Would non-binary computers be faster? Is there any benefit

show me a non-binary computer

>>61563934
No because it would be ridiculously complicated to make a processor that handles trits instead of bits

>>61563946
in the 30s and 40s decimal was normal thing, there is still decimal arithmetic built on of course on binary hardware in IBM processors

>>61563946
Russians made one because they couldn't get western computers

They abandoned it once they could get western computers for the sake of costs/efficiency, but I think it's a shame that they didn't pursue it further, because it was a genuinely interesting idea.

>>61563934
So one, zero and "it's complicated"? Or do you want to use some primitive other than CMOS?

Nobody wants your genderfluid SJW computer.

>>61563934
Analog computers can indeed be faster for certain tasks, in fact, for workloads in which you can use them, they solve the problem instantly. For example that's how airplane wing simulation was done way before digital computers were fast enough.

>>61564580
Those are quantum computers

Why is computer science so bigoted?
This binary thing reinforces gender binary bigotry!
Don't even get me started on objectification in OOP languages.

>>61563934
There's no sensible way to implement ternary logic using switches.

File: generdsdfdsfate.png (139KB, 500x700px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 500x700px

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Setun

Russians had a trinary computer that ran the russian version of forth, DSSP

non-binary computers would be a manufacturing nightmare. binary hardware is already affected by solar radiation, a trinary computer would fail fucking constantly

show me a transistor that can do such a thing

>>61565773
Transistors have 3 lines. Source, Drain and Signal

So you have 3 states.

There is nothing preventing them from using all three.

If Signal and Source are set, it's zero.

If Signal is set, and no Source, it's one.

If only Drain is set, it's two.

Semiconductor companies just want to prevent innovation for more profit.

The Technology is there.

>>61563934
>>61567151
/g/ is full of pajeets these days

>>61563934
Soviets did it

File: 1499467438203.jpg (237KB, 552x872px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 552x872px

>>61567151
Give this man the nobel prize

>>61563946
ternary computers were a thing, IBM has some research papers out on it.

>>61567243
this, we need tough /pol/ guys here and flags

>>61563934
> Would non-binary computers be faster?
In general, no. Binary also has interesting properties with both regards to hardware doing computations and algorithms doing... algorithm things.

I suspect we want the other kinds-of-hardware (say, quantum spin states qbits or hexadecimal processors or biological probabilistic neurons or such) more as co-processors anyhow.

>>61567151
>Transistors have 3 lines. Source, Drain and Signal
>So you have 3 states.

HAHAHAHAHAHA what a retard, it's 2 state system, it could be more but the more the states the higher the probability the noise can affect the state between voltage levels,
so you will end up with a broken computer flipping your state on its own

>>61563934
No. The most relevant thing around today is quantum computers, which are totally useless outside of very specific scientific applications. Most of them are actually slower than your average home computer. I haven't been keeping up with phones but I'd bet that even those are faster than a lot of quantum computers.

>>61563934
All data is transfered in binary "would non-binary computers be faster?" No. Unless there is a change how data is transfered (i.e. quantum computers)

>>61567151
This is when people with no degree in the field try to talk as if they had one.

One can even build a touring complete machine out of blocks in minecraft. It's all about definition. In electronics it isn't as simple as voltage (on -1), no voltage (off - 0), you just go and apply a logicial thought model that works with physic laws.

I think non-binary computers would be indeed faster but it's "cheaper" using binary.

Now imagine hunderths of transestors inside CPU!!!1

>>61563934
>Would non-binary computers be faster? Is there any benefit to using them?
Yes. Actually, a ternary computer would be more efficient. Ternary math is the most optimal (look it up).

Russians did it but it didn't catch on. They lacked powerful processors. These days it would be impossible to make a ternary computer because it would be way too expensive and there's no infrastructure (compilers etc) to support them.

>>61567151
You don't actually know what you're talking about do you?

>>61563946
my brain

>>61563934
>bringing your gender politics to computers
damn

>>61564561
it's two, one and zero for ternary computers, but I guess you're retarded, so nevermind

>>61567810
>tough /pol/ guys
You mean Reddit importers?
all this kekistani shit and kek 777 is boring and beaten to death, don't even mention the /r/The_Donald influx + shills. They're demonizing themselves instead of improving, just neckbeards in maga hats being autistic in the street.

>>61567151
>>61567857
>>61568131
>>61568763
Not that Anon, but three-state logic indeed is a thing.

>>61568921
yes thats true but using different voltages, you dont get magically get three states because a transistor has "three lines". That post made absolutely no sense.

>>61563934
were programs any better after we stopped using bool for everything and starting using int and char?

>>61569018
For a Brainlet like you

>>61564665
topkek