Intel's Light Peak: One PC cable to rule them all
The Light Peak technology sends signals with infrared light over optical fibers.
(Credit: Intel)SAN FRANCISCO--Intel unveiled technology called Light Peak that it hopes ultimately will replace the profusion of different cables sprouting from today's PCs with a single type of fiber-optic link.
Dadi Perlmutter, the newly promoted co-general manager of Intel's Architecture Group, demonstrated Light Peak at the Intel Developer Forum here and said components for the technology, though not Light Peak-enabled PCs, will be ready in 2010.
"We hope to see one single cable," Perlmutter said, adding that one thing getting in the way of smaller laptops is the profusion of cable ports around the systems' edges.
This prototype PC has the Light Peak controller and optical connector that sends signals down a single white optical cable.
(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET)In a demonstration, Perlmutter showed a PC connected to a monitor across the stage showing high-definition video sent over a Light Peak optical cable. The cable can be as long as 100 meters and can carry data at 10 gigabits per second in both directions simultaneously, though Intel expects it will reach 100 gigabits per second in the next decade, said Jason Ziller, Intel's director of optical input-ouput program office, in an interview.
The company envisions Light Peak as a replacement for the cables that currently lead to monitors, external drives, scanners, and just about anything else that plugs in to a computer. A PC could have a number of Light Peak ports for different devices, or a connection could lead to a hub--perhaps an external monitor--with multiple connections of its own, Ziller said.
It's not clear how much the technology will cost or how many years it will take to become mainstream. And wireless communication technology--Intel itself has promoted Ultra-Wideband (UWB) for years--offers the attraction of getting rid of some cables altogether.
The Light Peak technology handles multiple communication protocols at the same time, with quality-of-service provisions to ensure high-priority traffic such as video get preferred treatment, he said.
Intel's Dadi Perlmutter traces the Light Peak cable from a PC to a monitor on the other side of the stage. Light Peak can traverse distances up to 100 meters.
(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET)In addition, Intel said it's working on bundling the optical fiber with copper wire so Light Peak can be used to power devices plugged into the PC, he said.
The cables themselves are durable, Ziller said: "You can tie a knot in it and it'll still work."
Intel has a lot of clout in the computing marketplace, but building support for a radical new connection that could replace DVI, DisplayPort, USB, Firewire, HDMI, and any number of other connections would require broad industry support. Intel's taking the usual approach to tackling that problem:
"We're working with the industry to standardize it," Ziller said. Intel has been briefing other companies for "the last few months," and now is trying to get the standards process started in earnest with partners including companies in the computing, consumer electronics, and telephone handset markets, he said.
Ziller wouldn't say who else is participating in the effort, but Intel published a statement of support from Sony, which has a lot of clout of its own in many markets.
"Sony is excited about the potential for Light Peak technology that Intel has been developing, and believe it could enable a new generation of high-speed device connectivity," said Ryosuke Akahane, vice president of Sony's Vaio Business Group.
So will Light Peak become a universal port? "Intel's long-term vision is you could get to that," Ziller said.
This monitor connected to a Light Peak communication apparatus showed a video signal coming from the remote PC.
(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET)
Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank. 
I'm curious of Intel wants this to replace the network connection too. While 100 gbps would be nice, it would mean rewiring a lot of installations (home networks) let alone the backend hardware. It'll also be interesting to see if Apple follows with it's video connection.
I find it curious that Sony is the first partner to be announced. You just KNOW they're working on their own cable solution and is preparing to wage another format war. Come on, this is Sony. It's what they do.
USB 3.0... sounds nice and all but why only focus on that when there is a possibility of moving beyond anything called "USB", or Firewire, Ethernet, etc... So, calling Light Peak almost USB 4.0 is way off base IMHO. The potential for Light Peak is incredible.
As for Sony... i dont think they have a chance on any format here that works in their favor.
I thought we were done with this after USB 3.0. And 2.0. And 1.0. And FireWire. And Bluetooth! And effing Ethernet!!!
Especially if the wires are allowing the data to travel at the speed of light, which, you know, is kinda speedy :)
You could run a hundred 10Gbps fibers down a narrow hall and get 1Tbps of bandwidth in that space. You would be hard pressed to do that with wireless. Also, it may just be me, but I am a bit nervous about living in a sea of modulated radio data. If you had a room that was streaming 1Tbps between devices, I don't know if I would want to hang around in there.
You need 10Tbps? Replace your 10G xponders with 100G. Or run ten more fiber bundles.
Yes, wires have their problems, but so does wireless.
Prime example (on a larger scale) You could never transfer over wireless the total FIOS data that is flowing in the urban area where I live. Now add the data flow from Comcast to that. The wireless spectrum is not that wide or deep.
"joyofsomeone - wireless also travels at the speed of light, and UWB doesn't have the reliability issues of narrowband."
Um, what? Yes, wireless travels in the same "way" as light, through (mostly) invisible air waves, but not at the same speed. There are many types of waves that we can or cannot see, including radio waves, light waves, and even ocean waves.
The waves that make up wireless communications are not light waves. Think of it this way: If we have a space shuttle near the moon or some other distant location, and we send them a radio transmission to turn on some scientific instrument, it will take X time for that command to make it to the ship. The astronauts get the command and turn on the instrument and relay their status back to mission control. The instrument begins doing it's thing instantly and one byproduct is that it gives off a lot of light. If the light given off (or our measuring equipment) was strong enough, the people back at mission control would see it long before the much slower radio waves got back to the base.
All forms of electromagnetic radiation, from radio waves through light waves to gamma rays, travel at c (=299729458ms^-1) in a vacuum. i.e. irrespective of wavelength/frequency/energy. After all, c = wavelength * frequency.
However, in a refractive medium, such as glass, the speeds of different wavelengths/frequencies of electromagnetic radiation differ slightly, and refract at different angles (which is responsible for the annoying phenomenon of chromatic abberation in telescopes). So perhaps you're not completely wrong... but in your thought experiment, the difference is imperceptible without very sensitive instruments.
I'm sorry to be so blunt. It's just that I study physics at uni, and it irks me to see such blatant... wrongness! Anyway, that aside, you're obviously an articulate person, so I can't fault you there! :)
Well, I built my own 486 computer, needed to check a dozen jumper and change about 3 to 4 of them for each (of the 3) manufacturer.
Well, until Pentiums I still need to find which pin is pin 0 or pin 1 for each ribbon cable.
Well, I just built my core duo and athlon II boxes without get confused. If they want a only one kind of wire, why make this wire even invisible? WIRELESS.
I'd like to see a variant of high speed Bluetooth or similar technology to handle these sorts of devices instead.
sometimes hub can come in handy (you don't want anything connected to the mouse, obviously). but in general - no.
as was pointed our before, the great advantage is the high speed LightPeak supports: I don't know of any wireless protocol capable of supporting full HD, while still supporting all your other periphery (am i wrong?)
The benefit to fiber is much lower attenuation over distance, as well as being harder to tap and not susceptible to EMI (fiber is frequently run right next to power cables in large datacenters).
Still takes too long to boot up my computer and the BIOS limits us in so many ways. It's like writing with a quill and ink well.
Nice cable. Sigh.
As Rants&Raves alludes to there really isn't much wrong with current BIOS iterations. My i7 system spends maybe 2~3 seconds at the BIOS splash screen before control is handed off to the OS boot process. After that any delay is not usually the fault of BIOS. If your BIOS is taking much longer then that I suspect you've got it setup wrong. EFI has been around for awhile but few really wanted or needed it..
1. It *must* be powered. What is the point of having one cable if I have 20 wall warts and power cables running everywhere?
2. It *must* have one *and* only one type of plug instead of the 20 different USB plugs we have now.
3. They have to prove that the cable will have the same durability as a copper one. Fiber is much more fragile and they are going to have to come with with a Jacket/Sheath that properly protects the cable.
Coming to market cheap would be a huge bonus.
When you have fiber running throughout your home at 100Gbps your biggest limitation will be processor and hard-drive speeds. By increasing the speed of data between devices, maybe they can encourage the marketplace to invest in better processors to handle all that data. I was just thinking:
At present, a dual-layer Blu-ray can hold 50GB. 50GB x 8 bits/byte = 400Gbits?
So over Light Peak at 100Gbps you could (theoreticaly) transfer the contents of a Blu-ray disc in as little as 4 seconds?
If you look at the intel Demo that Motherboard is from a prototype Mac Pro and the whole demo is running OSX. Its due to be included in Apple Iphones, Ipods and Macs in late 2010
Link below for more info:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/26/exclusive-apple-dictated-light-peak-creation-to-intel-could-be/
- by webrp September 28, 2009 10:29 AM PDT
- This is small potatoes compared to not having a "standard" plug across manufacturers for cell phone chargers - no fiberoptics required & uses yesterday's technology. The only thing that's needed is to get greedy mfg's to do it.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(34 Comments)