Are processors the most advanced human technology?

Are processors the most advanced human technology?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterprise_resource_planning
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Nah I'd say rockets are. Any gook can put together a processor but they all have real trouble building ballistic missiles.

Missiles are crude, they don't showcase manipulating matter to an extent shown by processors, and are actually controlled by processors.

MRIs are objectively the most advanced piece of technology.

I'd still say processors are more advanced. I think it's much more technically impressive to design a processor from scratch than a rocket. The later is just a lot more expensive to build due to raw material and fuel costs.

Just because it's cheap to mass manufacture once you have a design and the fact that everyone has one makes it seem more mundane.

Actually, I take that back. Just looked it up and fuel is like 0.5% cost of a launch.

I guess precision engineering for rockets is impressive, but a lot of the control systems and stuff are done with processors anyway.

right now GPU are most advanced, they left CPUs in the dust like 10 years ago.
high end 8 core intel CPU 250 gflops
high end GPU 15000 gflops

you're welcome.

what about AI?

I mean, technically, you could argue that a computer, which integrates a CPU, is more "advanced" than the CPU itself.

The same logic can be applied to CPU's themselves. Are integrated circuits the most advanced technology? Is semiconductor doping the most advanced? What about PCB printing, etc.

You could argue it endlessly because the level of complexity of that "technology" is set arbitrarily by the individual.

big reason for that huge cost is that many rockets are made one by one, where processors can be put into production and mass produced.

>jigaflops matter more than general processing ability
Minerfag detected

Optical and quantum versions are more advanced technically

Yeah but they don't work

what do you mean? AI can mean several things, all of them quite important but most advanced tech? I dont think so

Still more advanced

Honestly I still cant wrap my head around the fact that we actually manipulate atoms and subatomic particles?!
I mean how is that even possible when our instruments are made of atoms and we cant even see what are we doing.
For example transistors in those CPUs are like 40-50 atoms wide... what the actual fuck and how?
Isnt this (however it is acomplished) the most advanced thing we have ever done?
Calculating mass of atom? Charge and spin of electrons? Fuck man...

>GPUs
>not FPGAs
>not hybrid SoCs
stop being so smug pleb

We basically use clever trick with light to "print" the circuitry. We don't deal with individual atoms as that would take forever. Even with the ultra-advanced process for making chips, a lot of them still don't make it through. It's a game of chances really, you make some and you waste some.

Big software projects are propably the most complex things we make.

This got me thinking. What has lower information entropy - a modern CPU sitting by itself or a hard drive with Windows 10 and Photoshop installed on it (both tremendously complex pieces of software)?

No processors are easy, it's not hard to control circuits precisely and boolean algebra is fairly straightforward. They're just really tiny which is what makes them seem amazing. Rocket engines on the other hand, controlling combustion instability and turbopump design is still pretty much voodoo. We just iron it away with simulations, nothing is exact like with electronics. And then there's the guidance, NK can make a nuke but they can't seem reliably hit the 3,000 mile wide target across the Pacific ocean.

rockets use processors, ergo rockets are by definition more complex than them

I would say operating systems are the most complex. But processors are close.

this is so retarded, especially if you're speaking about some dumb commodity OS like linux

>Windows 10
>Complex

yeah, just think about all of that massive ERP software (basically an OS of an enterprise) running chain stores, managing hundreds of stores, just in time supply lines, minimizing storage, logistics, HR, evaluating market and predicting demand, fuck, even giving a summary of all the things it does needs a summary.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterprise_resource_planning

The question is about whether the invention itself is more advanced. Rockets seem pretty pale in comparison to CPUs.

...

Actually your logic works the other way around, the Apollo missions wouldn't have worked without microprocessors therfore rockets are more complex seeing as the microprocessor is just one part of the complex rocket system.

Doesn't really matter which OS. Any modern OS is complex as balls.

quantity of C code + drivers != complexity

No we got silicone from roswell incident

Gpus aren't because only Vulkan cuts down on cpu compiling and let's the gpu do all the work. Non Vulkan your cpu has more overhead

Nah windows just eats ram but osx by far. Especially with audio. Asio is useless

Artificial Insemination I mean

Rocket engines are in essence is just a glorified turbine engines or even simpler when pressure fed.

if you have access to a fabricator, yeah anyone can make a simple processor

Modern processors require far more advanced technology than you perhaps realize. Consider that rockets were achievable in the 60s, and modern processors are the result of ongoing extremely well funded development for ~60 years beyond that.

Simple on paper = / = simple in reality.
Russians could never work out large single chamber designs, Americans could never work out oxidizer-rich staged combustion. Both could shit out microchips.

I didn't expect Veeky Forums to be this retarded
>"it's just hot gas out of a nozzle looks simple!"
>"wow tiny microchip cant see how it works so it must be alien technology!"
Either that or you are a CS student desperate to prove there is anything of value in your codemonkey degree.

We stopped funding rocket development because the Cold War ended. SpaceX is designing new rocket tech as we speak are they not?

Well by a more broad definition, rocketry has still been developed as far as intercontinental missiles and such but the differences between 2018 rocketry and 1960s rocketry is far less than the differences in processors.

My point is though that there is an absurd amount of money in making a computer go as fast as possible (like 95% of modern industries benefit from it) so a proportionally absurd amount of effort has gone into developing the technology. This is not the case with things like rockets.

So you are saying that processors have merely been developed further not that they are inherently more complex.

There is plenty of complexity in developing them further, you cannot simply make things smaller and smaller using the same methods, for example in silicon chips we are quite literally reaching the molecular limits, at that scale quantum effects become non-negligible.