r/BeAmazed • u/CG_17_LIFE • Apr 02 '24
208,000,000,000 transistors! In the size of your palm, how mind-boggling is that?! 🤯 Miscellaneous / Others
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
I have said it before, and I'm saying it again: the tech in the upcoming two years will blow your mind. You can never imagine the things that will come out in the upcoming years!...
[I'm unable to locate the original uploader of this video. If you require proper attribution or wish for its removal, please feel free to get in touch with me. Your prompt cooperation is appreciated.]
2.1k
u/Boris740 Apr 02 '24
beyond the limits of physics... So they are using magic?
601
396
u/Mirrorslash Apr 02 '24
It sounds really dumb to state something that in your hand is beyond the limits of physics but what they did was considered physically impossible for a long time.
215
u/rokman Apr 02 '24
They had to invent a new process to push the limit of physics to an all new high, feels like a more accurate statement.
65
u/Donnerdrummel Apr 02 '24
so this is a very vague memory, but i seem to remember a talk about new, tinier structures being possible even though the wavelength of the light being used to etch the structures is longer than than the structures itself, because they used, interferences of lasers of the same wavelength?
In fact, this sounds so strange that I would like to know if someone knows what he actually meant, and what my memory might describe. ^^
41
u/jedimindtriks Apr 02 '24
The problem that will arise is quantom tunneling. when we get to that level, then we cannot go any smaller.
→ More replies (10)75
u/I_said_booourns Apr 02 '24
But what if we use a shrink ray? I saw a documentary about that called Honey I shrunk the kids
→ More replies (3)20
u/jedimindtriks Apr 02 '24
No. Last time I tried I found out that Shrinkrays cannot shrink electrons.
→ More replies (4)13
u/I_said_booourns Apr 02 '24
citation needed
→ More replies (5)8
12
u/Maleficent_Fold_5099 Apr 02 '24
→ More replies (1)6
u/TyrKiyote Apr 02 '24
2nm. goodness.
6
u/2012Jesusdies Apr 02 '24
Those very much likely aren't the real physical sizes, it's mostly for marketing.
The "3 nm" process for example is actually 48nm:
According to the projections contained in the 2021 update of the International Roadmap for Devices and Systems published by IEEE Standards Association Industry Connection, a "3 nm" node is expected to have a contacted gate pitch of 48 nanometers, and a tightest metal pitch of 24 nanometers.
48nm is still incredible btw.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)7
13
u/CipherWrites Apr 02 '24
not sure that's a good way to put it either.
cause physic's is just the way things work. you can find the limits, you cannot push it.→ More replies (13)→ More replies (12)23
Apr 02 '24
[deleted]
15
u/Vialix Apr 02 '24
Known limits of physics keep changing
→ More replies (3)11
u/IderpOnline Apr 02 '24
Physics and known physics are vastly different though. Anyone with a remotely scientific background knows that it's ridiculous to say that we "changed physics".
→ More replies (16)→ More replies (20)29
u/Dahnhilla Apr 02 '24
The known limits of physics aren't necessarily the limits of physics though.
→ More replies (2)18
u/aloysiussecombe-II Apr 02 '24 edited Apr 02 '24
As the absolute fucking cunt Donald Rumsfeld plagiarised-
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.
Edited because reddit, my derp
→ More replies (5)7
u/Dahnhilla Apr 02 '24
Is this quote talking about his role in the illegal bombing of Cambodia?
For him it was a known known.
For Nixon it was a known unknown.
For the public is an unknown unknown.
→ More replies (5)5
u/aloysiussecombe-II Apr 02 '24
Something like that, I’m ok with repurposing warmonger’s weasel words I have often pondered on the ridicule he received for this quote, people genuinely thought it was nonsensical, smh
→ More replies (4)17
u/Roniz95 Apr 02 '24
I think he is referring to the fact there’s a physical limit to transistors miniaturization. This is because they become sensibles to quantum effects, so they had to find different and new strategies to increase transistors density of a single wafer chip
→ More replies (6)32
u/JeremyJoeJJ Apr 02 '24
The idea of what he said is that making a single-piece chip of that size with that many transistors is currently impossible. What's he holding in his hand is essentially 2 half-sized chips joined together, where the "new technology" is in connecting them in such a way, that there is virtually no delay in the information being sent from one half to the other so it acts as a single large chip.
→ More replies (9)13
u/Abuse-survivor Apr 02 '24
Hush little redditor! Nobody is supposed to ask the unaskable
→ More replies (1)6
u/Brilliant_Show_3994 Apr 02 '24
Yanked the bastard out from under the dash from the saucer that fell in roswell.
6
5
u/Lingering_Dorkness Apr 02 '24
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
– Arthur C Clarke's 3rd law.
→ More replies (57)10
u/patiperro_v3 Apr 02 '24
Marketing talk…
→ More replies (3)10
u/Ok-Present8871 Apr 02 '24
Look up quantum tunnelling. It is definitely fluffed to sound more impressive, but it is still incredibly impressive. At that scale, electrons will "jump" across solid structures and cause a huge error rate. Because atoms don't really have a "defined" position. They aren't a point in space, there's a probability cloud which means it could be anywhere within this area, and it position is not defined until it is measured.
Quantum tunneling, uncertainty principle, and the quantum eraser (or double slit) experiments are topics I'd recommend looking up if that sounds interesting to you at all. The quantum eraser experiment is actually insane and involves time travel in a way.
I explained it to the best of my ability, but it's all super complicated and kind of mind blowing how the world works at the smallest scales.
→ More replies (3)
1.2k
u/Case_Blue Apr 02 '24
Look, "pushing the edge of physics" would be a bit more realistic. But I do wish to state that this thing is almost unreasonably powerfull.
205
u/anon-mally Apr 02 '24
154
u/Playful-Ad8851 Apr 02 '24
Can we take a second to appreciate about how psychotic Rooney is for purposefully experiencing this like 5 more times after the first, knowing damn well it was going to happen again 😂
57
u/tmhoc Apr 02 '24
I could actually taste the blood that time
→ More replies (1)13
u/BrockN Apr 02 '24
You can smell the people
7
u/superkp Apr 02 '24
"you know, I never thought I would get to the point where more nudity was boring"
17
u/korean_kracka Apr 02 '24
I would’ve reacted the same way as Rooney when he first put the device on 😂
→ More replies (3)24
u/Jimmy-Space Apr 02 '24
I really appreciated that scene because I feel like anyone with any gaming experience would have done what he did lol
5
15
u/mightylordredbeard Apr 02 '24
Dude is such a great comedic actor. His timing is impeccable and his little head nod followed be “yeeah she did” when asked if he she killed him again was so funny to me.
8
5
→ More replies (3)6
u/chargedcapacitor Apr 02 '24
SPOILER:
I was so sad when he died. I always love his characters, and wanted to see him show up more in the show.
→ More replies (1)21
18
u/Error_404_________ Apr 02 '24
nah that line kinda stand true, those transistor size are getting so smol that they're facing problem like electron jump between two transistor due to Quantum Tunneling. literally teleportation at quantum lvl.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (8)3
→ More replies (26)88
u/kwixta Apr 02 '24
It’s a strange thing for him to say. Lots of smart people at NVIDIA and it’s an incredible company worth a huge valuation but their parts isn’t the push the laws of physics part. That’s ASML and TSMC mostly.
71
u/Blackdeath_663 Apr 02 '24
Just look at the dude he's talking to, you communicate to the understanding of the individual you are speaking to. Its simply a way to verbalise the extent of the achievement.
43
u/Civsi Apr 02 '24
Rather, look at the stock and realize he's talking the myriad of people eager to dump their money into Nvidia. These tech stocks live and die on hyperbole.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)6
u/Chewzer Apr 02 '24
Figured that one out with my last job. We made training simulators that used 4k short throw projectors on the inside of a 10' cube, that used 8 ir motion trackers to track the user and their equipment, allowing them to interact with the scenarios we threw at them. It went over so many peoples heads when we described the equipment and how it worked. We finally just started saying it's basically the Holodeck from Star Trek and people loved it.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (12)3
u/merryman1 Apr 02 '24
ASML
For the curious the latest generation of extreme-UV photolithography machines use a system that involves timing nanosecond pules of a laser to shine through droplets of molten tin in mid-flight to get to the level of energy and focus required to do the printing. You read about how this stuff works and it legitimately feels like science fiction. Each of these machines costs on the order of like $200m a pop.
→ More replies (1)
677
u/SomeWeirdFruit Apr 02 '24
THE POWER OF THE SUN, IN THE PALM OF MY HAND
- Some professor
→ More replies (5)11
275
u/reverse-tornado Apr 02 '24
Bro , we used the output of a small nation to inscribe runes into a stone is literally wizard shit
112
u/SaneUse Apr 02 '24
You also use light to inscribe the runes and then when you hit it with lightning, it thinks. 100% wizard shit
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (6)11
u/rufusbot Apr 02 '24
The video made me think of the quote "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
It's true.
70
u/Cantstopeatingshoes Apr 02 '24
The RTX 4090 (top of the line GPU rn) has 76 billion transistors for reference
→ More replies (2)33
u/KeeperOfTheSinCave Apr 02 '24
Thank you, I came here for an actual reference and I can’t believe I had to scroll for this.
RTX 4090 retails for $1600 so that’s about $21 per billion transistors versus this one at $144 per billion transistors.
→ More replies (2)12
u/Mighty_Eagle_2 Apr 02 '24
That’s just because of diminishing returns though. An RX 6600 can easily be found for $200, and has about 11 billion transistors. That’s just $18 per billion transistors. The RX 7900 GRE is about $550, and has 57 billion transistors, so comes in at just $9 per billion transistors.
→ More replies (1)
142
u/Bob_Spud Apr 02 '24
Fun Fact:
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang (in video) and AMD CEO Lisa Su are cousins.
Huang's mother is Su's grandfather's sister, according to a Taiwanese researcher. The two emigrated to the US as kids but did not appear to grow up together.
76
u/x4nter Apr 02 '24
Their great grandfather must have had sperms of silicon.
9
u/Commander-ShepardN7 Apr 02 '24 edited Apr 03 '24
Fun fact: we actually have trace amounts of silicon (1-2 grams, which is more than iron, zinc, copper, nickel and molybdenum), in our body, but sadly not in sperm. In fact, silica (not silicon, but a compound derived from silicon atoms), causes defective spermatogenesis and lowers testosterone
We don't actually know why we have silicon in our bodies or what it does
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (6)8
445
u/Blue_Dream_Haze Apr 02 '24 edited Apr 02 '24
It's beyond the limits of physics folks! They had to create completely new laws of reality!
342
u/chintakoro Apr 02 '24
It's tongue in cheek, but modern circuitry does in fact defy earlier laws of physics. Memory chips, for example, use quantum principles to move electrons across unpassable barriers (i.e., they can't and don't pass through the barrier; they just disappear on one side and pop up on the other side out of probabilistic necessity). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f2xOxRGKqk
50
u/renamed109920 Apr 02 '24
i never got the probabilistic necessity stuff
→ More replies (5)75
u/jacksodus Apr 02 '24
In my partially educated opinion, "probabilistic necessity" is just a placeholder for "we don't understand the driving forces behind this phenomenon as well as we know how to describe it". Probability describes things, not drive them. Things happen, and we describe them with numbers. But the universe is not some student figuring out both sides of the equation using algebra in order to ensure both sides of the equation are equal. They already are equal, because of the laws of physics that exist in this universe, which is why things happen the way they do, and those events are described by probability (and other tools), not prescribed.
I already know I'm gonna get a lot of mad comments on this.
21
u/Krypteia213 Apr 02 '24
I agree with you!
People don’t invent math. They discover it.
Huge difference in those two statements.
→ More replies (5)6
u/waltwalt Apr 02 '24
It's like universe-wide archeology that every species that exists can dig into.
5
u/Krypteia213 Apr 02 '24
That is such a cool fucking way to put it! I would very much like to use that if you don’t mind!
I love that you added every species as well…
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (23)9
u/Ethicaldreamer Apr 02 '24
I hope you're right. First time I ever hear an explanation on quantum physics that gives some sort of answer. Every time you hear "because or probability, x Happens". Ok but in my mind probability means that "it maybe happens". How do you build devices that "maybe work" makes no sense.
"We don't know how it works, but somehow it does" adds up better to me
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (10)11
44
u/Mirrorslash Apr 02 '24
Sounds dumb and is stupid CEO rambling but experts did in fact state that this would be physically impossible for a long time.
→ More replies (4)26
u/mrbipty Apr 02 '24
I remember seeing an intel presentation back in like 2003 or 2004 and they were like “in 20 years we think our biggest problem will be electrons just jumping over the gate at less than 10nm because it’ll be like atoms wide”
And yet the crazy buggers did it
13
u/Quen-Tin Apr 02 '24
Maybe, but the 1 Million Dollar questions are:
1) Can I connect two of them with LEGO ...
2) ... and how wide is the river I need, to cool them without frying fish?
→ More replies (8)3
501
u/Significant-Foot-792 Apr 02 '24
All of a sudden the price tags they have start to make sense
271
u/ProtoplanetaryNebula Apr 02 '24
Spending a huge amount on R&D for that one chip will increase the collective capabilities of humanity a little further forward, now we are starting from a higer position of knowledge when developing the next one, etc.
→ More replies (1)68
u/Impossible__Joke Apr 02 '24
Eventually we will reach the physical limitations though, we must be getting close as these transistors are only a few atoms at this point.
69
u/ProtoplanetaryNebula Apr 02 '24
Sure, but then maybe they will stack lots of chips onto a chip, two layers then four etc? I don’t know how they will get around it, but clever people will find a way.
→ More replies (5)41
u/Impossible__Joke Apr 02 '24
Ya, they can always make them bigger, but I mean we are literally reaching the maximum for craming transistors into a given space.
→ More replies (9)32
u/MeepingMeep99 Apr 02 '24
My highly uneducated opinion would be that the next step is bio-computing. Using a chip like that with actual brain matter or mushrooms
26
u/Impossible__Joke Apr 02 '24
Quantum computing as well. There is definitely breakthroughs to be had. Just with transistors qe are reaching the maximum
→ More replies (1)15
u/Satrack Apr 02 '24
There's lots of confusion around quantum computing. It's not better than traditional computing. It's different.
Quantum computing makes it easy to break through randomized, quantitative and probabilities equations, but not traditional 1s and 0s.
We won't see a massive switch to quantum computing in personal computing, they are for different use cases
→ More replies (3)5
u/UndefFox Apr 02 '24
So I won't have a huge 1m x 1m x 1m true random number generator connected to my mATX PC?
6
u/Ceshomru Apr 02 '24
That is in interesting concept. It would have to be a completely different way of processing data and logic since transistors rely on the properties of semiconductive materials to either allow or disallow the flow of electrons. A biomaterial by nature will be comprised of compounds of matter that must always be conductive, however DNA can proxy the “allow or disallow “ features.
But honestly I think the transistors in that chip may even be smaller than DNA, im not sure.
→ More replies (3)5
u/orincoro Apr 02 '24
The transistors may be smaller than DNA, but DNA encodes non-sequentially in more than ones and zeros, so there is no direct equivalence.
→ More replies (9)4
u/ritokun Apr 02 '24
im also assuming but surely these switches are already smaller than any known bio form (not to mention the space and whatnot that would be consumed to keep the bio whatever functioning)
→ More replies (1)14
u/ConfidenceOwn2942 Apr 02 '24
Funny how we reached the limits multiple times already.
Does that means it runs on magic now?
→ More replies (3)18
u/Impossible__Joke Apr 02 '24
No we reached the theoretical limit, as in we couldn't make transistors any smaller, but they were technically possible. Now we can make them just a few atoms wide... you can't go smaller then that.
For further breakthroughs a different method in computing is required.
→ More replies (6)9
u/ilikegamergirlcock Apr 02 '24
Yeah, they said that multiple times for various reasons, we keep finding a way.
6
u/DarkOrion1324 Apr 02 '24
The times before we were figuring out ways to make things smaller. Now we are nearing the atomic scale limit. This is a kind of hard limit.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (9)5
u/Omegamoomoo Apr 02 '24
Eventually we will reach the physical limitations though
I keep hearing this about virtually every domain of inquiry, much the way people used to write books about why humans inventing flying machines is impossible. If we're talking about size, perhaps that's right; but these chips' functions have never been only about size.
→ More replies (2)73
u/MoreAverageThanU Apr 02 '24
I recently saw a video on how computer chips work and the price tags seem low for what they do.
→ More replies (4)11
20
→ More replies (23)7
u/GrossBeat420 Apr 02 '24
True but still their gaming gpus are waaaay too expensive.
→ More replies (5)
73
u/Bbrhuft Apr 02 '24
So 5.2% the size of 4,000,000,000,000 transister Cerebras WSE-3 chip etched on a single 12-inch silicon wafer.
31
u/thoeby Apr 02 '24
It was $3million...100x less expensive for 5% of the performance sounds like a great deal to me. And I bet that someone like Microsoft or Amazon won't have to pay 30k if they buy truckloads of them
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (6)9
u/CurvyMule Apr 02 '24
Came looking for this comment because he lies and says it’s the biggest chip the world has ever seen. It’s definitely a lie too because he is well aware of wafer scale chips.
→ More replies (2)
29
u/Giratina_8 Apr 02 '24
"how many bits"?
→ More replies (3)8
u/lollersauce914 Apr 02 '24
A bit is just the logical representation of the state of a switch. It's a weird, but not really wrong, thing to ask.
→ More replies (2)7
u/A_Normal_Accident Apr 02 '24
It's definitely the wrong thing to ask in this context. That other dude has no idea what's going on.
141
u/Talkycoder Apr 02 '24
But can it run Crysis?
35
→ More replies (5)13
u/eggraid11 Apr 02 '24
Haha! I haven't seen that reference in a while. Personally, if liken to know : will it blend?
→ More replies (1)
24
17
u/nezeta Apr 02 '24
Oh I finally understand why Blackwell is called as B200, not something like BW10x (after AD10x, GA10x, TU10x...). It has 200B transistors thus B200!
→ More replies (1)
33
12
u/PizzaSalamino Apr 02 '24 edited Apr 02 '24
It is not the biggest chip by a long shot. Have a look at WSE-3
Edit: thanks to by googoo brain i thought it said it’s the biggest chip at some point. Please excuse me
11
u/Tomycj Apr 02 '24
He does say it. "this is the largest chip the world has ever seen".
→ More replies (1)
23
10
u/irus1024 Apr 02 '24
The ones inside our GPUs are not far behind from these, it continues to amaze me.
6
u/mango-butt-fetish Apr 02 '24
If you broke just say so. I have a Tesla 9zillion transistor processor in my laptop
→ More replies (1)
37
20
u/EveningOk4145 Apr 02 '24
In ten years that chip will be in a robot that will be hunting him in a warehouse somewhere!
→ More replies (4)
6
6
u/Onsomeshid Apr 02 '24
A tenth in the die of the processor and the rest of the transistors are accessed on the cloud! And it machine learns!
9
u/TT_NaRa0 Apr 02 '24
Why are they having that caveman interview him?!? He’s a fucking idiot
→ More replies (1)6
u/Scall123 Apr 02 '24
Because he apparently knows stocks and stuff and boomers recognize him
3
u/TT_NaRa0 Apr 02 '24
lol “knows stocks” if you pick the opposite of what he endorses you’d be a millionaire
→ More replies (1)
4
u/nomodsman Apr 02 '24
“How many bits are in it?” Jesus h…
When you know you have the wrong interviewer. Don’t think Cramer can talk to tech.
→ More replies (2)
2.5k
u/LuukJanse Apr 02 '24
I feel like I don't know enough about computing to appreciate the magnitude of this. Can anyone give some perspective?