Superconducting Microprocessors? Turns Out They're Ultra-Efficient (2021)
1–10 of 100 posts
Re: Superconducting Microprocessors? Turns Out They're Ultra-Efficient (2021)
#2Another notch on the belt for a cryocooler boom.
Oh “superconducting is hard”, “if only we had high temperature superconductors”. All valid, but if we work with what we got and disrupt cyrocoolers make them a commodity like magnetrons all those laments become moot.
Prove me wrong.
Re: Superconducting Microprocessors? Turns Out They're Ultra-Efficient (2021)
#3Another notch on the belt for a cryocooler boom. Oh “superconducting is hard”, “if only we had high temperature superconductors”. All valid, but if we work with what we got and disrupt cyrocoolers make them a commodity like magnetrons all those laments become moot. Prove me wrong.
So someone else needs to prove a negative, that there exists no possible technology that will "disrupt" cryocoolers by bringing them to an unspecified price/performance point by an unspecified time in the future to service an unspecified computing use-case?
That seems more than a little unfair. :p
Re: Superconducting Microprocessors? Turns Out They're Ultra-Efficient (2021)
#4Another notch on the belt for a cryocooler boom. Oh “superconducting is hard”, “if only we had high temperature superconductors”. All valid, but if we work with what we got and disrupt cyrocoolers make them a commodity like magnetrons all those laments become moot. Prove me wrong.
Also notable because heat rejection on that scale till you enter the superconducting regime is a reinforcing loop: the device no longer makes heat, you just need to keep the environmental heat out.
Re: Superconducting Microprocessors? Turns Out They're Ultra-Efficient (2021)
#5Another notch on the belt for a cryocooler boom. Oh “superconducting is hard”, “if only we had high temperature superconductors”. All valid, but if we work with what we got and disrupt cyrocoolers make them a commodity like magnetrons all those laments become moot. Prove me wrong.
Is the cost of cryocoolong capex or Opex dominated?
Re: Superconducting Microprocessors? Turns Out They're Ultra-Efficient (2021)
#6Another notch on the belt for a cryocooler boom. Oh “superconducting is hard”, “if only we had high temperature superconductors”. All valid, but if we work with what we got and disrupt cyrocoolers make them a commodity like magnetrons all those laments become moot. Prove me wrong.
So someone else needs to prove a negative, that there exists no possible technology that will "disrupt" cryocoolers by bringing them to an unspecified price/performance point by an unspecified time in the future to service an unspecified computing use-case? That seems more than a little unfair. :p
> someone else needs to prove a negative, that there exists no possible technology that will "disrupt" cryocoolers
Look at the Wikipedia references for crycoolers [1]. Note the dates and volume. Now look at room-tempuerature superconductors [2].
1990 vs 2023. 5 vs 57. OP is arguing that a greater fraction of high-temperature superconducting research dollars might find purchase in improving the cryocooler than we presently spend.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryocooler#References
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room-temperature_superconducto...
Re: Superconducting Microprocessors? Turns Out They're Ultra-Efficient (2021)
#7Another notch on the belt for a cryocooler boom. Oh “superconducting is hard”, “if only we had high temperature superconductors”. All valid, but if we work with what we got and disrupt cyrocoolers make them a commodity like magnetrons all those laments become moot. Prove me wrong.
Is the cost of cryocoolong capex or Opex dominated?
[deleted]
Re: Superconducting Microprocessors? Turns Out They're Ultra-Efficient (2021)
#8Another notch on the belt for a cryocooler boom. Oh “superconducting is hard”, “if only we had high temperature superconductors”. All valid, but if we work with what we got and disrupt cyrocoolers make them a commodity like magnetrons all those laments become moot. Prove me wrong.
Would running a cryocooler spend more energy than a superconducting CPU / GPU would save?
Re: Superconducting Microprocessors? Turns Out They're Ultra-Efficient (2021)
#9A more recent take on this subject:
https://diginomica.com/superconducting-chips-could-pack-data...
Re: Superconducting Microprocessors? Turns Out They're Ultra-Efficient (2021)
#10Another notch on the belt for a cryocooler boom. Oh “superconducting is hard”, “if only we had high temperature superconductors”. All valid, but if we work with what we got and disrupt cyrocoolers make them a commodity like magnetrons all those laments become moot. Prove me wrong.
Would running a cryocooler spend more energy than a superconducting CPU / GPU would save?
>The 2.5 GHz prototype uses 80 times less energy than its semiconductor counterpart, even accounting for cooling
It's in the header of the article.