Jump to content
IGNORED

Vacuum Transistors - tubes on a chip?


Paul R

Recommended Posts

This could be the answer to all of our disputes over solid state vs. tubed devices... :)

 

How the Aged Vacuum Tube Could Save Moore's Law

 

Interesting. 460 GHz is FAAAST ! Very few transistors can do more than several GHz.

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
Interesting. 460 GHz is FAAAST ! Very few transistors can do more than several GHz.

 

 

Look what that could mean for microprocessors. They seem to be stalled at around 3GHz now making us have to rely on parallel processing for more performance, it would be nice to once again increase processor speed.

George

Link to comment
Look what that could mean for microprocessors. They seem to be stalled at around 3GHz now making us have to rely on parallel processing for more performance, it would be nice to once again increase processor speed.- George

 

Without the need for parallel processing, power consumption of a PC should also be dramatically reduced, with greatly reduced RF/EMI, as well as possibly negating the need for internal fans and their attendant problems, not the least of which is the need for regular cleaning to maintain peak performance, especially with high performance video cards and Processors ?

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
Ignore the photo at the top of the page. The subject is Moore's Law and very high GHz signals. Nothing in analog or digital audio can use components like these.

 

Except perhaps the computer or DAC... this is Computer Audiophile, after all! :)

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment

My dad actually worked on something like this in the early sixties, it was an integrated thermionic processor, made out of stacked layers of photo-lithographically processed "wafers", the whole thing fit in a glass sphere about 4" in diameter. The device inside was roughly spherical, they called it the "glowing golf ball". The whole structure ran hot enough to emit light, the only way it could get heat out was through radiation, so the temperature got pretty high.

 

It didn't go very far, semiconductor ICs came out soon thereafter and completely eclipsed it. I have no idea what happened to it, I doubt it exists anymore. I couldn't find anything about it on the net.

 

I never saw it in person, just heard about it from my dad, it sure would have been nice to see.

 

John S.

Link to comment

I remember hearing about something like that, though I cannot remember exactly what. Seemed like it had something to do with trying to get rid of some radar component, or control an aperture radar, or something vaguely along those lines.

 

These new ones are totally cool though - potentially much smaller and faster, and with easily controlled heat dissipation. :)

 

-Paul

 

 

My dad actually worked on something like this in the early sixties, it was an integrated thermionic processor, made out of stacked layers of photo-lithographically processed "wafers", the whole thing fit in a glass sphere about 4" in diameter. The device inside was roughly spherical, they called it the "glowing golf ball". The whole structure ran hot enough to emit light, the only way it could get heat out was through radiation, so the temperature got pretty high.

 

It didn't go very far, semiconductor ICs came out soon thereafter and completely eclipsed it. I have no idea what happened to it, I doubt it exists anymore. I couldn't find anything about it on the net.

 

I never saw it in person, just heard about it from my dad, it sure would have been nice to see.

 

John S.

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
Without the need for parallel processing, power consumption of a PC should also be dramatically reduced, with greatly reduced RF/EMI, as well as possibly negating the need for internal fans and their attendant problems, not the least of which is the need for regular cleaning to maintain peak performance, especially with high performance video cards and Processors ?

 

 

While what you say IS true, I'm thinking more along the lines of 10 GHz processors WITH multi-cores for even faster, more efficient computers.

George

Link to comment
Except perhaps the computer or DAC... this is Computer Audiophile, after all! :)

 

Except that nothing I know about having to do with music needs that kind of computing power - even for the largest, densest files (like 24/384, or really high-end DSD formats).

 

If you know of something that would benefit from a computer with the power of a CRAY, let me know.....

George

Link to comment
I remember hearing about something like that, though I cannot remember exactly what. Seemed like it had something to do with trying to get rid of some radar component, or control an aperture radar, or something vaguely along those lines.

 

These new ones are totally cool though - potentially much smaller and faster, and with easily controlled heat dissipation. :)

 

-Paul

 

 

Like you, I recall reading about something like that beck in the early '70's called "vacuum state" electronics. Don't think anything ever became of it though. It was being touted as a defense project to protect our military infrastructure from EMP damage.

George

Link to comment

(grin) if you have anything at least as a fast as an iPad 2 in your office, you already have a machine that could beat a 1980's era CRAY hands down. An iPad 2 will do something a little better than 1.5 gigaflops. :)

 

That i7 Macbook Pro has more storage and is faster too.

 

And I know you hear people complaining about them being slow- especially when doing PCM to DSD256 or better conversions on the fly!

 

-Paul

 

Except that nothing I know about having to do with music needs that kind of computing power - even for the largest, densest files (like 24/384, or really high-end DSD formats).

 

If you know of something that would benefit from a computer with the power of a CRAY, let me know.....

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
(grin) if you have anything at least as a fast as an iPad 2 in your office, you already have a machine that could beat a 1980's era CRAY hands down. An iPad 2 will do something a little better than 1.5 gigaflops. :)

 

That i7 Macbook Pro has more storage and is faster too.

 

And I know you hear people complaining about them being slow- especially when doing PCM to DSD256 or better conversions on the fly!

 

-Paul

 

 

OK thanks. I was referring to today's supercomputers when I mentioned the CRAY, not ones from the 1980's.

George

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...