Slashdot Mirror


Auto Industry's Fastest Processor Is 128Mhz

afabbro writes "GM stated that the 2011 Buick Regal will have the auto industry's fastest processor: 128Mhz, and 3MB of flash. 'Three meg of flash memory and 128MHz clock speed doesn't sound like a lot in terms of computing power until you consider the environment these controllers have to live in. Our controllers are made to operate reliably up to 260 degrees (127C) and down to -40 degrees (-40C) for the life of the vehicle.'"

21 of 397 comments (clear)

  1. This is cool, but not revolutionary... by mlts · · Score: 3, Interesting

    128MHZ for a rugged CPU for automotive use is a good thing, but clock speed is just one of many factors. TFA was a tad light on information and worded as an ad (which is to be expected from GM's press website), but other than just mentioning vague details and the fact that Freescale made it, this doesn't really mean much without factoring in other details.

    Will this mean the 2011 Regal will be leaps and bounds over the 2010? Yes. How much is debatable.

    Will this matter in the total scheme of automotive technology? Not really. ECMs have been improving each year, so the 2011 Regal may have a bump in the control CPU's clock speed, but perhaps some other car maker would have a different architecture in place (multiple modules controlling different functions such as PATS/antitheft, O2 sensor, fuel sensor [1], etc.)

    Will other car companies have improvements in their technology? Assuredly. Ford has some new engines going in the mainstream line of vehicles. Other vehicle makers may be bringing diesels to the US.

    The big question in all of this: Is there a car example I can go on here?

    [1]: I'm sure all cars in the US will eventually be going Flex-Fuel (talk about bumping gasoline from 10% to 15% is happening in some places here in the US), so having the circuitry in place to handle varying amounts of ethanol will be crucial.

    1. Re:This is cool, but not revolutionary... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's a special use, being more like a very powerful microcontroller, it only needs so much power, and it has to last. While the average life of a car is nearly 10 years, it's not so terribly uncommon to keep a car going for almost 20 years, in contrast very few 20 year old PCs are still in regular use, I think a lot of people would be very hard pressed to find a ten year old computer being used daily, and PCs don't have to worry much about environmental factors.

      If the system is flex-fuel, it has to be able to take any range from 0% (occasional exemption from ethanol) to 85% ethanol. There is no control over what what the next tank will have, and you'll have some residual, making your ratio almost constantly varying.

      I thought most of ethanol's benefits were pretty reasonably debunked, at least corn ethanol anyway.

    2. Re:This is cool, but not revolutionary... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This progression is to be expected. But the thing people should be asking is: does the new Buick ECM have an interface exposed that third parties can build readers for? Is there an assessable API? Probably not, so all this power will only be available to dealerships.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:This is cool, but not revolutionary... by SirThe · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, the reason people don't have old PCs is because they break down, not because newer and better technology comes out.

    4. Re:This is cool, but not revolutionary... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Really? This is your response to my comment on ethanol? I wonder if you're trolling. But anyways, I'll bite in case you aren't. For instance, the main reason corn ethanol is even financially palatable is because of US government subsidies.

      Corn ethanol's environmental benefits are shaky at best if you're interested in reduction of CO2 emissions.

      When you factor in all the energy needed to raise the corn and make the ethanol, it makes very little new energy, some estimates suggest that there is no new energy being made, basically as little as one gallon's equivalent being made from one gallon's equivalent burned to make that gallon.

      Other plants can be used to make ethanol, but it's not being done widely. When cellulosic ethanol is workable on a mass scale, then the value of ethanol production might change to something that's of a net benefit to society.

    5. Re:This is cool, but not revolutionary... by inflex · · Score: 3, Informative

      Agreed, it's not revolutionary - but each generation is a nice improvement.

      The tech is new but the design is biased towards factors other than outright performance (obviously). If you consider microcontrollers like the very popular Atmel AVR32 series, they're barely pushing the speed but their technology is very current. Things like integrated ADC/DAC/SPI/TWI~I2C/USARTS/USB/CAN/opamps/comparators/counters~timers/safety-circuits/power-savings (down to nA range) are what's important. The modern microcontroller is an amazing toolkit of modules, vastly reducing your board build complexity and improving your longevity.

        Looking at the highres photo of the board, you can see it's mostly just a hell of a lot of power regulators, switchmode-controllers and MOSFETS (for the switchmode power) with a couple of ASICs. There's also a lot of safety bits on there such as polyfuses. My first impression of this design is that there's a lot of isolated power channels to ensure that even if one goes down everything else keeps on going.

    6. Re:This is cool, but not revolutionary... by tagno25 · · Score: 3, Informative

      This progression is to be expected. But the thing people should be asking is: does the new Buick ECM have an interface exposed that third parties can build readers for?

      Yes, It is called the OBDII port.

    7. Re:This is cool, but not revolutionary... by Dahamma · · Score: 5, Informative

      Other plants can be used to make ethanol, but it's not being done widely

      Sure it is. Brazil has been producing efficient sugarcane-based ethanol for decades, and now accounts for almost 40% of the world's ethanol fuel production. Not that it matters much to the US, because of the quotas and massive tariffs to protect the crappy corn ethanol industry...

    8. Re:This is cool, but not revolutionary... by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Other plants can be used to make ethanol, but it's not being done widely. When cellulosic ethanol is workable on a mass scale, then the value of ethanol production might change to something that's of a net benefit to society.

      All agriculture not based on returning the shit to the fields is inherently harmful. It amounts basically to hydroponics in a dirt (not soil) medium. Feeding humans without maintaining the soil has already destroyed much of the planet's arable land to the point where there would be worldwide starvation without exports from the Americas or acres of land dedicated to greenhouses and hydroponics in the nations where the food is eaten. All of which, just like the so-called "Green Revolution" farming used by big agribusiness today, is based on oil; synthetic fertilizers, synthetic pesticides, all the plastic that it's all made of, and all the energy to run it around. Topsoil-based fuels will lead us directly to a future where only the rich can afford to eat real food, which will be produced on hillside farms in locations too remote to factory-farm.

      Consequently, as you say, only cellulosic ethanol is of a benefit to society. The analyses of ethanol's net energy value don't even take damage to the soil into consideration.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:This is cool, but not revolutionary... by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 4, Funny

      in contrast very few 20 year old PCs are still in regular use, I think a lot of people would be very hard pressed to find a ten year old computer being used daily

      I've got a 15 year old PC that's not only used daily, it runs 24/7 to run a specific piece of software.
      I've also got a 14 year old one that does some network functions, although it would be much easier to replace than the first one, if it came to it.

      So, my anecdotal evidence trumps your statistics, because as everybody on /. knows, if you have a single contradictory outlier, it proves generally accepted trends are completely wrong.

      :)

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  2. Should be by JustOK · · Score: 3, Funny

    128 MHz should be enough for every car.

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  3. Re:Measurement Fail by jx100 · · Score: 4, Informative

    -40F is equal to -40C

  4. Re:not fastest by omglolbah · · Score: 4, Informative

    Your GPS unit is not an "automotive cpu"... It is a consumer product fitted into a car.

    The automative processor is what controls your fuel injection, ABS and other such functions.

    There is a world of difference between the two.

  5. Made to last... by Mishotaki · · Score: 3, Funny

    3 years or 25 000 miles...

  6. Re:30MPG 1952 MG Convertible by arcsimm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    His 1952 MG also crumples up like a soda can in an accident, whereas your Corolla is stuffed to the gills with crumple zones, traction-control gizmos, and eight thousand-odd computer-controlled airbags. On the other hand, it also weighs twice as much as the MG and handles like it, so good luck avoiding an accident that he could.

    On the bright side, you probably don't have to keep a fire extinguisher in your car to put out the daily wiring harness fires.

  7. Re:Ahh... automotive, that brings back memories by stimpleton · · Score: 3, Funny

    Ex Honda Mechanic here(1982-1989). "Environment similar to mil spec, durability like industrial, prices like consumer products".

    1984-86 Honda Accord/Accura igniter units(Fires the igntion coil at the right time), it was more like "Environment as in a home in winter, durability like a chinese small engine, and prices like a haliburtion supplied widget".

    If i'd replaced 200 of these things. Yes, i am sure todays automotive embedded stuff is better but its been a long road.

    --

    In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
  8. Re:not fastest by nacturation · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And how is the environment of a built-in GPS really significantly different from the ECU? [...] Perhaps it's not expected to be fail-safe...

    But that's the whole point, isn't it? Your vehicle isn't a useless lump of metal and plastic if your GPS unit fails.

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  9. Re:30MPG 1952 MG Convertible by Loualbano2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "On the other hand, it also weighs twice as much as the MG and handles like it, so good luck avoiding an accident that he could."

    The Corolla probably handles better. See this article about an autocross race between an 2003 Honda Odyssey, a 60's Porsche 356 and a 60's Jag XKE.

    http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/soccer-moms-revenge/

    ft

  10. Sounds like plenty to me... by commlinx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Three meg of flash memory and 128MHz clock speed doesn't sound like a lot in terms of computing power

    Guess that depends on your point of view, a car travelling 360Km/Hr is travelling 100m/s, so in a millisecond travels 10cm or about 4 inches. Assuming one instruction per clock cycle you can do a lot of useful stuff with 128,000 instructions, or put another way probably about one million for every revolution of the wheel

    3MB of FLASH is huge as well when you aren't loading a lot of crap like multimedia, not that it would run Linux but I just took a look at the last kernel I built for an embedded platform and it came in under 2MB with quite a generous set of modules loaded.

  11. Completely and utterly wrong by Kupfernigk · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The Diesel cycle is more efficient than the spark ignition cycle. If you knew basic thermodynamics you could work this out for yourself. The reason? The efficiency of a combustion engine depends on the ratio of the ignition temperature to the exhaust temperature. Gasoline engines have relatively low compression, and as the power reduces the amount of air per cycle reduces, reducing the compression still further. This means that the effective compression varies from a maximum of perhaps 14 atmospheres to a minimum of no more than 1 at idle. Because Diesel engines do not mix air with fuel, and so always use a full air charge, their compression ratio is usually a minimum of 18. In my car, it varies from 18 to 1 at idle to nearly 50 to 1 at full boost. Now look at the adiabatic equation and see how that relates to the peak temperature which determines efficiency.

    Summarising, a modern turbodiesel is inherently about 25% more efficient than an equally modern gasoline engine. With old and crude designs like, say, carb hemi V8s, the Diesel has more like a 2:1 advantage. The remaining 5% comes from the fuel.

    Sheesh, kids today. Get off my lawn.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  12. Re: Transmissions and extreme cold by shking · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've seen all kinds of cars and tractors start in temperatures getting near or below -40 degrees. Some times that meant the transmission got busted.

    As a teenager in northern Canada, I learned that you need to warm up the transmission as well as the engine in extreme cold. A friend of my dad's forgot this lesson and and had to replace his car's automatic transmission.

    In extreme cold, you can protect your transmission by putting it in neutral for a few minutes. This gets the transmission oil moving (and warming) without engaging more delicate mechanical parts. Do not leave an automatic transmission in "Park".

    BTW - While several minutes of idling in neutral during EXTREME cold conditions are required to warm the transmission, 90 seconds of idling is all your engine needs. Any extra idling time is for only for the driver's comfort (i.e. warms up the cars interior )

    --
    -- "At Microsoft, quality is job 1.1" -- PC Magazine, Nov. 1994