Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

extremetech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 32 posts

Re: IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

#11

Post by cobrausn »

ginko wrote: post #3
tpatke wrote: post #2

When I think of IBM, I still think of consultants and guys in blue suits. ...but more than anyone else out there, these guys are building the future. See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watson_(computer) http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/30/embargo-ibm-develops-inst... http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/14/ibm-stores-bits-on-arrays... I hate to think what their patent portfolio looks like.

It's true that IBM does incredible research, but their results never seem to break into mainstream.

IBM was the first company to successfully release a commercial USB flash drive back in 2000.

Re: IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

#12

Post by Karunamon »

nickik wrote: post #10
mrsebastian wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its patent portfolio is huge -- the biggest in the world. They have registered the most patents per year for, like, the last 10 years. More than 5,000 per year! (Next biggest is Samsung and MS, which have averaged around 2k-3k per year, I think).

How awesome would it be it we just could hit delete on the hole shity patent db.

Your horrible spelling aside, I wouldn't mind seeing the patent system suffer an irreversible data corruption, along with a fire destroying all hard copies.

A forced reset, as it were.

Re: IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

#13

Post by Sam_Odio »

ginko wrote: post #3
tpatke wrote: post #2

When I think of IBM, I still think of consultants and guys in blue suits. ...but more than anyone else out there, these guys are building the future. See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watson_(computer) http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/30/embargo-ibm-develops-inst... http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/14/ibm-stores-bits-on-arrays... I hate to think what their patent portfolio looks like.

It's true that IBM does incredible research, but their results never seem to break into mainstream.

Ever heard of the PC?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Personal_Computer

Re: IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

#14

Post by foreverbanned »

wcoenen wrote: post #5

How do they get the carbon nanotube in the correct position and orientation like that? I suspect it will be difficult to do it reliably and cheaply for billions of transistors at a time.

They probably use an atomic force microscope (google "atomic force microscope nanomanipulation").

Re: IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

#15

Post by adestefan »

wcoenen wrote: post #5

How do they get the carbon nanotube in the correct position and orientation like that? I suspect it will be difficult to do it reliably and cheaply for billions of transistors at a time.

Pfft. That's an engineering problem, not a research problem. I kid a bit, but IBM does have the fabrication engineering talent to pull it off.

Re: IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

#16

Post by sliverstorm »

wcoenen wrote: post #5

How do they get the carbon nanotube in the correct position and orientation like that? I suspect it will be difficult to do it reliably and cheaply for billions of transistors at a time.

Probably. There's a reason we are still using 32nm silicon, even though we can experimentally fabricate graphene & gallium-arsenide transistors at sizes down to... 6nm? (That's the smallest I remember.)

Re: IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

#17

Post by wcoenen »

kibwen wrote: post #9

"At 9nm, IBM’s transistor is also smaller than the physical limit of silicon transistors, which is around 11nm." Can anyone cite a source for that statement regarding the theoretical minimum size of silicon transistors?

According to the Wikipedia article about the 11nm node, the thickness of the gate dielectric becomes just 1 atom at that scale: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/11_nm

Re: IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

#18

Post by smackfu »

ginko wrote: post #3
tpatke wrote: post #2

When I think of IBM, I still think of consultants and guys in blue suits. ...but more than anyone else out there, these guys are building the future. See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watson_(computer) http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/30/embargo-ibm-develops-inst... http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/14/ibm-stores-bits-on-arrays... I hate to think what their patent portfolio looks like.

It's true that IBM does incredible research, but their results never seem to break into mainstream.

I believe IBM was the first company to use GMR in hard drives.

Re: IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

#19

Post by jcarreiro »

Karunamon wrote: post #12
nickik wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How awesome would it be it we just could hit delete on the hole shity patent db.

Your horrible spelling aside, I wouldn't mind seeing the patent system suffer an irreversible data corruption, along with a fire destroying all hard copies. A forced reset, as it were.

If IBM didn't think that it would be awarded patents for work like this, why would they bother to do the research in the first place?

Re: IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor that outperforms silicon

#20

Post by Karunamon »

jcarreiro wrote: post #19
Karunamon wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your horrible spelling aside, I wouldn't mind seeing the patent system suffer an irreversible data corruption, along with a fire destroying all hard copies. A forced reset, as it were.

If IBM didn't think that it would be awarded patents for work like this, why would they bother to do the research in the first place?

Surely you don't think the only reason people do research and advance science is due to hope of compensation?
Post reply on HN