Slashdot Log In
New Data Transmission Record — 14 Tbps
Posted by
kdawson
on Sat Sep 30, 2006 03:22 PM
from the that's-140-hi-def-movies dept.
from the that's-140-hi-def-movies dept.
deejne writes to alert us to a new bandwidth record: Nippon Telegraph and Telephone has announced data transmission at a rate of 14 terabits per second over a single optical fiber. The paper claims the previous record was "about 10 Tbps." In the new experiment, NTT sent data over 160 kilometers (nearly 100 miles) of optical fiber, in 140 channels of 111 Gbps each.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
140 channels of 111 Gbps each (Score:5, Funny)
Preparing? (Score:5, Funny)
Misread title (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Misread title (Score:5, Funny)
Given an hour with that link it's exactly what i'd use it for.
Parent
Re:Misread title (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Okay, its about time... (Score:2)
Re:Okay, its about time... (Score:5, Funny)
Well, I remember back on my 14.4 modem... those text pages loaded like the wind. I was on top of the world... Then those damned pictures started cropping up on websites. Pictures on the internet? Ha! Then came the 56.6k modem which showed those pictures who were boss. No problems. Oh wait, online gaming? File sharing ? Cable and DSL save the day. More than adequate
Reply:
I beg to differ. I have [cough] friends that download movi^H^H^H^H^H content from the internet, and some dvd rips^H^H^H^H^H^H^H database files can be larger than 4GB! Even at a good (cheap) DSL line of 1KBPS it still takes quite alot longer to download content than it would take to go to blockbuster^H^H^H^H^H^H^H the office and pick up physical media with the data on it.
Parent
Re:Okay, its about time... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Okay, its about time... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
land speed record (Score:5, Funny)
We're talking about tubes (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:We're talking about tubes (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:land speed record (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You mean like the highways get filled up with semis and traffic slows to a crawl? Yeah, tubes aren't like highways at all...
Re: (Score:2)
Let's say that a DVD's box is 15cm by 15cm by 2mm (about 2000 DVDs per cubic meter), and the semi is 20m by 5m by 5m (500 cubic meters). That's one million DVDs, each containing about 8 GB or 64 Gb, so 64 petabits total. Traveling at 100 km/h (60-70 mph), that makes approximately 20 Tbps over a 100 km link.
(If hard drives are carried instead of DVDs, I guess that number becomes about 100 Tbps.)
So, a loaded truck is still better than a single fiber link, but not by an order of magnitude. It's not "no
Re:land speed record (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Time for a Math Lesson. (Score:3, Informative)
The distance traversed is 100 miles, which would take 1.4 hours, at 70MPH.
There are 3600 seconds in an hour.
This means that per hour a line can move 1.58 million DVD's
for a 70 MPH trip this adjusts to 2.25 Million DVD's
or 225,000 (100 disk spindles) Each Spindle Weighs 4Lbs
leaving 900,000 lbs or 450 tons..
That would be a semi with 200 cars loaded on it....
Now How big of a truck are you drivin....?
Storm
Re:Time for a Math Lesson. oops correction.. (Score:4, Interesting)
So while the new line isnt quite nothing compared to a truck, a truck can move more data 100 miles faster than the new link.
Storm
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:swallows (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
download speeds (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The old record still stands (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Memory serves, fingers don't. I meant a few Tbps over 2000 km.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
1) Yes, distance is cruically important in these measurements. There's no points in having gazillions of petabyte data transfer if it can only done from one corner of the lab to the other. Which is why all credible speed-of-information-transfer articles include a number with units of [ (bits / second) * distance].
2) The record is still held by the transmissions from Voyager II's encounter with Neptune.
Cost (Score:4, Insightful)
Right question, wrong hardware. (Score:3, Informative)
On the whole, fiber is cheep. Ultra-high-speed multiplexors and demultiplexors are not. A typical bundle of fibers might easily have 128 or 1024 fibers running through it, and the extra quality needed to go from a few terabits to a few t
You won't be seeing this at home anytime soon (Score:3, Informative)
Re:You won't be seeing this at home anytime soon (Score:5, Insightful)
That goes without saying, right? It is, after all, a record. People don't usually turn to the Guinness book of world records for guidance on, say, what a realistic number of hotdogs is to consume within 12 minutes.
Now of course, greater bandwidth is cool and all, but 14 Tbps is obviously impractical for actual use, even in specialist medical imaging applications -- for the simple reason you couldn't fill up your harddrive (or even RAM) as quick as that!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Surprisingly, data demands in the medical environment aren't nearly as high as you might think. We routinely route MRI images from hospital to hospital with infrared and T1 connections. Those MRI images are actually only about 10MB each. We got ourselves a 1Gb/s imaging network at our
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Pushing 56k through a POTS line was an experiment once.
Hardware (Score:2, Insightful)
Pays to be frugal. (Score:4, Funny)
But does it mean... (Score:2, Insightful)
Convert to standard units please (Score:4, Funny)
Also, they failed to provide a conversion from terabyte to Libraries of Congress.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I love acronyms (Score:3, Insightful)
Try saying "CSRZ-DQPSK" three times fast! I guess this acronym does serve the purpose of being easier to say than "carrier suppressed return-to-zero differential quadrature phase shift keying," but couldn't they have chosen a snazzy acronym that was hip to say and then worked out what it meant, like NASA?
Ha! That is nothing! (Score:5, Funny)
20*4*10^11*8/sqrt(2*2/9.8)~=10^14 bps or 100 Tbps
As you see if you have enough money to burn you may easily scale that number.
100 Gigabit Ethernet, here we come! (Score:3, Informative)
Disputed record (Score:4, Funny)
I admit the distance wasn't far, but the burst rate was 24 TBytes/sec.
Future means faster speeds (Score:4, Funny)
Not the worlds fastest...Cisco did 8x that. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Damn (Score:4, Insightful)
These things need to be thousands of times faster than your home connection because each one will carry thousands of times more data.
Its no good one single person having all that bandwidth if there is nobody else to talk to at that speed.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
When I multiply that out, I get 1.990656e+9
That's about 2 Gbps
So, you could fit about 7000 of these uncompressed video streams over the 14 Tb/s link, unless I'm screwing up the calculation someplace.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm pretty sure somewhere like that gets them directly from the manufacturer.
Re:If this test was 30 seconds (Score:4, Funny)
20 GOTO 10
Parent