4 ms·

> 1) How would wiring to you processor work? Sure, there's a modulus gap to be interfaced, but flexible circuits have been worked on forever. The whole point

> 1) How would wiring to you processor work? Sure, there's a modulus gap to be interfaced, but flexible circuits have been worked on forever. The whole point is of this tech is that the transistors themselves are flexible. But since the transistors they end up with are orders of magnitude worse than what the microprocessor age started with, to me this just shows that this tech is not anywhere close to practical application.

ChuckMcM 2y ago
Yes, the entire chip (wiring and transistors) is flexible. Which is something I find kind of amazing. Back in 2008 there was a company in the UK called 'Plastic Logic'[1] that was going to make an e-reader that could be rolled up. Back when organic LEDs were just starting to be possible and this stuff was living on a glass substrate, doing "all" of the circuits in long change hydrocarbons was a pretty revolutionary idea. My original point was that dismissing the technology out of hand because you imagine you could solve the same problem with tiny ICs is probably premature. Dismissing any technology coming to market because you think it doesn't solve any problem is usually a bad idea because it takes non-zero effort and resources to bring anything to market. As a result, if you imagine what something is irrelevant because there are other proven solutions, then take that as a signal to say "Hmmm, what am I missing here?" > But since the transistors they end up with are orders of > magnitude worse than what the microprocessor age started > with, to me this just shows that this tech is not anywhere > close to practical application. This doesn't really track though does it? The "first" microprocessor, the 4004 ran at 750kHz max. Most of the challenge here appears to be heat dissipation as plastic melts at a much lower temperature than silicon, but the chemistry is still interesting. I completely agree that this isn't going to displace servers in the data center any time soon, but I can imagine applications for an all (or nearly all) plastic computer on a flexible plastic substrate. [1] Their IP (not the reader though) lives on at https://www.e-pi.com/ https://www.e-pi.com/
- marshray 2y ago
  > The "first" microprocessor, the 4004 ran at 750kHz max. The 4004 wasn't useful to power a general-purpose computer as we think of one today, it was made for a 4 function calculator and it's hard to find many examples of it being used in other systems online. It took another 10 years of Moore's Law for the ingredients to come together and microprocessor-powered desktop computers to achieve critical mass. Look at Table 2 in the (awful, IMO) Nature article. This thing is 10x slower than even a 4004. > Dismissing any technology coming to market because you think it doesn't solve any problem is usually a bad idea because it takes non-zero effort and resources to bring anything to market. As a result, if you imagine what something is irrelevant because there are other proven solutions, then take that as a signal to say "Hmmm, what am I missing here?" 100%! But is there reason to think Moore's Law is happening here? Or did these researchers just print some minimum viable transistors on kapton?
  - faragon 2y ago
    Slower, clock wise. My guess, considering the IPC, is that it could perform better.
    - londons_explore 2y ago
      The IPC is far worse too - this is a Serial RISC-V machine - Ie. it takes ~~60 clock cycles for 1 instruction. Ie. IPC will be 30x worse than a microcontroller core, and 200x worse than a desktop PC core. (couldn't find exact numbers)
      - faragon 2y ago
        Thank you

ChuckMcM 2y ago

Yes, the entire chip (wiring and transistors) is flexible. Which is something I find kind of amazing. Back in 2008 there was a company in the UK called 'Plastic Logic'[1] that was going to make an e-reader that could be rolled up. Back when organic LEDs were just starting to be possible and this stuff was living on a glass substrate, doing "all" of the circuits in long change hydrocarbons was a pretty revolutionary idea. My original point was that dismissing the technology out of hand because you imagine you could solve the same problem with tiny ICs is probably premature. Dismissing any technology coming to market because you think it doesn't solve any problem is usually a bad idea because it takes non-zero effort and resources to bring anything to market. As a result, if you imagine what something is irrelevant because there are other proven solutions, then take that as a signal to say "Hmmm, what am I missing here?" > But since the transistors they end up with are orders of > magnitude worse than what the microprocessor age started > with, to me this just shows that this tech is not anywhere > close to practical application. This doesn't really track though does it? The "first" microprocessor, the 4004 ran at 750kHz max. Most of the challenge here appears to be heat dissipation as plastic melts at a much lower temperature than silicon, but the chemistry is still interesting. I completely agree that this isn't going to displace servers in the data center any time soon, but I can imagine applications for an all (or nearly all) plastic computer on a flexible plastic substrate. [1] Their IP (not the reader though) lives on at https://www.e-pi.com/ https://www.e-pi.com/

marshray 2y ago
> The "first" microprocessor, the 4004 ran at 750kHz max. The 4004 wasn't useful to power a general-purpose computer as we think of one today, it was made for a 4 function calculator and it's hard to find many examples of it being used in other systems online. It took another 10 years of Moore's Law for the ingredients to come together and microprocessor-powered desktop computers to achieve critical mass. Look at Table 2 in the (awful, IMO) Nature article. This thing is 10x slower than even a 4004. > Dismissing any technology coming to market because you think it doesn't solve any problem is usually a bad idea because it takes non-zero effort and resources to bring anything to market. As a result, if you imagine what something is irrelevant because there are other proven solutions, then take that as a signal to say "Hmmm, what am I missing here?" 100%! But is there reason to think Moore's Law is happening here? Or did these researchers just print some minimum viable transistors on kapton?
- faragon 2y ago
  Slower, clock wise. My guess, considering the IPC, is that it could perform better.
  - londons_explore 2y ago
    The IPC is far worse too - this is a Serial RISC-V machine - Ie. it takes ~~60 clock cycles for 1 instruction. Ie. IPC will be 30x worse than a microcontroller core, and 200x worse than a desktop PC core. (couldn't find exact numbers)
    - faragon 2y ago
      Thank you