4 ms·
Subtitle from the link: > The 2.5 GHz prototype uses 80 times less energy than its semiconductor counterpart, even accounting for cooling (emphasis mine)
by thatcherc 6y ago
Subtitle from the link:
> The 2.5 GHz prototype uses 80 times less energy than its semiconductor counterpart, even accounting for cooling
(emphasis mine)
- amelius 6y agoYeah, but only at datacenter scales. > Since the MANA microprocessor requires liquid helium-level temperatures, it’s better suited for large-scale computing infrastructures like data centers and supercomputers, where cryogenic cooling systems could be used.
- alkylketone 6y agoI'd be curious what the energy savings are like at smaller scales -- 80x at data center scales, but how about for a smaller machine, like a PC with phase cooling?
- nullc 6y agoI would expect the cooling to have a scaling advantage-- heat gain is proportional to surface area, but the mount of superconducting mojo you can use is proportional to volume so it should be more energy efficient to build larger devices.
- thatcherc 6y agoThe authors' power comparison is outlined in Section VI of their paper [0] (page 11-12). You might be able to figure out some intermediate scalings from that! [0] - https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=9295318 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=929...
- ernst_klim 6y agoSo great for big computing centres and such? CERN and other should be happy with it.
- lallysingh 6y agoDC scale is great. Most stuff runs in a DC. What's wrong about requiring DC scale?