Start up company Tachyum claims to design a processor that can replace cpus and gpus

[Doobeedoo]

10x improvement ey hmm, yeah urm let's see that APU like chip and how it will actually compare to conventional one. 

[DocSwag]

It sounds like you'd need to reprogram a lot of stuff for this to work.... Even if their claims are true I feel like that would be a large enough hassle that at least some consumers would be driven off.

[Drak3]

2 hours ago, Dash Lambda said:

you'll make a car that goes 350mph and gets 100mpg.

Technically possible, just won't achieve both at the same time.

[Hugh_Mungus]

10 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

I don't know much about processor architecture but from what I understand they are saying their processor can do a mix of what cpus are gpus do and it offloads some cpu tasks that it can't do to a compiler so in effect it can replace cpus and gpus. I don't quite buy what they say about only needing only a few employees for key innovations because why would you hire a large number of them if they are unneeded. I would think nvidia when designing a processor would want to be "reducing the number of slow wires on a chip, and reducing the average length of existing wires" so I doubt this was something that only they thought of. I'm skeptical of their claims of being superior to current processor companies like nvidia and intel but I guess only time will tell.

 

https://www.techradar.com/news/this-startup-wants-to-kill-the-cpu-and-gpu-in-one-go

Think of project Larabee. This Cpu is the same thing, software based

[mynameisjuan]

14 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Technically possible, just won't achieve both at the same time.

There is no engine with the power to do 350 while also being able to get 100mpg at any speed. No not possible.

[Drak3]

7 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

There is no engine with the power to do 350 while also being able to get 100mpg at any speed. No not possible.

A) Talking about a car as a whole package.

B) It is possible to design an engine and power train combination that can do both, just not at the same time. It likepy wouldn't be reliable, insanely expensive, and would have to involve turning off cylinders and using a myriad of electric motors to achieve the goal.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Not really. Electrochemical signals. Much more complicated than purely electric.

It's an electric signal. The ion channels are voltage-gated. Only at the synapse are the ion channels controlled by neurotransmitters. 

[Murasaki]

as always the salt deposit is infinite

[Mira Yurizaki]

7 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

asynchronous compute?

Asynchronous compute is basically the GPU version of simultaneous multi-threading for CPUs. Although in GPU land, it works on bundles of threads rather than individual threads.

[mynameisjuan]

12 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

A) Talking about a car as a whole package.

B) It is possible to design an engine and power train combination that can do both, just not at the same time. It likepy wouldn't be reliable, insanely expensive, and would have to involve turning off cylinders and using a myriad of electric motors to achieve the goal.

While this is side tracking its still an impossible claim like the OP

1. I know, thats literally what my post was about. 

2. No its not. Turning off cylinders are not as easy as you think and is extremely inefficient the large the motor is and there is a breaking point of fuel required to even keep the engine running. On top of adding a shit ton of weight from electric motors. 

 

No its not possible period. A Chrion has a V-16 just to reach 261mph, let alone the engine needed for 350. Its V-16 take a crap ton of fuel just to stay idle let alone 100mpg on the highway. 

[Brooksie359]

31 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

While this is side tracking its still an impossible claim like the OP

1. I know, thats literally what my post was about. 

2. No its not. Turning off cylinders are not as easy as you think and is extremely inefficient the large the motor is and there is a breaking point of fuel required to even keep the engine running. On top of adding a shit ton of weight from electric motors. 

 

No its not possible period. A Chrion has a V-16 just to reach 261mph, let alone the engine needed for 350. Its V-16 take a crap ton of fuel just to stay idle let alone 100mpg on the highway. 

I mean if you implemented it as a system that can charge the electric engine as a sort of generator then turn off the gas engine completely at times you could get a good gas mileage for a certain period of time. I believe the electric supercars use a method somewhat like this and can run completely on electric for a short time. I would also say that everyone thinks something is impossible until someone finds a way to do it. The idea of impossible is dumb when talking about creating and innovating. Most great inventions do thing that people previously thought was impossible. You even limit the idea that a car has to be using existing engines. If something like this is possible it would likely be a new engine. 

[Master Disaster]

Do these guys work for Musk? It sounds just like something he'd say...

 

"I've invented this great new thing that somehow works better than everything we currently have and yet is also cheaper too. I haven't actually got anything to show you but I totally promise it's all in my head and when I do show you guys your all gonna be hyped to death I swear".

 

People who brag about ideas tend not to do so well, an idea isn't really anything. Much better to keep your mouth shut, build the thing then evaluate its performance before you go bragging about it because what happens if you build it and it's terrible?

[Master Disaster]

18 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I mean if you implemented it as a system that can charge the electric engine as a sort of generator then turn off the gas engine completely at times you could get a good gas mileage for a certain period of time. I believe the electric supercars use a method somewhat like this and can run completely on electric for a short time. I would also say that everyone thinks something is impossible until someone finds a way to do it. The idea of impossible is dumb when talking about creating and innovating. Most great inventions do thing that people previously thought was impossible. You even limit the idea that a car has to be using existing engines. If something like this is possible it would likely be a new engine. 

Basic hydrodynamics would tend to say that a car, to quantify, a vehicle with multiple seats and doors, 4 wheels, an engine (or multiple), a boot and a bonnet/hood; would never be able to travel at 350mph. The drag caused by the car travelling at that speed would be far to high for any kind of conventional engine to overcome the air resistance.

 

Fun fact: Once you go over somewhere around 250mph it takes around 100bhp more power to move the car an extra 10mph and that figure increases literally every 1 mph faster you travel. When Audi designed the Bugatti Veyron Supersport they had to increase BHP by around 240 (from ~980 to ~1220) to get an extra 16mph on the top speed.

 

A usable car travelling at 350mph is beyond what's currently technically possible.

[mynameisjuan]

2 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I mean if you implemented it as a system that can charge the electric engine as a sort of generator then turn off the gas engine completely at times you could get a good gas mileage for a certain period of time. I believe the electric supercars use a method somewhat like this and can run completely on electric for a short time. I would also say that everyone thinks something is impossible until someone finds a way to do it. The idea of impossible is dumb when talking about creating and innovating. Most great inventions do thing that people previously thought was impossible. You even limit the idea that a car has to be using existing engines. If something like this is possible it would likely be a new engine. 

The extra power needed to charge actively with an engine and the amount of efficiency drop doing so will net less performance. The way hybrids are now is electric from 0-30 then the gas engine and then braking get generate some more power. Super cars still have a battery that is used to assist on launch they are not big enough for sustained use. 

 

It is impossible until science finds a way to capture the heat from combustion and make it usable before you see power and efficiency. Electric is the new future of the car, engines have reached their limits. 

[Dash Lambda]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

Technically possible, just won't achieve both at the same time.

Point is that they're claiming to do two things that no other product has even come close to yet.

 

@Drak3 @Brooksie359 @Master Disaster @mynameisjuan

Let's do a little math:

Taking the Bugatti Chiron as example, with a drag coefficient of .38 and a face area of roughly 2.47 m², assuming air has a density of 1.2 kg/m³, the power required to maintain 156 m/s (~350 mi/h) is F*v = (1.2)(156³)(.38)(2.47)/2 = ~2,138 kW (~2867 hp). Assuming 100% efficiency and a power density of 127 MJ/gal, that's .0168 gal/s, or about 350/(3600*.0168) = ~5.78 mi/gal.

Of course, gas engines are generally around 30% efficient, maybe 40% at most. Turbine engines used in power plants can be as much as 60% efficient, but that wouldn't work well for a car.

So, basically, point is, it's literally impossible to get even close to 100mpg at those speeds, at least on Earth. Which you guys agreed on, but I just wanted to prove.

 

It should be perfectly possible to make a car that can go that fast but get good mileage at low speeds, but not with traditional combustion engines.

[Kamjam21xx]

14 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

Point is that they're claiming to do two things that no other product has even come close to yet.

 

@Drak3 @Brooksie359 @Master Disaster @mynameisjuan

Let's do a little math:

Taking the Bugatti Chiron as example, with a drag coefficient of .38 and a face area of roughly 2.47 m², assuming air has a density of 1.2 kg/m³, the power required to maintain 156 m/s (~350 mi/h) is F*v = (1.2)(156³)(.38)(2.47)/2 = ~2,138 kW (~2867 hp). Assuming 100% efficiency and a power density of 127 MJ/gal, that's .0168 gal/s, or about 350/(3600*.0168) = ~5.78 mi/gal.

Of course, gas engines are generally around 30% efficient, maybe 40% at most. Turbine engines used in power plants can be as much as 60% efficient, but that wouldn't work well for a car.

So, basically, point is, it's literally impossible to get even close to 100mpg at those speeds, at least on Earth. Which you guys agreed on, but I just wanted to prove.

 

It should be perfectly possible to make a car that can go that fast but get good mileage at low speeds, but not with traditional combustion engines.

we started off on electronics. lol

 

[Mira Yurizaki]

6 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

they got a presentation o_o grab pöpcørn

Can't wait to see what their generic sounding methodologies really mean.

[Linus_torvalds]

It's a startup company of course they claim to do amazing things. They need to get some attention.

[Brooksie359]

44 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

Point is that they're claiming to do two things that no other product has even come close to yet.

 

@Drak3 @Brooksie359 @Master Disaster @mynameisjuan

Let's do a little math:

Taking the Bugatti Chiron as example, with a drag coefficient of .38 and a face area of roughly 2.47 m², assuming air has a density of 1.2 kg/m³, the power required to maintain 156 m/s (~350 mi/h) is F*v = (1.2)(156³)(.38)(2.47)/2 = ~2,138 kW (~2867 hp). Assuming 100% efficiency and a power density of 127 MJ/gal, that's .0168 gal/s, or about 350/(3600*.0168) = ~5.78 mi/gal.

Of course, gas engines are generally around 30% efficient, maybe 40% at most. Turbine engines used in power plants can be as much as 60% efficient, but that wouldn't work well for a car.

So, basically, point is, it's literally impossible to get even close to 100mpg at those speeds, at least on Earth. Which you guys agreed on, but I just wanted to prove.

 

It should be perfectly possible to make a car that can go that fast but get good mileage at low speeds, but not with traditional combustion engines.

That is under the assumption that gas is the only power source. Let's say you end up harnessing that wind resistance into a power source then the calculations would be meaningless. Again you are limiting what you think is possible based on what we currently have. The likely solution to something "impossible" would be something nobody has thought of yet. Real innovation doesn't come from talking about how it is impossible but rather asking how could it be possible. 

[Master Disaster]

1 hour ago, Dash Lambda said:

Point is that they're claiming to do two things that no other product has even come close to yet.

 

@Drak3 @Brooksie359 @Master Disaster @mynameisjuan

Let's do a little math:

Taking the Bugatti Chiron as example, with a drag coefficient of .38 and a face area of roughly 2.47 m², assuming air has a density of 1.2 kg/m³, the power required to maintain 156 m/s (~350 mi/h) is F*v = (1.2)(156³)(.38)(2.47)/2 = ~2,138 kW (~2867 hp). Assuming 100% efficiency and a power density of 127 MJ/gal, that's .0168 gal/s, or about 350/(3600*.0168) = ~5.78 mi/gal.

Of course, gas engines are generally around 30% efficient, maybe 40% at most. Turbine engines used in power plants can be as much as 60% efficient, but that wouldn't work well for a car.

So, basically, point is, it's literally impossible to get even close to 100mpg at those speeds, at least on Earth. Which you guys agreed on, but I just wanted to prove.

 

It should be perfectly possible to make a car that can go that fast but get good mileage at low speeds, but not with traditional combustion engines.

I disagree, using your figures 2,800bhp isn't possible with any current technology, at least nothing that would be considered road safe.

 

I mean sure, you could strip the vehicle out almost entirely and strap 2 Chiron engines together to achieve it but at that point it's not really a car and it certainly wouldn't be allowed on roads anywhere outside of maybe India.

 

Now if we're ignoring the available to the general public for use qualifier then it's already possible, the current land speed record for a piston engined vehicle is 440mph.

and 340mph for an electric motor

[Master Disaster]

6 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

That is under the assumption that gas is the only power source. Let's say you end up harnessing that wind resistance into a power source then the calculations would be meaningless. Again you are limiting what you think is possible based on what we currently have. The likely solution to something "impossible" would be something nobody has thought of yet. Real innovation doesn't come from talking about how it is impossible but rather asking how could it be possible. 

Well yeah, you're correct in what you say but everything is still bound by reality and a car with 2,800bhp is unrealistic. Not that you couldn't do it (see my above post) but that if you did it could you really call it a car (as in a vehicle used to transport multiple people on public roads) and would it ever be usable by the general public?

[Drak3]

11 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

road safe.

Not a factor.

 

11 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

wouldn't be allowed on roads anywhere

Not a factor.

 

1 hour ago, Dash Lambda said:

Taking the Bugatti Chiron

Why the Chiron? It's the fourth fastest production car.

[Master Disaster]

4 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Not a factor.

 

Not a factor.

 

Why the Chiron? It's the fourth fastest production car.

Hang on, if road safety isn't a factor then why are we discussing production engines?

 

Also the discussion was about a 350mph engine that can achieve 100mpg, if we're going off road then why is mpg a factor at all?

 

I mean it's already possible to do 440mph on a combustion engine, assuming you think everyone will be driving this in the future...

[Drak3]

Just now, Master Disaster said:

why are we discussing production engines?

We aren't. The point is that while possible, with what we have today, it would be too expensive and hillariously unreliable to turn it into a product.

[Mira Yurizaki]

So about this mystery processor some startup claims will revolutionize the hardware industry