NASA Perseverance rover 200 MHZ CPU costs $200K
Listen, I know we're all complaining about the fact that CPUs and GPUs, components in general are expensive. But wait until you hear this one. NASA Perseverance rover uses a processor that runs at 200 MHz, and it did cost roughly $200K USD.
Obviously, it's a CPU that needs to be able to run in a somewhat stringent environment. But more details on it, have surfaced on the web. The technology of the on-board computer Rover Compute Element (RCE for short) is reduced for performance, far below that of normal desktop PCs.
The chip has a size of 130 mm 2 and a computing power of 240 to 366 MIPS, the processor requires five watts. It has 10.4 million transistors and is manufactured by BAE Systems using the 0.25-micrometer process. According to the manufacturer, the CPU, which costs around $ 200,000, is already in over 250 spacecraft. If the RCE fails, an identical backup system switches on in the Mars rover.
RAD750
The RAD750 processor works with clock rates from 110 to 200 MHz. In addition, the on-board computer has 256 MB of RAM, 2 GB of flash memory and a so-called warm electronics box to maintain a constant system temperature. However, it has a decisive advantage over other systems: robustness. The RCE withstands temperatures from -55 ° C to +125 ° C. In addition, the processor is not only extremely robust against extreme temperatures, but it also withstands radiation levels that would put conventional systems out of action. To put it into perspective: The RAD750 can withstand radiation of up to 10,000 Gray (Gy for short) - 6 Gy means death for humans.
NASA developers already fear that the system will crash in about 15 years due to external circumstances. In addition, the VxWorks operating system working in Perseverance would have to be supplied with new patches at some point. It remains to be seen how long the system will withstand the extremely difficult circumstances on Mars. A similar system of the Mars rover Curiosity has been running for almost ten years.
Senior Member
Posts: 292
Joined: 2008-05-07
Also, that process is so huge they could have just used Legos.
Senior Member
Posts: 4920
Joined: 2008-12-09
All fine and dandy, but the crucial, most important thing is reliability.
Maybe the CPU is made on that specific node just to give the circuitry more density on trace paths for redundancy and transmission.
New technology is a "convoluted mess" older technology can be refined and honed to perfection, thus achieving reliability.
Convoluted mess - on a tech channel (sorry, I am still looking for it ) an tech engineer confessed that even that everything is well though and designed, there are shortcuts, workarounds and trade secrets. Sh!t works, but don't send that in space, it has a huge probability of failure.
So, NASA wanted the most boring and trustworthy, reliable CPU out there.
Maybe I am wrong and talking crap. Maybe not.
What say you?
Yeah you're right on. They're paying for redundancy, low usage, and reliability. It's just like car embedded systems. They use chips that are slow, "dual core" (but they actually just do the same thing and compare computation), etc. I'm sure if they popped out 100k of those chips, it would be way cheaper. They just don't need 100k of them.
It's like comparing a desktop pc to a server. Way more expensive to buy a server but they're designed to run 24/7 for a long time with no problems.
Senior Member
Posts: 325
Joined: 2020-11-03
NASA = decades-long budgetary constraints; SpaceX does not.
Senior Member
Posts: 2770
Joined: 2010-01-03
yay government
given what military tech prices look like(900k per round zumwalt gun?), and that whole senate launch system boondoggle, I would love to know more about this amazing cpu
Unregistered
I'm just glad they finally found that decades old technology they "lost" when they landed on the moon.