Future Microchips

To All:

In the January issue of Scientific American there is an article titled "The Next 20 Years of Microchips: Pushing Performance Boundaries", which I thought might be interesting, since we're all obviously involved with using computers. I've copied some excerpts from the article below.

==============================================================

formatting link

Alternative materials and designs will be needed for chips to continue to improve.

Size: Crossing the Bar:

Instead of fabricating transistors all in one plane (like cars packed into the lanes of a jammed silicon highway), the crossbar approach has a set of parallel nanowires in one plane that crosses over a second set of wires at right angles to it (two perpendicular highways).

Heat: Refrigerators or Wind:

A research group led by Intel has crafted a thin-film superlattice of bismuth telluride into the packaging that encases a chip. The thermoelectric material converts temperature gradients into electricity, in effect refrigerating the chip itself.

Architecture: Multiple Cores:

If the approaches can be perfected, desktop and mobile devices could contain dozens or more parallel processors, which might individually have fewer transistors than current chips but work faster as a group overall.

Slimmer Materials: Nanotubes and Self-Assembly:

Arranging molecules or even atoms can be tricky, especially given the need to assemble them at high volume during chip production. One solution could be molecules that self-assemble: mix them together, then expose them to heat or light or centrifugal forces, and they will arrange themselves into a predictable pattern.

Faster Transistors: Ultrathin Graphene:

...Researchers are confident they can make graphene transistors that are just 10 nanometers across and one atom high. Numerous circuits could perhaps be carved into a single, tiny graphene sheet.

Optical Computing: Quick as Light:

Engineers at Intel and the University of California, Santa Barbara, have built optical ?data pipes? from indium phosphate and silicon using common semiconductor manufacturing processes.

Molecular Computing: Organic Logic:

Molecules can be tiny, so circuits built with them could be far smaller than those made in silicon. One difficulty, however, is finding ways to fabricate complex circuits. Researchers hope that self-assembly might be one answer.

Quantum Computing: Superposition of 0 and 1:

In addition to enjoying superposition, quantum elements can become ?entangled.? Information states are linked across many qubits, allowing powerful ways to process information and to transfer it from location to location.

Biological Computing: Chips that Live:

A biological chip, in addition to its having orders of magnitude more elements, could provide massively parallel processing. Such computers may end up in your bloodstream rather than on your desktop. ==============================================================

Reply to
BottleBob
Loading thread data ...

My hero Richard Feynman thought that computers will become one-billionth the size and power consumption eventually. Interfacing should prove to be interesting.

Reply to
Buerste

We used to refer to that as the "Smoking Hairy Golf Ball" As the processor would get smaller and more and more dense, it would need more and more connections to the denser core of circuitry all packed tighter, and tighter.

Reply to
Half-nutz

Half-nutz fired this volley in news:9938d640-15c8- snipped-for-privacy@21g2000yqj.googlegroups.com:

IIRC, in the fairly early days of "super" VLSI, Fairchild published a joke engineering spec on the F9440 (a DG Nova 2 instruction-set micro).

It stated something to the gist of, "Cooling should be provided with a 6- foot fan placed 1/2" from the top of the package. If the chip overheats, more cooling is called-for."

Of course, back in that day, 50MHz x86 chips were overheating. They've learned a lot since then. They'd have been all a-goggle over a 3+GHz processor clock.

LLoyd

Reply to
Lloyd E. Sponenburgh

IIRC, back around 1980 the place I worked at got a CNC upgrade to it's Bridgeport Boss I NC milling machine. It used Bridgeport's proprietary CAM system (Before EZCam), ran on a Tandy TRS80 clone, with

4 KB of RAM @ 1.77 MHz. I think my first home computer was an IBM PC that ran at 4.77 MHz with 16 KB of RAM (that was expandable to 256 KB). When I expanded it to 256 KB, I thought it was HUGE, & that I was the Big Dog on the block and would NEVER need that much RAM. LOL
Reply to
BottleBob

My first computer was an Epson QX-10. Yeah, CP/M! Dual 320k (IIRC) floppies, and not much ram. These were the days when nearly every CP/M computer had it's own disk format. Most shareware was available in Kaypro format, so when I got something to try, I had to visit a friend with a Kaypro and a program that would convert to the Epson format. This was my first gateway to the online world via a 300baud modem. For the young-uns here, you can read text streaming from a BBS in real time at 300 baud. At 1200 you can scan enough to know the gist of the text.

What was standout for the machine was genuine WYSIWYG text editing. Of course, at a crude resolution that didn't even match dot matrix printers of the day. That was using the Valdocs software (Valuable Documents). One of my customers deals in automation, I was talking to one of his programmers one day and discovered he was one of the programmers for Valdocs. Small world sometimes. I remember when an interface card was made available that would support a whopping 20mb HDD. The card alone was around a grand!

I thought it was pretty danged advanced when I bought it, compared to the Altair/MITS some of my high school classmates had gone nuts over...

Hooray for progress!

Jon

Reply to
Jon Anderson

300 Baud? I'm almost certain I'm younger than you (40 this summer) and I started off at 110 baud...

But I do remember the old 8" floppies and hard drives that weighed in at 50+ lbs. About 4-5 lbs. per meg. :)

Just about a month ago, I reconnected with an old friend from the early

1980's who claimed he could "hear" at 110 baud. In other words, I can pick up the phone and tell you what touch tones you press by ear... He claimed to be able to tell what some characters were at 110 baud. LOL... Those were the days before "Hacker" was a term made negative by the media. BBS wasn't a sexual preferecne either. Phreaks we were, that's for sure. :)

Regards, Joe Agro, Jr. (800) 871-5022

01.908.542.0244 Automatic / Pneumatic Drills:
formatting link
Spindle Drills:
formatting link
Tapping:
formatting link
Site:
formatting link
formatting link
V8013-R
Reply to
Joe AutoDrill

Jon Anderson fired this volley in news:EpOXm.418051$ snipped-for-privacy@en-nntp-08.dc.easynews.com:

Not my first computer, which was a hand-built, home-designed wire-wrap monstrosity... but my first "real" computer was a Ferguson Big-Board I built up to run CP/M. And I had WordStar! Now that was WYSIWYG! (I remember that I got a "seconds" board because it was about $50 less expensive than the first-quality ones. The seconds had somehow escaped the final tin-plate process -- all the feedthroughs were nickel plated, and a damnable BITCH to solder.)

IIRC, the 8" SA801 drives held 141K per disk. It was amazing when they went double-sided with the SA851s, and astounding when I built a SASI host-adaptor and connected a Shugart 5MB hard drive to the system. WOW!

The whole computer (sans monitor and keyboard) only weighed about 120lb. Most of that was the honkin' linear supply with about 40lb of iron in it.

LLoyd

Reply to
Lloyd E. Sponenburgh

051$ snipped-for-privacy@en-nntp-08.dc.easynews.com:

Yikes, My first computer was a hand wire wrapped "Collection" The old power supply was still sitting around and last weekend I needed a battery charger and my normal one was at the shop. So I used the old power supply for a battery charger. I had an enormous disk drive.. 4 or 5 Megabytes, it only weighed 900 lbs, and originally ran on three phase. I converted it over to single phase, and built level shifters for the old diode logic in the disk drive. It has since been donated to a computer museum. The 'operating system" was hand written, compiled on a quadrille pad, and then I made a homemade EPROM programmer. I had to borrow an old Altair system to key in the bytes one at a time to memory, and burn the EPROM chip. Took it home and plugged it into the CPU board to allow me to use a keyboard and a video display.. My next computer was a home-brew apple II clone. And a bunch of assembly programming for the old CPM computers. Those were the days. You could actually work on something. And get the information you needed. Nowadays, you load some software, something dies, and the software seller tells you it's Micro$oft'$ fault. Micro$oft tells you need to spend a few hundred for a new operating system. Nothing works and the ONLY solution is to piss more and more money down the drain.

We did NOT progress in the last 30 years.

Reply to
Half-nutz

O.K. Mine was an Altair 680b (the Motorola 6800 CPU machine, not the Intel 8080 machine or the later Z80 replacement for the 8080.

*No* disks, 1K of RAM to start, with an added 16K board later. Another later board added the ability to save/load (at 300 baud) from audio cassette tapes.

Try it at the 110 Baud limit of a Teletype ASR-33. :-) (And add the fun of a keyboard which had keys so stiff that you could balance a broom, handle down, on a keycap without actually activating that key. :-)

My second machine was a Technico machine based on the TI 9900 CPU (16-bit CPU, with actual hardware multiply capability. :-)

The third machine was the SWTP 6800 -- the first one for which I got a floppy controller.

All three machines used stand-alone terminals instead of built-in graphics cards and a keyboard attached, so the resolution was limited by the terminal's own capabilities, not the computer's.

My first hard disk was a 5.6 MB one -- for which I had to wire wrap an adaptor to talk to the controller card. Later, I did the same with 27 MB disks, and a card to convert those MFM disks to SASI (the predecessor of SCSI). At one point, I had two 5.6 MB and two 27MB disks running on the one system, along with four 8" floppy drives (1 MB each) two 5.25" DSDD floppy drives (400 KB on that OS), and two 80 track DSDD drives (800 KB on that OS.) The OS was SSB's (Smoke Signal Broadcasting's) DOS-68.

Later was the SWTP 6809, running a choice of SSB's DOS-69 or Microware's OS-9 (A multi-user, multi-tasking OS in 56K of RAM.)

Well ... the Altair 8800 (Intel 8080 CPU) had avaiable 8" floppy drives.

I won't bother documenting the progression through many unix systems which followed. :-)

Amen!

Enjoy, DoN.

Reply to
DoN. Nichols

I had a Xerox 820 surplus bare board that I had to solder all the parts on. The 820 was the Big Board with Xerox's name on it. I loved to play text adventures like "Zork" (xyzzy)

Reply to
Buerste

I've reworked the Big Board (ala Kaypro, ala ATR8500, etc). It's only 4-1/2" x 6"

And that using all thru-hole parts and no programmable arrays.

I (heart) Z80s...

Reply to
cavelamb

How about WPM TTY...

Mart>> This was my first gateway to the online world via a 300baud modem.

Reply to
Martin H. Eastburn

All the TTY I worked with (interfacing with deaf students at the time) were either 110 or 300 baud.

Reply to
Joe AutoDrill

Surely Mr. Feynman was joking!

Reply to
Existential Angst

EA:

Heh wasn't that the title of one of his books?

Let me go look..... Dyamm, I got one right! "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character"

But here's a lecture he gave in 1959. Small excerpt:

=============================================================

formatting link
Miniaturizing the computer

I don't know how to do this on a small scale in a practical way, but I do know that computing machines are very large; they fill rooms. Why can't we make them very small, make them of little wires, little elements--and by little, I mean little. For instance, the wires should be 10 or 100 atoms in diameter, and the circuits should be a few thousand angstroms across. Everybody who has analyzed the logical theory of computers has come to the conclusion that the possibilities of computers are very interesting--if they could be made to be more complicated by several orders of magnitude. If they had millions of times as many elements, they could make judgments. They would have time to calculate what is the best way to make the calculation that they are about to make. They could select the method of analysis which, from their experience, is better than the one that we would give to them. And in many other ways, they would have new qualitative features. =============================================================

So Feynman proposed nano-computers when the state of the art computers at the time filled rooms.

Reply to
BottleBob

Just noticed the site link:

formatting link
is Ray Kurzweil's site. He was (is) quite the visionary. Founded Kurzweil Keyboards. Maker of some bad ass electronic keyboards.

-- Bill

Reply to
BillT

Bill:

That's pretty cool. It was just a coincidence that I ended up choosing his site. The first site I chose was a PDF that wouldn't let me copy any excerpts. I don't normally like to quote from private party blogs.

Reply to
BottleBob

Ergo PV's oh-so slimy wit... wait a minute.... that should have been "oh-so sublime wit"..... Heh, Feynman, a NYC boy, Queens/Brooklyn, Far Rockaways/Coney Island.... He was chided for his Brooklyn accent.

He had insights, dats f'sure. But I'm sure a lot of people grokked that 0's and 1's don't need thick wires, big spaces.

The thing is, you can only go so small before the probability of QM renders things, well, perty uncertain. Hey, where'd dat "1" go??? It was here just a nanosecond ago!!! WTF??? Oh, THERE it is!! How'd it get over *there*??

Could be a big proleng in bank accounts, eh? Your bank balance loses a zero or two, jumps over to mine! heh....

Reply to
Existential Angst

Those WERE the days! I was driven to learn "Turbo Pascal" then "C".

Reply to
Buerste

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.