say that the number is getting smaller and that it will soon reach it's limit, hope not! Good job!
ReplyDeleteethan,
ReplyDeletei like this post, more so because my dad used to work for this type of company! your graphs and table look great! you organized your information very well, remembered to include your units in all of your calculations, AND i like that you included the "actual" values in your explanation of the IRC rather than just speaking generally.
great job!
professor little