Startup claims 100x more efficient processor than current CPUs, secures $16M in funding (www.techspot.com)
from yogthos@lemmy.ml to technology@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 02:11
https://lemmy.ml/post/13098400

#technology

threaded - newest

simple@lemm.ee on 13 Mar 2024 02:38 next collapse

Claims don’t make any sense if there isn’t any benchmark.

avidamoeba@lemmy.ca on 13 Mar 2024 02:55 next collapse

It’s called Efficient Computer. That increases the veracity of the efficiency claims by at least three thousand.

authed@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 04:04 collapse

so you think they claimed that and didn’t do any testing?

wagesj45@kbin.run on 13 Mar 2024 04:17 collapse

Maybe

authed@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 04:18 collapse

Would you believe faked benchmarks? They are pretty damn easy to fake.

velox_vulnus@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 04:54 next collapse

Our processors are 100x more efficient than state-of-the-art low-power CPUs. A single AA battery can power our processors for up to a decade

That’s some really extraordinary claim.

flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works on 13 Mar 2024 06:39 next collapse

It’s so ridiculous I’m not even going to bother with the article

velox_vulnus@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 07:08 collapse

In their defence, there are a few research papers on their site with respect to the startup. I’ve not read it yet, but it might probably be legit, given how most of the founding members are from ivy-league universities.

flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works on 13 Mar 2024 07:33 collapse

Huh… We’ll see, I guess

LostXOR@fedia.io on 13 Mar 2024 15:53 next collapse

An AA battery has around 10kJ of energy; spread over a decade that's 31 microwatts of power. No way they're doing useful computations with that.

becausechemistry@lemm.ee on 13 Mar 2024 16:31 collapse

A single AA battery is going to discharge itself just sitting on the shelf over a decade

Faceman2K23@discuss.tchncs.de on 13 Mar 2024 05:51 next collapse

I mean, we know the absolute limits of computational efficiency thanks to the Landauer limit and the Margolus–Levitin theorem, and from those we know that we are so far from the limits that it is practically unfathomable.

If they can show some evidence that they can perform useful calculations 100x more efficiently than whatever they chose to compare against (definitely a cherry picked comparison) then I’ll give them my attention, but others have made similar claims in the past then turned out to be in extremely specific algorithms that use quantum calculations that are of course slower and less efficient on any traditional computer.

yogthos@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 11:45 collapse

I’d like to see these chips benchmarked in the wild as well before getting too excited, but the claims aren’t that implausible. Incidentally, this approach is why M series chips are so much faster than x86 ones. Apple uses SoC architecture which eliminates the need for the bus, and they process independent instructions in parallel on multiple cores. And they’re just building that on existing ARM architecture. So, it’s not implausible that a chip and a compiler designed for this sort of parallelism from ground up could see a huge performance boost.

krolden@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 14:30 collapse

Thats not why Apple silicon is faster. Every modern mobile device uses a SoC these days.

yogthos@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 14:31 collapse

It is very much part of the reason it’s faster than the traditional x86 architecture with a bus, which is what I was talking about. Here’s a good summary for you archive.is/DtT7c

krolden@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 14:44 collapse

Sorry I thought you meant its more efficient just because its a SoC.

delirious_owl@discuss.online on 13 Mar 2024 05:54 next collapse

What about power and heat?

yogthos@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 11:41 next collapse

The article says that this architecture uses significantly less power which would mean producing less heat as well.

SuiXi3D@fedia.io on 13 Mar 2024 12:23 collapse

Efficient, not fast. Just means it’ll sip power as opposed to guzzling it.

mindlight@lemm.ee on 13 Mar 2024 07:25 next collapse

So Intel, Apple, every other company that develops ARM based processors, AMD and Nvidia has just missed this technology ?

We’re talking about trillions of dollars in just R’n’D investments and this technology just flew under the radar?

If it sounds too good to be true, it is probably too good to be true.

Faceman2K23@discuss.tchncs.de on 13 Mar 2024 07:56 next collapse

Usually means “yes this works in theory but only for very specific operations at limited scales that aren’t all that important so it’s not worth pursuing seriously”

Mora@pawb.social on 13 Mar 2024 15:15 next collapse

Maybe. But the blue LED was also deemed impossible by a lot of big companies. And then a guy build one. Very interesting video on that topic: youtu.be/AF8d72mA41M

PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks on 13 Mar 2024 15:15 collapse

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://piped.video/AF8d72mA41M

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.

Nomecks@lemmy.ca on 13 Mar 2024 16:02 next collapse

It probably runs a completely custom instruction set which makes it incompatible with current architectures. Current manufacturers are designing chips that are operable with popular instruction sets.

caseyweederman@lemmy.ca on 13 Mar 2024 16:17 collapse

I’d write it myself if it was a hundred times faster

caseyweederman@lemmy.ca on 13 Mar 2024 16:15 collapse

I mean
Big companies tend to “innovate” by buying market-disrupting startups and squashing the life out of them so they wouldn’t need to compete

eleitl@lemmy.ml on 13 Mar 2024 14:52 next collapse

Thesis: g-ram.github.io/files/gobieski_thesis.pdf

HaywardT@lemmy.sdf.org on 13 Mar 2024 16:35 collapse

Seems like it uses a bunch of pipelines that are also cross connected. Pretty interesting idea.

kyub@discuss.tchncs.de on 13 Mar 2024 15:27 next collapse

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary funding evidence.”

firefly@neon.nightbulb.net on 13 Mar 2024 17:12 collapse
They've been promising quantum computers for three decades with zilch results. I've lost count of how many times and how many startups and even major market players claimed to have working quantum computers, which of course to this day are all just smoke and mirrors.

They've been promising artificial intelligence for three decades with zilch results. Then they redefined what AI means to get venture capital pointing the money hose at it. Now people think a glorified autocomplete and grammar engine is 'artificial intelligence.'

I'll believe it when I see it.