1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Smaller more powerful chips for computers

Discussion in 'General Equipment Chat & Advice' started by AndyTake2, May 6, 2021.

  1. AndyTake2

    AndyTake2 Well-Known Member

    IBM has announced a 2nm process for making computer chips.
    They aren't alone in the 2nm arena, but they licence their tech to people like Intel and Samsung, who will benefit from it.
    There is a claimed 45% performance and 75% energy efficiency compared to 7nm processes.
    If this then trickles down to cameras, we could see extremely fast and efficient processing of files, especially video - imagine no rolling shutter or overheating of cameras at high frame rates.

    The tech would obviously need to be applied with BSI stacked sensors as well, but it could certainly help with things.

  2. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    What has British Standards Institute got to do with it?

    I know you really mean Back Side Illuminated but not every reader will know what that means.
    Learning likes this.
  3. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    In this context and for the likely nerdy reader of a photo forum, I think it would be well enough known. But then I know you love discussing TLAs, don't you? ;)
    Learning likes this.
  4. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I'm simply pointing out that common courtesy suggests that the first time an abbreviation is used it should also be quoted in full and thence the abbreviation alone.

    As I pointed out elsewhere most TLAs have multiple uses depending on the field of application.

    Anyway, the idea that 2nm chips are now likely seems to mean that cameras could record video for much longer periods, subject to storage capacity, than is currently possible. That probably means that 4K video becomes easier and 8K too. In stills photography it might just be what the mirrorless camera needs to give an acceptable, to me at least, battery life. How far away production might be is another matter.
    Petrochemist likes this.
  5. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member


    The assumption that others will automatically understand his abbreviation is a sign of the abbreviator's stupidity.
  6. AndyTake2

    AndyTake2 Well-Known Member

    Can you work this one out?
  7. AndyTake2

    AndyTake2 Well-Known Member

    My bad.
    Just assumed that as it was in the context of sensors it was known.
    Zou likes this.
  8. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

  9. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    FYT can mean something polite. Then again it might refer to something rude.
  10. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Indeed: context is all. In this case, though, I think the context was clear, unfortunately.
  11. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    Maybe he was a little annoyed that you called him stupid for using a TLA...
  12. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    You're quite right, if I had.

    I made a general remark about the indiscriminate use of abbreviations, which he chose to assume referred to him personally.
  13. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    If I may, this forum is read by many people who aren't members either directly or via search engines. That means that it is very likely that a high proportion of the non-members reading a post aren't photographers and/or up to speed with all the acronyms. It could be argued that not understanding the abbreviations is the readers problem but I disagree. If you post on a forum you are, I assume, trying to communicate and if you use language that other members, or guests, don't understand you aren't communicating effectively. Hence the convention that the first time an abbreviation is used it is quoted in full.
  14. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I think the rule of holes applies here.
  15. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    I've got a spade and I'm going to use it... ;)
  16. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    Geoff, maybe not acronyms as such, but you post a lot about aircraft and aircraft engineering. Sometimes you do use acronyms, sometimes it is quite technical. Very few people on this forum have a clue about aircraft engineering (I would guess). We are in the main interested in photography and why we are here. To me, it might as well be written in hieroglyphics. That is my issue maybe. It doesn't stop you posting it, not that you should either, it is what you know and helps with discussion in the lounge for some topics, which is fair enough.
    DaveM399 likes this.
  17. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    A fair point, I am however unconvinced that expanding some of our abbreviations would leave you in a better position. I will try to remember to expand them none the less. Thank you.
  18. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I gave in and looked up TLA - bit of a disappointment to find it means three letter acronym.
  19. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Oddly enough, STLA is the stock market code for a company called Stellantis, which makes cars, lots and lots of cars.

    STLA is therefor not an acronym for "stupid three letter acronym"...

    ...apparently. :confused:
  20. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I think I'll go up the hill to EGLD* and scream, if that's OK with the rest of you.

    *EGLD isn't an acronym, it's an ICAO code
    ICAO is an acronym of International Civil Aviation Organisation.

Share This Page