4 ms·

Less than a single clock cycle (0.1 ns) of a fast conventional processor? This feels like the difference between electromechanical computing and transistors (s

Less than a single clock cycle (0.1 ns) of a fast conventional processor? This feels like the difference between electromechanical computing and transistors (skipping vacuum tubes entirely). These moments in life I hoped for as a kid, when you realise there's a step change between technologies you are familiar with and what's coming next are exhilarating and worrying. The downside is that everything we've created to this point, including all the bad applications, will be magnified by the same factor as the good things. Time to get our house in order.

thisiscorrect 4y ago
570 ps is 0.57 ns.
- mcronce 4y ago
  Also, 0.1ns would be a single clock cycle at 10GHz
travisathougies 4y ago
There are several companies doing photonic computing (some with commercially available or soon-to-be-available chips). Unfortunately, it's currently all for naught, as existing available silicon hardware accelerators can currently do the computation faster than anyone can stream the data into the chip. The more interesting problem is data movement, as usual.
- nonrandomstring 4y ago
  I guess this bodes the end of the copper PCB, except for power supplies.
  - travisathougies 4y ago
    I'm going to guess most electronics is not going to be super high-speed. Sort of like how fiber optic was once the realm of only large businesses, then small businesses, and now is commonly available at home (although nowhere near 100% adoption). I think the copper PCB will eventually go away, but not for many decades.
- splittingTimes 4y ago
  I do not understand your remark. > do the computation faster than anyone can stream the data into the chip. The more interesting problem is data movement, as usual. Is that not the selling point of integrated photonic circuits? You got photonic chips/components that are connected by photonic waveguides. So essentially photons replace electrons for all intents and purposes and the data moves at close to the speed of light.
  - travisathougies 4y ago
    My point is the following: 1. Photonics is a new technology. It is more expensive than silicon 2. Silicon can do the compute as fast as photonics, and we understand silicon. Building a silicon chip is 'easy'. 3. The problem is data transport, which silicon cannot do fast enough. We can compute inferences faster than we can get the data Photonic compute doesn't help with (3). Photonic data transport does, and there are several companies who have entered this market, including several who have already exited with large deals. However, photonic data transport can terminate at photonic compute or silicon compute, and silicon compute is fast enough and cheaper / better understood.

thisiscorrect 4y ago

570 ps is 0.57 ns.

mcronce 4y ago
Also, 0.1ns would be a single clock cycle at 10GHz

travisathougies 4y ago

There are several companies doing photonic computing (some with commercially available or soon-to-be-available chips). Unfortunately, it's currently all for naught, as existing available silicon hardware accelerators can currently do the computation faster than anyone can stream the data into the chip. The more interesting problem is data movement, as usual.

nonrandomstring 4y ago
I guess this bodes the end of the copper PCB, except for power supplies.
- travisathougies 4y ago
  I'm going to guess most electronics is not going to be super high-speed. Sort of like how fiber optic was once the realm of only large businesses, then small businesses, and now is commonly available at home (although nowhere near 100% adoption). I think the copper PCB will eventually go away, but not for many decades.
splittingTimes 4y ago
I do not understand your remark. > do the computation faster than anyone can stream the data into the chip. The more interesting problem is data movement, as usual. Is that not the selling point of integrated photonic circuits? You got photonic chips/components that are connected by photonic waveguides. So essentially photons replace electrons for all intents and purposes and the data moves at close to the speed of light.
- travisathougies 4y ago
  My point is the following: 1. Photonics is a new technology. It is more expensive than silicon 2. Silicon can do the compute as fast as photonics, and we understand silicon. Building a silicon chip is 'easy'. 3. The problem is data transport, which silicon cannot do fast enough. We can compute inferences faster than we can get the data Photonic compute doesn't help with (3). Photonic data transport does, and there are several companies who have entered this market, including several who have already exited with large deals. However, photonic data transport can terminate at photonic compute or silicon compute, and silicon compute is fast enough and cheaper / better understood.