As a conventionally understood process, no, and there is no practical way of even considering what you’re suggesting as a hypothetical. Maybe I and everyone else who knows anything about this topic are wrong though. If you can figure out a way, prepare to be very, very popular, because it would legitimately be a game-changer.

The only thing I can vaguely think of fitting what you seem to be asking about is the process of combining hundreds or thousands of old pieces of hardware to run tasks in parallel. For example, think of turning a whole room into a cluster of Commodore 64s. If you had 1000 C64s, you could in theory run things 1000x as fast as a single Commodore 64. That’s an interesting idea, in theory.

As far as catching up to Moore’s law, it’s going to be a struggle: This is almost never energy-efficient and almost never practical in the extreme, but it can technically be accomplished. Running tasks in parallel like this across different hardware is also extremely limiting though, as the isolated tasks have no way of communicating with or sharing information with each other at anything even close to the speed of actually processing the information. This is fundamentally different from a single-threaded task running at high speed on a single, combined processor, and requires careful design in either chunking the data into 1000 totally independent pieces or pipelining it into 1000 equally-computationally-intensive steps to be performed or some combination of the two, things which can really only be done effectively in certain problem spaces. This is why multi-threaded tasks typically end up not scaling up linearly in speed as you throw more cores at them. Many problems are not effectively parallelizable and cannot be cleanly broken into chunks without losing the context they need and cannot be split into so many discrete steps while maintaining the predictable timing window needed to schedule those tasks into a pipeline that isn’t constantly waiting on a handful of “slow” steps. It’s a huge challenge and not a realistically solvable one.

If you just want homemade processors that can technically accomplish the same things as modern processors, sure, that’s technically possible but it’s going to be really, really slow and impractical. If you want homemade processors that can do a very limited set of things at something resembling Moore’s law speeds, you might be able to pull that off for certain very specialized tasks but again not in a super practical way and likely not in an energy efficient way either. What you almost certainly can’t do is both of those things at once. You can’t have the full capabilities of a modern processor in a homemade processor that is also as fast as a modern processor. That would just be a modern processor. And those are unbelievably advanced devices, they are basically the pinnacle of humanity’s collective technological achievement. I don’t think anything else can really compare to them, and you absolutely are not making them in your garage.