Hacker News Reader

Science is not done by quotes from VPs, and we don't know how MediaTek used these methods. Also, would you like to hear from VPs who wasted their company resources on Google RL and gave up?

The more marketing claims we see, the less compelling the Google story is.

Your perseverance is as admirable as it is suspicious. You are the lonely voice here defending the Google announcement.

View on HN

Unfortunately, there aren't publicly available benchmarks for modern technology node sizes, at least not that I'm aware of. Kahng compared on 45nm and 12nm chips, which are very different from a physical design perspective from the 4nm technology node size used by Dimensity 5G, or the sub-10nm technology node size of TPU. "MLContra" used a >100nm technology node size, which is just crazy.

Even if the AlphaChip authors redid Kahng's study properly, this still wouldn't give us useful information -- what matters is AlphaChip's ability to optimize chips in a real-life, production setting, for modern chips, where millions of dollars are on the line.

Yes, that's unfortunate. In that case, the Google Nature paper doesn't belong in Nature. Google is definitely free to claim that they revolutionized their business, but without scientific evidence this is just marketing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com