4 ms·
Amazing, that is 320 GB/cm^3. I didn't know that we have possibly already passed the information density of the human brain (~80 GB/cm^3).
by 3rd3 12y ago
Amazing, that is 320 GB/cm^3. I didn't know that we have possibly already passed the information density of the human brain (~80 GB/cm^3).
- jacquesm 12y agoYou can't really compare passive storage with combined processing and storage. The brain computes all over, it does not have a 'data bus' or a von Neumann like bottle-neck as far as we know today.
- 3rd3 12y agoOf course not. However, I would have guessed that the 3-dimensional structure of the brain would still have higher information density compared to 2-dimensional IC's (+ wiring + heat regulation) by some orders of magnitude. But I guess neurons aren't that small after all.
- jacquesm 12y agoThey're not all that small and there is a ton of support infrastructure and deadweight around them.
- josu 12y agoActually, if my math is correct the ratio of storage to size of a 128GB Micro SD is still greater. In two dimensions, for simplicity's sake, since a micro SD is obviously slimmer than a regular SD: 512GB SD = 768mm^2 128GB Micro SD = 165mm^2 SD = 0.667 GB/mm^2 Micro SD = 0.776 GB/mm^2 If we add the third dimension the efficiency of a Micro SD will be even greater compared to a SD. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SD_Cards.svg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SD_Cards.svg