   IBM Develops Super-Fast Transistor
  They were able to make a 500Ghz processor (at 4.5 K), 300Ghz at room temperature!Look HereAnd Here
  Shhh! Bethesda will hear you!   ;Quote:Original post by RavuyaShhh! Bethesda will hear you!And make that chip the minimum requirement for TES5: Oblibion 2?   ;  Most of the articles I've seen about it were pretty confused about whether it's a transistor running 500GHz (which is nice, but not a world record), or a chip running that speed (which is pretty damn unbelievable... [wink]   ;  This isn't the first time I see such an article.Also, a chip that's 100 times faster also needs to be 100 times smaller, or the signals will never reach those fast transistors in time because they're traveling only at the slow lightspeed.Also, what's a fast processor worth if the RAM access is going to stay as slow as it is now...   ;  seems like it just usessuperconductors,hardly a new thing and making a chip with superconductors is the easy part, the hard part is making it so they dont need to be supercooled to work   ;  One of those would go nicely with the Direct3D 10 Reference Rasterizer. Might just about clock up real-time performance then [grin]The BBC seems to be quite sure its a whole chip rather than a transistor. But thats not necessarily proof...Quote:From the BBC:The team believes it is possible to make chips run at 1,000 Ghz, or one Terahertz, at room temperature.Admittedly my EE knowledge isn't amazing, but I was sure that recent evidence as well as talk from Intel/AMD (and others) suggested we weren't going to go much above 4ghz for chips. Even just the commercial constraints, let alone power/heat and general transistor switching speed seemed to indicate it wasn't going to happen.Now we've got a news story of them clocking over 100x this and promising 250x it in the future. Were all the clever scientists on holiday during those previous announcements?Cheers,Jack   ;Quote:Original post by jollyjeffers[...]Admittedly my EE knowledge isn't amazing, but I was sure that recent evidence as well as talk from Intel/AMD (and others) suggested we weren't going to go much above 4ghz for chips. Even just the commercial constraints, let alone power/heat and general transistor switching speed seemed to indicate it wasn't going to happen.[...]An in-lab demonstration product or a limited-distribution commercial product with a very precisely controlled environment is VERY different from a consumer-level retail-available chip.Otherwise, the term "supercomputer" wouldn't mean much.   ;Quote:Admittedly my EE knowledge isn't amazing, but I was sure that recent evidence as well as talk from Intel/AMD (and others) suggested we weren't going to go much above 4ghz for chips. Even just the commercial constraints, let alone power/heat and general transistor switching speed seemed to indicate it wasn't going to happen.Now we've got a news story of them clocking over 100x this and promising 250x it in the future. Were all the clever scientists on holiday during those previous announcements?They're using superconductors. Certain materials, mostly types of ceramic, become superconductive when they are cooled to below a certain temperature. A superconductor has virtually no resistance. Virtually no resistance means virtually no heat generation, meaning they can overclock a superconductive processor to several orders of magnitude higher than a traditional silicon chip. The only catch is the "warmest" running superconductor we know of needs to be cooled below something like -80C.   ;Quote:Original post by jollyjeffersOne of those would go nicely with the Direct3D 10 Reference Rasterizer. Might just about clock up real-time performance then [grin]The BBC seems to be quite sure its a whole chip rather than a transistor. But thats not necessarily proof...Quote:From the BBC:The team believes it is possible to make chips run at 1,000 Ghz, or one Terahertz, at room temperature.Admittedly my EE knowledge isn't amazing, but I was sure that recent evidence as well as talk from Intel/AMD (and others) suggested we weren't going to go much above 4ghz for chips. Even just the commercial constraints, let alone power/heat and general transistor switching speed seemed to indicate it wasn't going to happen.Now we've got a news story of them clocking over 100x this and promising 250x it in the future. Were all the clever scientists on holiday during those previous announcements?Cheers,JackHerb Sutter, to name one, has given presentations explicitly stating that the future of faster processing is thorugh parallism.Dave   