8 ms·
It's much more effective at extremely high frequencies used in compact radars, like the kind used on fighter jets. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallium_arseni
by pstrateman 2y ago
It's much more effective at extremely high frequencies used in compact radars, like the kind used on fighter jets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallium_arsenide#GaAs_advantages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallium_arsenide#GaAs_advantag...
- amy-petrik-214 2y agoYea fo sho', and it was the Cray 3 supercomputer actually based on gallium arsenide at the time, meaning faaasssttt clock rates, about 6x faster than compeititors in terms of Hz. So that would be something like a 50 ghz processor today, wild
- chasil 2y agoMy phone is faster.
- heeton 2y agoYour phone operates roughly 10x slower in terms of Hz.
- ben_w 2y agoAccording to page 10, the Cray 3's clock speed was 500 MHz: https://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/access/text/2010/02/102685990-05-01-acc.pdf https://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/access/text/20... Phones beat that by a factor of x2-x4. And has 1-16 processors of 1 gigaflop each; depending on how much precision you want, a phone can beat that by a factor of just over x2000.
- bgnn 2y ago[dead]
- rwmj 2y agoThere was a whole Byte magazine dedicated to it back in the day. It was thought (at the time) that the only way we'd ever break the 1 GHz barrier was to use GaAs, which obviously turned out to be wrong.