100 thoughts on “Graphene Computing & 3D Integrated Circuits To Increase Computing Performance

  1. The video is so well made, it's just amazing and really shows your efforts. I'd love to watch the last two private videos in this series.

  2. Graphene has no energy gap; it behaves more like a metal rather than a normal semiconductor, which limits its potential for transistor-type applications. There’s a lot of research on other two-dimensional materials, like Indium Selinide (InSe) or hexagonal boron-carbon-nitrogen (h-BCN), that have large bandgaps.

  3. Got this video as recommendation. Surprised that my work is mentioned here. Many thanks for such a clear and simple explanation

  4. Great video very informative and up to date, just a couple things, first the audio, I don't know what it is but it sounds like you're muffled or something, and second I know its a lot of information for 10 minutes but sometimes I think you went a bit too fast.

    Keep it up hope to see more!

  5. So basically, if we manage to create a commercial CPU using graphene, even with today's IPC levels, we could boost the computation power by hundreds. Wow.

  6. It's crazy how few subscribers you have for the quality you have! Keep it up and this will grow rapidly. Fantastic work.

  7. QUESTION: Did anyone from outside China verify if their latest superfast computer worked to international standards as they claim? No, nobody independent from outside has verified that speed under proper conditions and temperatures. If you trust anything that this new dictator commie government has to say, then you are a fool.

  8. Background music is really annoying. If you could make it softer in your future videos, that would be awesome.

  9. A FLOP isn't a measurement instruction per second. IPS is the measurement of instructions per second however it doesn't work very well for modern high performance computer. This is mostly because newer systems are designed to perform more than one floating point operations in a single operations.

    Also, no bets are being placed on Carbon replacing Silicon. To make a graphene transistor, you have to control both the chemical and physical structure; we can hardly make a single transistor in lab. Whatever replaces Silicon will have to work with photolithography otherwise we won't be able to manufacturer it no matter how much better than Silicon it is.

  10. Really great content. Although I don't have trouble keeping up, you should consider slowing down. This is not the only video of your to have many comments about you talking too fast. I'm only saying because maybe you could get more subs. On the other hand if that's just how you talk… meh. Anyhow you have a new sub

  11. Ya but the display is actually 90% of the battery drain in smartphones!
    We need transparent displays already with all the components in the bezel. (Yes, bring bezels back in exchange for see-thru screens)
    Apple needs to get on this first or they will fall behind even further lol!

  12. I'm an idiot please disregard the following paragraph under the dotted line.. As I miss heard you, having said that..
    You seriously need to slow down your ranting, yes ranting is what it sounds like..
    Sorry but I am adamant that graphene is not carbon nanotubes, My understanding is that graphene is actually a single layer of carbon atoms, a somewhat 2 dimensional Mass, I say somewhat as an atom is made up of standing waves or "Particles", Anyway I digress, So yeah: Yes.. Once a tube is formed by a sheet of Graphene, it is only then best to refer to that Mass or Structure as a Nanotube, I am guessing maybe that's why you received so many thumbs down, which BTW I haven't.. Mind you I also didn't give you a thumbs up..

  13. use the material from the space shuttle tiles as heat sync in between layer of the 3d chips to cool them

  14. Graphene would be nice but we can only make 400 tons a year. If we really want to have a graphene age we need to make over 10,000 metric tons a year to find a niche market. Silicon was made in quantities around 7.2 million metric tons a year.

  15. You just told me that within the next two decades computers can become trillions of times more powerful?

  16. Very Informative tone of narration , it weirdly keeps you curious .. Great Video ! and the animation is very well done !

  17. 3:19 It is always "either or", never "and". Your very own text about the IBM claim states that ("Or, more interestingly…"). Smaller fabrication nodes provide a higher power efficiency, which means that CPU and GPU companies face a trade-off between higher performance at the same TDP (i.e. heat, which is derived from how much power is consumed) or the same performance at a lower TDP. Or, of course, they can opt for a combination of the two.

    For instance if a new node can provide 20% higher performance (at the same TDP, and thus the same battery life for mobile phones, tablets and laptops) or 35% lower TDP (at the same performance) they can sacrifice some of the performance and target 15% higher performance and ~25% lower TDP.

    According to the first preliminary data about Intel's first couple of Cannon Lake CPUs that have been spotted in Asia, they have ~15% higher performance due to the transition to 10nm, despite having no architectural difference. That performance edge is due to the 10nm node's higher power efficiency, which allowed Intel to add a 10% higher clock to their base clock and the rest must be due to longer boost clock times and +1 MB of L3 cache.

    Yet their TDP is the same as the previous generation, which means Intel sacrificed their entire TDP gain in exchange for merely 15% higher performance. That does not paint their 10nm node in a very bright light, which is presumably one of the reasons they delayed full volume production until next year. Nope, despite your exascale and even zettascale projections the road to them is nowhere close to "this increase in computing performance doesn't show any signs of slowing down". The industry requires either new materials like III-V semiconductors or a replacement for CMOS.

  18. will you be doing a video on the recent MIT advance in industrial quantity production of graphene film… thanks… this is the source video I leaned about it…

  19. In 1985 I worked for a company that was making Diamond substrates from carbon based gases. Once we had perfected the process, the FBI came in and SHUT US DOWN, TOOK EVERYTHING. Whats is Diamond substrates good for? Silicon IC have a problem, heat. Diamond IC's are near limitless in speed. 33 years later, you never see nor hear of "Diamond Processors".. and you won't. The Government has them. In the 1990's I worked for a company that made 'sub-micron' metrology devices. 1995 ALL of our customers told us, they could no longer buy our equipment, because their parts were "TOO SMALL" to be seen in a 1 micron field of view… TOO SMALL…!! That was 23 years ago… You can not even fathom where tech science is today.

  20. Become a YouTube member for many exclusive perks from early previews, bonus content, shoutouts and more! https://www.youtube.com/c/singularityprosperity/join – AND – Join our Discord server for much better community discussions! https://discordapp.com/invite/HFUw8eM

  21. Hey, I just found your channel and you've definitely earned my sub. I just wanted to say, you give off a very Isaac Arthur vibe, which is amazing. I hope you grow even more! Cheers!

  22. I just came across your channel by accident today and immediately subscribed – what a fortuitous accident it was! Your work is top notch and very informative.

    I have an interest (venture capital investment) concerning the practical applications of graphene in general electronics (not only computing), photovoltaics, energy storage, in propulsion and transportation, desalination and the invention/production of brand-new industrial materials through combining and interspersing and/or sandwiching layers of different metals, carbon fibre, plastics etc with graphine layers.

    The problems associated with graphene as a new industrial material capable of solving multiple problems towards progress of otherwise feasible 21st century technologies, seemed to lie primarily in the production costs and scalability of graphene sheets. It would appear now that very recently this road block may have become a thing of the past.

  23. It's funny how you animated a clock speed going up to 1 THz. Just due to the speed of light limit the entire processor, with all of the logic gates, control circuits and internal memory, has to fit within a sphere of 150 microns diameter just because of the speed of light limit (assuming the signals travel at that speed and the logic gates don't slow the signal down more than that).
    Technically, yes, you can make a processor that fast but it wouldn't really be able to do anything that useful except for doing some small number calculations that require the operations to be executed in a specific order that that is already done in normal processors in operations like addition that can be executed in a single cycle. But the clock rate for the whole processor has to include all the interpretation and execution of the instructions and one of the main limits is how much internal memory you want since it takes up a lot of space but if you have it externally it is much slower.
    So, yeah, you can get high clock speeds for specific tasks but not much higher for general purpose processing.

  24. And yet the time it takes to boot up your computer hasnt changed since the first pc and upload and down load and web surfing time ist much faster than the best dial up speeds. How about the computer industry let speeds get faster before trying to cram in more memory than the computer and internet can handle?

  25. So what happens if you link nanotubes along their length so that all their walls intersect around a central cavity?

  26. If the human brain is by far faster and more efficient than any supercomputer then we need to make the next computers out of fat and protein not nano tubes right??

  27. a very fast sculptor sculpts a rock say 100grams per second. if you come with a hammer and start chipping at the rock at 1grams per second, you are slow, so what's the solution? get a bigger hammer, and chip 20 50 60 75 then 100 grams per second. the rock is smitherines, doesn't make it a sculpture.

  28. Bro i spent like the last hour or so watching a bunch of your videos. You use computers everyday but rarely do you ever stop to think how it all actually works. You just know it does work so your questions stop there. Its cool to see how it all works together. Awesome vids!

  29. Even though Summit currently runs at 200 petaflops, they too say that their upgrades will be around 1 exaflop around 2020 so that's right in line with this prediction.

  30. The assumption that one could increase the Clockspeed of a CPU to the 10^12 Herz just because heat generation sinks low is false. This is due to the fact that the wavelength of the electromagnetic waves becomes too small for the chip to remain controllable. There is a reason as to why CPU are as small as about 4cm, while the wavelenth is about 6cm at 5 GHz. At THz the CPU would have to be smaller then 300 micro meters.

  31. Love your video, but would be even better if background music was lower and you slowed down a bit. Very hard to follow at times, had to watch a few times. Awesome content and graphics. Kudos to you.

  32. Is that how humans solve super advance mathematical equations and find new technologies, by allowing super computers to think for us?

  33. If 1 EXAFLOP will simulate the human brain, at that point, wouldn't the computer be smarter then humans because it will be able to access all that information while we as humans have that brainpower but don't/cannot access all parts of our brain?

  34. Just a little correction , next year we are expecting to have a 34 exoflop supercomputer , tachyum is building it , it will be the power of 34 human brains , and will be significantly more powerful than the 1.2 exaflop supercomputer planned by US gov in 2021 and according to a the head of true North we will also get a neuromorphic chip as powerful as the human brain next year also. Mabye this will shake these AGI denyers out of their skepticism. I have no doubt we will have an AGI within 5 years after the breakthroughs that will be made this year at Darpa. Rey Kurzweil predicted an AGI as smart as a human by 2029 , but he never predicted the rapid progress in quantum computing that could enable a super intelligent AI within 5 years and he never predicted elon Musks neuralink that will enable us to scan whole cortical columns starting in 2019

  35. How much is 1 to the power of 50 flops? I found no search results? And that's by using a black hole as a computing device

  36. if you simulate the human brain with transistors it wont be as efficient
    dedicated neural units maybe better but som1s gotta make and design them
    you could train them on a standard computer so they learn faster then move them onto dedicated hardware

  37. all the tech shown in this video was created 10 years ago or more
    its just that the computer industry worked with silicon and improved it and wont change to a better material because it will have to change its entire assembly line to make them
    now that they can no longer do that, they turn to material scientists with stored ideas from over a decade ago to improve computing!

  38. I'm born in the right decade, or came just a bit too early and found out on all the good stuff when it is in its heyday.

  39. Mate, speak a little slower. If you talk so fast, most of what you say will just go over people's heads. There's no rush, you have all the time in the world. So please speak at a more comfortable speed for the viewer, not like someone trying to win a rap battle.

  40. Incredible video, as usual! Your timelines are just slightly off – we'll be getting 3nm transistors in 2021 (likely either GAAFET or MBCFET), not 2025; we also won't hit zettascale in 2030, more like 2033-2035.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *