Small computing, very small computing.

by **TechMage** » May 21, 2002 @ 7:30am

Check this article out, <A href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020520/ap_on_hi_te/ibm_nanotechnology_1">here</A>.

by **sponge** » May 21, 2002 @ 1:00pm

by **ingallsj** » May 21, 2002 @ 4:26pm

by **Warren** » May 21, 2002 @ 9:25pm

The IBM Bluechip processor goes at 180Ghz, but it's really really expensive and not available to the public yet.

by **TechMage** » May 22, 2002 @ 12:43am

by **Courtney White** » May 22, 2002 @ 3:46am

by **accolon** » May 22, 2002 @ 11:43am

by **James S** » May 22, 2002 @ 4:27pm

But the data would be sent faster than it could be cached and read off the hard drive. What Intel and AMD need to do is redesign their processors to get better performance out of the same MHz speed.

by **RICoder** » May 22, 2002 @ 7:48pm

*snicker*

by **James S** » May 22, 2002 @ 8:10pm

snicker? wha?

I'm kind of interested in getting into that nano-tech stuff, sounds like a fun career. Maybe in a medicinal value, someone else can make nano-tech trees that bleed gasoline for sap.

by **ingallsj** » May 23, 2002 @ 12:01am

I guess it's possible, but why don't we just use soybean diesel fuel? It is already a proven technology. And you could always try to underclock the Deep Blue processor, but the only REAL value of having it would be to process really complex 3D models of entire cities with all the cars moving and the wind and so on, not to run Word or some other program. :wink:

by **James S** » May 23, 2002 @ 2:37am

by T¹ » May 23, 2002 @ 2:37pm

by **Mike Bannick** » May 23, 2002 @ 5:22pm

by **ktemkin** » May 23, 2002 @ 7:03pm

Small computing, very small computing.

Small computing, very small computing.

Sort

Forum Description

Moderators:

Forum permissions