Infographic: Chevy Volt Has 10 Million Lines of Code; F-22 Raptor Only Has 1.7 Million

4 years ago by Inside EVs Staff 18

Would you have thought that the Chevy Volt has more lines of programming code than the F-22 Raptor (arguably the most advanced fighter ever produced)?

We sure didn’t, but then again, the Volt uses a form of technology never before seen on roads.

Though code isn’t solely responsible for the Volt’s operation, it does play a significant role in ensuring everything works in harmony.

But 10 million lines? That’s a heck of a lot.

Is there anything out there with more? Check out this infographic to find out.

Chevy Volt Requires Lots of Coding

Chevy Volt Requires Lots of Coding

Tags: , , , ,

18 responses to "Infographic: Chevy Volt Has 10 Million Lines of Code; F-22 Raptor Only Has 1.7 Million"

  1. Sam says:

    Having that any lines of code is not a good thing. No bragging rights. Sounds like bloat ware. They’re doin something wrong to need so much complexity. It would however explain why it is so buggy.

    1. kickincanada says:

      Actually you couldn’t be more wrong. Without the heavy duty software and coding we wouldn’t have the car today. See the links below for info. I’ve had my Volt for 2 years now and other than the odd glitch with the console screen I would hardly describe it as buggy.

      http://www-01.ibm.com/software/rational/announce/volt/
      http://gm-volt.com/2010/11/02/gm-using-ibm-software-to-develop-and-control-the-chevy-volt/
      http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Enterprise-Applications/IBM-Software-Drives-Chevys-2011-Volt-Electric-Car-825154/

      1. Aaron says:

        As a professional coder, the sheer number of “lines” of code you have does not make for an efficient code set.

        Example: Many years ago, I coded an application that did pitch-shifting of WAV files without changing the tempo. Total size of executable: 52 BYTES — less than the length of my posting.

        If I were to code this in a high-level language, the sheer number of lines would explode but provide no additional functionality. That is the definition of bloatware. Sam is correct.

        1. Open-Mind says:

          Another coder here, and I of course agree that L.O.C is a poor metric. As do all other coders:

          http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3769716/how-bad-is-sloc-source-lines-of-code-as-a-metric

          Apparently only marketers and managers haven’t learned this yet. IMHO, they’re bragging about a stat that should be a source of embarrassment. Of course, IBM Rational is generally considered the Grand Poobah of bloat:

          https://www.genuitec.com/go-bloat-yourself-with-rad/

          Impressive that the Volt’s software works so well, since most bloatware does not.

  2. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

    It should be pointed out that there’s lines of code and then there’s the minimum possible lines of code. There’s the code before pre-processing and the code after pre-processing.

  3. David Murray says:

    The infotainment system alone probably accounts for 95% of that code. So it isn’t quite as impressive as all that.

    1. kickincanada says:

      See above – actually the infotainment system probably has the least amount of code in the vehicle. What GM did with IBM is very impressive and it was also key to bringing the most technologically advanced vehicle to market in unheard of timeframes (paper napkin to production in 4 years)

      1. David Murray says:

        The Volt shouldn’t require any more lines of code than a Toyota Prius, as far as the drivetrain goes.

        1. Aaron says:

          It shouldn’t, but remember that the Volt has 3 clutches. That leads for 6 combinations (all clutches disengaged doesn’t count) that all need accounting for, including the state where all 3 clutches are engaged — the state that makes the Volt a PHEV.

          1. David Murray says:

            Look, I’m a programmer. I have a pretty good idea how much extra code would be required for the volt drive train. An extra few hundred lines of code should cover the extra complexity of the Volt’s system as compared with the Prius. The only place I, as a programmer, can see where the Volt would need more code is in the instrument panel and the infotainment system. Beyond that, I’m pretty familiar with both cars internals and there really isn’t that much different from a programming perspective.

  4. TamaGuy says:

    Sam, I’ve owned a Volt for 9 months now and the only bug I’ve seen is the occasional fly that gets in from an open window. I’m also a software developer and think this thing is amazing and will never go back to an ICE mobile.

  5. Martin T says:

    Yes the Volt is very reliable considering the immense processing power on board.
    Well done to GM & IBM for proofing it.

    Very Impressive, I just have a charging glitch with my particular L2 charger and in the states the have a fix for that.

    So yes I’m impressed, considering normal ICE cars have more glitches or the electric Fords.
    They have done mighty well!

  6. vdiv says:

    Considering that even the turn signals are a software-driven that is not surprising.

    Software is the plague of modern time.

  7. Ocean Railroader says:

    I wounder could someone hack into this car and have a joy ride while I’m driving. In that I don’t like how cars are becoming like driving smart phones these days in that those things along with computers are very hard to keep spam from popping up and from computer systems crashing.

    1. Aaron says:

      With general-purpose operating systems like Windows, you’re right — it is difficult to keep it free from viruses and bugs. The software on the Volt (and any other modern car) is not general-purpose: It has a very specific purpose and doesn’t have the “hooks” available that viruses attach to and infect your system.

  8. Bill Howland says:

    Well, two things:

    Of course the thing has 4 times as much coding as a Raptor and 1 1/2 times as much coding as a sophisticated jet liner.

    The car was designed by Commitee. Of course it has a ridiculous number of microprocessors and coding, is very ‘buggy’,and drains the 12 volt battery if left on.

    That said, point 2 follows:

    A). The car DOES work fine, bootstraps fast (only 4 seconds) and has a very low Vampire Loss.

    B). The Warranty on the complicated stuff is 8 years.

    C). The car is a joy to drive, Charges efficiently, and uses its electricity for the drive motor efficiently.

    This is in stark contrast to the Model S, for instance, which has a vampire loss, which increases to an unbelievable 1840 watts during very cold weather. My Roadster, although having far superior cold weather performance than the Model S, still suffers from poor 110 volt charging efficiency (4 miles per hour, decreases to 1 mile per hour when the Power Electronics Module heat sinks get dirty, something which requires zero maintenance in the Volt), and must be periodically cleaned to avoid hassles.

    So, Life is good, the end result is all that matters. I have had the thing confuse reverse and forward when quickly shifting between mtc mode and drive mode, but otherwise the entire package works quite well.

  9. KenZ says:

    Oh I can believe it has that much code. As new owners of a volt, taking it on a long road trip this weekend, both my GF and I came to the same conclusion: the car itself is awesome, but the center console and console software are a total cluster&$@/. It is really poorly done. Don’t get me wrong, we love our volt, but the user interface is awful.