Efficient Chip

[classicman]

OMG - could you put that in english for the rest of us - - - - ok well for me anyway?

[xoxoxoBruce]

I got, from reading the news release, they aren't trying to increase computation speed or memory capacity, but trying to reduce power consumption.

TI and MIT researchers envision the breakthrough leading to cellphones that run off ambient energy; portable computing devices with vastly improved running times; and medical implants that are powered simply by body heat and movement.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I got, from reading the news release, they aren't trying to increase computation speed or memory capacity, but trying to reduce power consumption.

That newest MSP430 would make some very interesting applications. TI was actively promoting contests for best application of their MPS430 processor. But then even 1960 technology processors (RCA's COSMOS) consumed so little power that the largest consumer of battery power was the battery itself (also called shelf life). Watch batteries typically are not run down by the watch. That battery would die just as fast whether in the watch or just sitting on the shelf - again shelf life. Processors in watches 30 years ago consumed so little power.

Other reports also cited that TI 'low power' as a significant development. Significant developments from ISSCC included new memory technologies, MIMO, and discussions about multicore processors - the new Moore's law?

Reporters did what many computer assemblers also do. When a computer does not work, then blame only what they understand - heat. Then install more fans or hype Arctic Silver myths.

If more journalists had enough grasp to appreciate what really was significant this past week. Three new memory technologies are now avidly in competition to replace disk drives.

Not even mentioned was old news of an entire radio created in a buckyball tube. So small that its connecting wires are larger than the entire radio. Ahh, but that working radio was only a research project - not a new product.

Originally Posted by tw

... If more journalists had enough grasp to appreciate what really was significant this past week. Three new memory technologies are now avidly in competition to replace disk drives. ...

I've only read about the solid state drive in which the chief advantage seems to be durability, with only a few applications benefiting from a somewhat lower power consumption, and the major drawbacks currently being half the memory capacity at a 50% increase in cost making it impractical for most consumers at this time.

Are the other new technologies any better poised to see widespread application?

[tw]

Originally Posted by NoBoxes

I've only read about the solid state drive in which the chief advantage seems to be durability, ...
Are the other new technologies any better poised to see widespread application?

"Conventional memory was about storing electrical charges." A "solid state drive" is just that. An earlier attempt to replace disk drives with solid state was called "bubble memory". A potential 'disruptive innovation' called bubble memory eventually failed to make it.

Rephrasing the question is, "Are these disruptive innovations?" The disk drive inside a computer (called a cell phone or mobile) uses a solid state disk. Market for such drives has long existed. A 'less than one inch disk drive' existed maybe a decade ago. Can these new memory technologies do better? How long does it take for a disruptive innovation to change the marketplace? How many just 'knew' something was a disruptive technology when first made available?

We know these three memories are fundamentally radical new technologies to replace "memory by storing electrical charges". Companies such as Intel sold off their 'electrical charge storage memory' production lines to move into new memory technology. (Memory is the first component that Intel designs for each new technology processor.) We know these memories are technically superior to non-volatile memory found even in curent solid state disk drives. But does it meet a ballpark criteria of tens times improvement? Is it so disruptive as to threaten conventional disk drives?

Only time and innovation can answer that question. If there was a simpler answer, then I would not even bother posting the obvious. No way to answer that question with anything but a 'maybe'. New memory technology would have been a reporter's topic if he understood simple computer hardware concepts.