7 ms·
Is anyone knowledgable on the implications of the underlying tech once it gets commercialized? Obviously things like game streaming would be improved.
by keenmaster 6y ago
Is anyone knowledgable on the implications of the underlying tech once it gets commercialized? Obviously things like game streaming would be improved.
- throwawaygh 6y agoWe will be able to make comments complaining about bloated JavaScript libraries at lightning speed.
- TheSpiceIsLife 6y agoAren’t gamers primarily concerned with latency rather than speed?
- TheAdamAndChe 6y agoThey said game streaming, which makes me think s/he's talking about things like Twitch and Mixer, livestreaming platforms that do depend on throughput for high quality video.
- TheSpiceIsLife 6y agoSorry, yes, I see that now.
- thejynxed 6y agoWell, if you use things like nVidia Shield for remote streaming you want both.
- govg 6y agoBoth latency and bandwidth affect gaming. Latency is important to ensure that there isn't too much lag between you moving a controller stick and your character moving, and not as important for slower games which can handle this well. Bandwidth is important because it determines the resolution and quality you can stream at, so higher bandwidths would enable full HD or 4K gaming.
- stephen_g 6y agoThis isn't the kind of thing that we're going to see in home internet for a long time. The newest WiFi standard is only 10Gbps at best, and routers and wired standards aren't affordable over 10Gbps yet either for home use. For internet connections, there are currently already consumer standards that can do 10Gbps symmetric (like NG-PON2) which hopefully we see being deployed more widely soon. Even in 15 years I would be surprised if the high-end of available speeds for home connections are more than 2-5x that (Of course, companies that can pay for dedicated links can already get 100Gbps+ today). The technology in the article, if commercially practical, would first go in to carrier networks and the larger enterprise market for backhaul transit links in the next few years, then over time filter down to general enterprise networking. Even if transit providers upgrade, it wouldn't actually be a noticeable change, because they can already do this kind of link, just with a rack with dozens of laser modules that are optically multiplexed together. This does that in a single chip which would reduce cost a lot.
- dahfizz 6y agoThis improves the speed achieved with a single chip, not the actual maximum speed possible with fiber. We already have links that can go faster than this, this invention will likely just make those high speed links cheaper / more compact / easier to manufacture.
- dasudasu 6y agoThis would never be for a home access point. This would be used for long-haul communications (i.e. between metro areas). The data rates there are already pretty ludicrous. The current standard is called 800G, for 800 Gbit/s per wavelength.
- cycomanic 6y agoThe research here is all about core and metro networks, so those are the networks connecting metropolitan areas to each other and the ones connecting the big users within metro areas. The home users and mobile users are not directly connected to these networks, but through e.g. your providers passive optical network. You can think about this similar to a road network, you are living on the little side roads, these are the big highways and ring roads. But because everyone is using more and more data on their home and mobile devices, there needs to be bigger pipes in the core network (despite more and more local data centres for caching)