pfarrell Wrote: > opaqueice wrote: > >>Even if you round the numbers against it, calling it 12 years > >>and say that Moore's law is 2 year cycles, you should expect > >>2^6 = 64 times "better" in 12 years. > > > > Moore's law's got nothing to do with it - we're talking about the > same > > old spdif over the same old cable, not transitors on a chip. > > I disagree. Moore's law allows chips to get better, smaller and > cheaper. > A while ago, a senior engineer at SD said that DAC chips get massivly > better every couple of years (I'll paraphrase since I can't quote > chapter and verse). >
Moore's "law" is an observation. That is all it is. I can assure you that if the semiconductor industri was run according to socialist idéas, there would be no "moore's law". Also, I don't see why chip component count should have very much to do with SPDIF performance. Seems a bit strange to me to try to compare one with the other. -- P Floding ------------------------------------------------------------------------ P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=24613 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
