Isn't progress wonderful!

Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2006
Posts
9,637
We always need more CPU/GPU power, without it we cannot make decent AI, or crack problems that need massive computational power like cancer research or simulations.

These types of problems are solved by computers that look like this:
Tm4vAmy.jpg

Not computers that look like this:
YmOnlXI.jpg

Computing power per watt is very important in the former. The lower it is, the more computers you can have in a given space, using a certain amount of power and requiring a certain amount of cooling. There is plenty of development in this area. Unfortunately it doesn't necessarily mean you'll be able to get 120fps in Crysis or what ever the latest game is that must have over 60fps.
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Oct 2004
Posts
14,549
Location
London
Intel may have dropped the ball but ARM and its licensees are doing incredible things. Desktop-level power that only costs $5 and doesn't need fans to cool.
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Jun 2011
Posts
4,902
If you want to see proper rubbish progress then check out the underground.

When third world countries have better systems in place, especially 4g underground then you know you have gone wrong.
 

Pug

Pug

Soldato
Joined
20 Oct 2002
Posts
5,184
Location
Over there...
Not a single Group B stage record still stands does it? They were epic, but they were just power with very little control. Cars are now going faster.

Thats mostly due to suspension and tyre technology. Put a Group B on modern suspension and tyres, and then let's see...
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Jan 2006
Posts
7,768
Location
Derbyshire
Just think: from the 60s to the 80s it was common for most people to get milk in containers that were cleaned and re-used, delivered by fleets of electric vehicles. They would bring other basic groceries to you too.

Progress is great.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Apr 2009
Posts
6,258
Location
UK
The lack of progress which has shocked me is CPU power. Up until 5 years ago it was amazing but now it's just ground to a halt. Sure we have multi-threads but the programmers seem to about a decade behind coding for new CPU's

I'm shocked that Intel and AMD didn't have replacement technologies for the standard transistors, we should be seeing Quantum processing for desktops by now

Look at the Airbus A320 family; their flight computers run on a mixture of 80s hardware, some with an Intel 80186 CPU, some with a Motorola 68010 IIRC (Edit, now they apparently run on the Intel 80286). :D :cool: the in-flight entertainment systems will be magnitudes more powerful than the computers keeping you up in the air.
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
21,016
Location
Just to the left of my PC
Not a single Group B stage record still stands does it? They were epic, but they were just power with very little control. Cars are now going faster.

Are the stages exactly the same? As far as I know, very few stages are the same now as they were in the mid 80s.

Maybe a modern WRC car is faster than a Group B car on any rally stage, given that they are much better in almost every way, but the comparison would have to be on identical tracks. Preferably also in identical conditions. Perhaps, for example, Group B drivers would have been faster without spectators being on the track and grouped at the side of the track in the most dangerous positions.

A modern WRC car will spank a Group B car in everything apart from power to weight ratio, but a Group B car will spank a modern WRC car in power to weight ratio (e.g. Delta S4 has 2.2 times the power to weight ratio of a Focus WRC and that's with the stated figure for a conservative tune on the Delta, which is less than half the power it was capable of). I think which would win would depend on the stage, with the group B brute forcing a win if there were enough straighter parts.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
21,016
Location
Just to the left of my PC
Amusing but rather silly when you think the MSC Oscar was launched last year.

A ship that makes noahs ark look like a piddling dinghy.

It makes real ships look like dinghies too.

Given that this thread is about progress, the obvious example would be the most famous huge ship of its day - the Titanic. MSC Oscar could carry 4 Titanics if they were in pieces and you could fit two whole Titanics on it.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
76,634
Still billions short of funding but an exciting looking project nonetheless.

good thing is it, European space agency has said it now technologically feasible and is giving them some money.
it's just a shame it's taking so long to do anything. looking at 2019 really (and these things always fall behind) before we see a full sized motor fitted to an aircraft for flight experiments, let alone an actual skylon plane.

have faith that once they test a full sized engine they will get enough funding, as it's something that is needed.

although i'm not convinced about its economics for passenger flight, thats very much an after thought. its all about rapid reusability for low earth orbit.
 
Caporegime
Joined
25 Jul 2003
Posts
40,134
Location
FR+UK
Oh yeah I know they've gotten a few million from the British and European space agencies, but was continually denied funding by the UK government. Fortunately the Engine prototype worked and they've received £50m of funding now. The whole project though? Still woefully short of donors - I guess this will change if/when the engine gets built.

And as you said, it's more about reducing the £cost/kilo of getting things into space, which is what is necessary if space travel is ever going to become common.

Goddamn, sometimes I wish I'd been born 100 years in the future :p. Of course by then the planet might be a wasteland..
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jun 2007
Posts
68,785
Location
Wales
Still billions short of funding but an exciting looking project nonetheless.


Yeah, a passenger one thats not just a joy ride is unlikely to happen any timr soon.

But skylon as a project for satalite delivery could be a massive boon to the uk.

I hope airbus gets the contract for the airframe work, would be interesting to work on one
 
Back
Top Bottom