Intel Devises Chip Speed Breakthrough 465
Chad Wood writes "According to the New York Times (free reg. req.), Intel has demonstrated a research breakthrough, making silicon chips that can switch light like electricity. The article explains:''This opens up whole new areas for Intel,' said Mario Paniccia, a an Intel physicist, who started the previously secret Intel research program to explore the possibility of using standard semiconductor parts to build optical networks. 'We're trying to siliconize photonics.' The invention demonstrates for the first time, Intel researchers said, that ultrahigh-speed fiberoptic equipment can be produced at personal computer industry prices. As the costs of communicating between computers and chips falls, the barrier to building fundamentally new kinds of computers not limited by physical distance should become a reality, experts say.'"
mmmm (Score:4, Interesting)
Can someone tell me.... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Can someone tell me.... (Score:1, Interesting)
Photonics (Score:5, Interesting)
For some reason, buried among a zillion dog-eared back issues of "People" and "Sports Illustrated" at the Seattle's Best Coffee shop at the corner of Central and Kirkland Way in Kirkland, Washington, somebody left a copy of Photonics Spectra [photonics.com] in the magazine rack. I'm an electronics geek who had never heard of the field, and I probably spent three hours and two quad-damage lattes poring over that magazine. Fucking amazing stuff. Spend some time at the photonics.com website if you don't believe me.
Seriously, photonics looks like it might be the Next Big Thing.
monopolizing (Score:4, Interesting)
Great now we'll only have to buy from two companies in the future Intel and Microsoft.
Seriously though, when I hear some chip news, and how it's the 'next best thing' I kind of wonder how much is just marketing hype. So far I heard of terabyte chips... Coming Soon!!!... Faster chipset will do... and so on. Yet on the market you see none. According to most companies capabilities (providing it's not just hype), from what I gather, they have a chipset in the works that can fly you to the moon, wash your car, bone your partner, and have you back in time for work the next morning. However, these companies have to make as much money as they possibly can selling you their fourth, third, and second generation chips for the next few years.
Not to Overstate things, but... (Score:2, Interesting)
Hmmm The Speed of Light is ... (Score:5, Interesting)
I love generalization.
Re:Still binary.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Three states have been around awhile it's called Tri-state Logic [labri.fr]. Gordon Moore gave an interview [pcmag.com] in PC Magazine. He discussed multi-state logic, but said it was a non issue. He said that neural networks were much more important breakthrough.
Re:Intel's secret breakthrough (Score:3, Interesting)
I've had three AMD chips. The 500 mhz K6-2 is still running strong several years later, now in a younger sister's hand-me-down PC. My first 2000+ withstood the power supply exploding and lasted another 6 months before finally giving out. I'm currently using a new 2000+ with no problems. On both 2000+ chips, I have yet to even a STOP error that I can't attribute to something else.
How much more reliable do you want?
Re:Still binary.. (Score:3, Interesting)
The word you are looking for is either "trinary", or "ternary".
Either way, if you look at how the word "bit" is formed, you can think of two ways:
1. B-inary dig-IT
2. BI-nary digi-T
If it is the first case, then either "trinary" or "ternary" would still yield "tit":
T-rinary dig-IT
T-ernary dig-IT
However, if it is the second case, we could have a problem:
TR-inary digi-T = TRT
TE-rnary digi-T = TET
But, I agree with your original intent because neither of these are us fun as "TIT".
Re:Intel's secret breakthrough (Score:4, Interesting)
With AMD, the bullshit is just a thin (and obvious) marketing layer, which is easy enough to ignore. Intel, on the other hand, release slow chips with high clock speeds because they know the vast majority of morons out there will only pay attention to the MHz rating.
As a case in point, the infamous P4 Celeron. High-ish clock speed, crap performance, completely destroyed by similarly priced AMD processors.
I think AMD's naming makes a lot of clueful people a bit uncomfortable, but seems justifiable in a market dominated by a world-class bullshit artist like Intel.
Re:damn universe.. (Score:4, Interesting)
The limitation on physical distance in an electrical medium is dictated by its impedance, which dissipates the electrical energy in the form of heat. This creates an enormous problem of power loss, which increases linearly with the distance of the transmission line.
An optical waveguide, such as fiber or the silicon waveguides mentioned in the article, see no such losses due to electrical impedance.
Theoretically, as long as the parameters are met for photonic propagation, light will stay in the waveguide indefinitely. However, there are still losses due to imperfections and impurities in the medium itself, caused by microscopic deformities, bubbles, splices in the fiber, etc. There are also some losses dues to quantum effects, which we see in the form of 'evanescent' waves that tunnel outside of the boundaries of the waveguide.
What you really want to be asking is what is the transmissive and absorbtive properties for the silicon medium they use for the particular wavelength(s) of light that they are developing the technology with. If you know that, then combined with the effects above you can get a decent estimate of the power dissipation of the system for a given photon source.
My feeling, without performing the calculations, is that you will be pleasantly surprised at how little energy will be dissipated in the form of heat.
~Loren
Re:Not really (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Intel's secret breakthrough (Score:3, Interesting)
The last line of that post was pure brilliance/troll as well. Show me ANY benchmark were a P4 2.2GHz outperforms an A64 3000+ and you might be onto something. Until then, please stop speaking out of your ass.
Re:Photonics (Score:2, Interesting)
Photonic engineering (or electro-optics, as us physicists like to call the research side of it), is plagued by the same problems as the rest of the tech industry. Few companies are willing to fund the research in developing manufacturing techniques, therefore the incredible research that has been done in the field will sit in the journals getting dusty (as it has been for the past 10 years).
I will say that this is a big step for the industry though. Not because of Intel's 'breakthrough discovery', but simply because with a big name company making a press release about new photonic computing technology, many other companies will be tempted to scramble into that field as well. Someday down the line, I may actually be able to work in this field simply because of this press release...
*toast* Here's to hoping, right!
~Loren
Re:Can someone tell me.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Fluorescent lamps with high efficiency ballasts are much more efficient than either incadescent or LEDs by orders of magnitudes. That's why they are THE ideal choice for all interior lighting. People that complain about the color temperature of fluorescents are ignorant of the fact that their are a number of choices available other than "office" temperature. Guests in my home are surprised to find that all lighting in my house is fluorescent. You'll be surprised how many people still don't realize that those fixtures down at the Home Despot have a tone that is very close to incadescent bulbs.
No distance limitation (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:It's just a damn modulator (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:damn universe.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Easiest way to see this is to imagine A and B have an instantaneous communication device. They synchronize their clocks and then separate at velocity v. Some time later (t1), A sends an instant message ("lol d00d") to B. Due to time dilation, A knows B will receive this message when his clock says t2, where t2 < t1. In B's frame, he receives this message when his clock says t2, and he instantly responds ("r0x0r!"). In B's frame, A is moving away at speed v, so the time that B knows is on A's clock when he receives his instant message is t3 < t2. But that means that A receives a response to his IM at t3 < t1, which is before he sent it!
So that rules out instant communication. If you redo this argument mathematically, but allow the speed of the communication to be a parameter, you can find a constraint on the speed of information exchange to preserve causality. It's not immediately obvious to me that it will come out to be the speed of light, though. I suspect that it should, or I'v made an error in setting up this thought experiment.
photonic clocking (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Still binary.. (Score:3, Interesting)
cost: number of digits * number of states for a digit
base is b
number is n
cost is c
c = (1+log_b(n))*b
where log_b is logarithm base b
If (d c) / (d b) = 0 and n approches infinity b approches Pi.
In other terms: to store big numbers you better off using Pi based numeric system. 3 is the closest integer, hence the tertiary storage promises to be more effective.
Re:damn universe.. (Score:3, Interesting)
That said, and understanding that signals on chips are already propagating at fractional-light speeds, you can tell that the original statement is bunk. Why? Because we're already at the physical limitations. It is already true that it takes an appreciable fraction of a clock cycle for signals to propagate from one side of a chip to another. Remember, light -- in vacuum -- travels about 11 inches per nanosecond. Slow that down to 0.3c and suddenly your 3 GHz processor clock means you can get about 1 cm between clock cycles, or, from one edge to another of the big, modern chips.
So, the important question is: how fast do infrared photons travel in doped silicon? Anyone know?
Re:Thermal expansion? (Score:2, Interesting)
This is a much simpler question that I too am curious about. When Intel does their HDTV demo will the 5 mile coil of fibre get warm -- however imperceptibly -- because photons are "flowing" through it? If so, would that show up dramatically at small scales?
Re:Google link (KW) (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Intel's secret breakthrough (Score:1, Interesting)
I buy AMD now because it is cheaper, and outperforms intel chips in most areas. I honestly feel I am getting the best for the least.
Now I own a 64 and am extreemly happy with it. I was worried about buying one so soon after they where released, but I haven't had a single issue. The only issue I had was actually with my soundcard not working in linux...so I bought another and it does.
I am also rather impressed by the new heatsink chassis for the 64. I don't know what P4 is using, but the 64 has something better than I have seen on any previous CPU model.
Anyway, putting it bluntly...in my several years of experience using AMD processor I have never had an issue. I know several other AMD users that also have had wonderful experiences. I honestly don't know what you are basing your opinion on, but from this end it doesn't hold water.
NR
Breaking the laws of physics? (Score:4, Interesting)
I was under the impression that physical distance was always a limitation...? Which "experts" are saying this?
You don't understand (Score:4, Interesting)
1) It needs to be usable in the end. Binary is simple, when voltage is present, it causes something to happen, another gate to flip, a value in a memory circut to be set or unset, etc. With a larger set of states you again need more circutry to be able to differentiate one state from another which again increases complexity more than gain.
2) Be able to keep the states consistent. IT's easy with binary, on or off, voltage present or absent. With more states it gets hard, how is one defined from teh next, and what happens if the input voltage changes (which does happen) and changes the amount flowing through. I mean if the voltage sas for a second, does that throw off all calculations? Computers are imperitive devices. It is necessiary that one stage be able to rely on the fact that the result of the prior stage was correct.
3) As I mentioned, you need to be able to implement it on a silicon chip. YOu might be able to get some complex device that daels with a bunch of potentiometres and count those as "gates" but you'd be forgetting that they aren't implementable on silicon as a transistor is. Thus you get nothing workable in teh end.
Look, you're welcome to try and design a higher state chip, but I'll give good odds that you don't get anything even near working. IF you like, I'll run the idea past the EEs at work, but I already know what they are going to say.
Now quantum computers are entirely different. They solve problems in a whole different way and, indeed, work on a different level than conventional computers. But for the normal silicon chips, you are stuck with binary. Nothing else can be made workable.
Re:Intel's secret breakthrough (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Google link (KW) (Score:3, Interesting)
The U.S. post-secondary system is the best in the world without question. Not only by quality (9/10 of the worlds best institutions in any subject area will be in the U.S.) but by quantity. In the state I live in no student is more than 20 miles from a college, university, or branch location. This makes it easy for anyone who wants to get an eduction to get one. As a good example of how the worlds best come here one of our state schools that I wouldn't have even considered as a backup school has students from 157 nations!!!! Our secondary eduction may be lacking in some regards but we make up for it. Besides most comparisons are not on level grounds, a large percentage of the nations we are compared against do not have universally guarenteed secondary eduction. For instance both Japan and Germany have a system where only the top percentage of students will enter the college track eduction, these are the students that take the standardized tests, not the entirity of the population where in the U.S. every student who has not dropped out takes them.
Finally I would point out that the U.S. has largest percentage of the population in postsecondary education:
Per 100K population:
Korea 4,955
Japan 3,139
U.S. 5,398
U.K 3,126
France 3,617
Source [buffalo.edu]
In fact the U.S. has nearly as many students in postsecondary education as the rest of the first world combined at over 15 million!
Re:You don't understand (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.theseus.com/FramesTech.ht
More is available from:
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/async/background/i
You have a tradeoff because the 'wires' are actually pairs of wires and the gates are more complex but you win because of the power-savings in not having to drive a clock through the chip. Manchester's AMULET project has been around for quite a while now, they have a working chip design thats quite similar to an ARM design.
Re:damn universe.. (Score:2, Interesting)
I didn't know you had a 3 digit ID. lol nice
Just thought I'd say hi.
Loth
Re:Not really (Score:2, Interesting)
The reason that the "digital" system, the delta sigma DAC, comes out ahead is the real strength of digital systems- noise immunity.
With the traditional DAC's, there are only 16 current sources/resistors in the whole chip, but each one needed to be trimmed by a laser to a very precise value. This costs a lot of money, which is why you need to spend 10x more on the chip to produce the same performance as a delta-sigma DAC. (most industrial DAC's and high-end audio still use this system)
With the delta-sigma DAC, you can put in several thousand transistors, but each one only needs to respond to two voltage levels. Each transistor can be poorly made, it just needs to be good enough to turn on when the voltage goes high and turn off when the voltage goes low. So digital chips require much less precision and can be made at much lower cost.
Basically, it is much cheaper to make tons of cheap transistors rather than one precise/accurate one.
That is the same reason binary is better than trinary- Trinary systems would probably require less transistors than a comparable binary system, but each one would need to be much more precise.
Re:Still binary.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Google link (KW) (Score:4, Interesting)
Add to the fact that parents are on the kids side and not the teachers side. When a child fails a subject the parents first blame the teacher instead of themselves or the child. I have a few family memebers who are teachers and they work entirely too much trying to help every student learn, but if the parents are not involved it becomes nearly impossible.
No, the problem today is not lack of funding, but that America as a whole doesn't care about education anymore. Sure people pay a lot of lip service to helping the children and fixing the education system, but then no one wants to do anything about it. In order to fix the system the two main things that need to happen are 1)discipline needs to be restored and 2) parents need to become part of the solution.
Re:Google link (KW) (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Google link (KW) (Score:3, Interesting)
They made you think they work too little, but in fact it is you (and I) that work too much.