Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

New "PRAM" 30 Times Faster Than Flash

Posted by kdawson on Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:29 AM
from the faster-cheaper-longer-lasting dept.
Data Storage Hardware
hairyfeet writes, "The EETimes describes the new Samsung memory, phase-change RAM, called PRAM. Samsung is dubbing it 'Perfect RAM' because it is thirty times faster than NOR flash, ten times more durable — and cheaper to produce, to boot." 512-Mbit modules should be available sometime in 2008. None of the initial coverage goes much beyond Samsung's press release. At the same time, Samsung also announced a 40-nm, 32-Gbit NAND flash device.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Intel to Sample Flash-killer PRAM This Year 78 comments
Station writes "Intel's new phase-change memory technology (PRAM) will begin sampling this year. Samsung, IBM, and Hitachi are all working on phase-change memory as a successor to flash as it has a lower (~20ns) read latency than flash (50-90ns). 'Intel says they plan to ship the first PRAM modules as a straight-ahead NOR flash replacement so that they can work the kinks out of the design before trying to move it up the memory hierarchy. The company claims a much higher number of read-write cycles (100 million) than flash, as well as a potential 10 years' worth of data retention. NOR flash is typically used as program storage memory for mobile devices like cell phones, while more durable but slower NAND flash is used for mass storage in devices like the iPod nano.'"
This discussion has been archived.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.

New "PRAM" 30 Times Faster Than Flash 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Advantages (Score:5, Interesting)

    by duerra (684053) * on Monday September 11 2006, @11:30AM (#16081790) Homepage
    It sounds like great marketing and all using the name "PRAM" for "Perfect RAM". However, can anybody tell me what, if any, advantages that this design has over MRAM [wikipedia.org]? I'm all for a replacement of flash, given all of its disadvantages, but I would like to avoid a format war if one format between these two is clearly superior to the other.

    • Re:Advantages (Score:4, Interesting)

      by jimstapleton (999106) on Monday September 11 2006, @11:32AM (#16081808) Journal
      I didn't see it in this, does PRAM not have the read/write cycle limitation of flash? I hope so...

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by P3NIS_CLEAVER (860022)
        it mentioned '10 times more durable'? Maybe this means that it will go bad at a rate 1/10th of regular flash.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by networkBoy (774728)
            Maybe, but thermal durability is not there.
            Phase Change Memory (PCM) is thermally unstable (double edged sword). Durring reflow the temp is high enough to blank the device, so no factory programming. Devices will have to be in-circuit programmed.

            Good side: increminating evidence? just place in toaster or other suitable device and set on high. problem solved.
            -nB
    • The format war would take place with manufacturers and memory producers. Consumers will likely never install pram or mram into their computers just like they don't install flash now. The only time you might buy pram would be a USB flash device, and that already has the standard interface of USB. So really there's no reason consumers would ever have to choose one technology pathway or another. Manufacturers would have to choose, but they're much better prepared to switch technologies and avoid having dea
      • Consumers don't install flash into their computers now because Flash isn't all that fast... It's (much) faster to have DDR SDRAM than it is to have Flash...and for the purposes that general computer ram is used for, it works great. While it would be nice to have a very fast non-volitile solution, there just isn't anything currently being made in volume at a price worth paying that can compete with the likes of DDR, etc.

        MRAM may be the solution to that problem...which is EXACTLY why it will probably make i
    • This PRAM won't get fucked up if it gets near a magnet? That's a rather important thing for portable data, since just losing a floppy's worth was enough of a pain not so many years ago, and we'll be talking at least three orders of magnitude more storage.

      That, and MRAM was supposed to come out and have replaced DRAM entirely something like two years ago. So at this point, I'd effectively dub it vaporware. Of course this PRAM might end up in the same state, but it's not overdue yet.

      In either case, I would
      • To expose your USB drive to a magnet and not louse data what you need isn't a better memory technology inside. Fact is as long as you are rearranging electrons to store data your data is vulnerable to magnets.

        What you need to achieve that is better shielding. I can't remember the brand but I once left a 32 MB thumb drive stuck to the magnet of a 15" Pile, speaker. None of the 20 MB of data on it was damaged.

        This stick had a Metal shell. Perhaps someone who knows more than I do about memory technology and Ph

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by networkBoy (774728)
          In the case of flash, that speaker was not nearly powerful enough.
          Flash uses a floating gate, and the electron tunneling effect to program (charging the gate). This requires roughly 9-12 volts, so there is an internal charge pump. To disturb those electrons on the floating gate, while not actively programming, would take well over 10K Gauss, likely in the 100K Gauss range. Don't have a powerful enough magnet to prove anything with, but the 5K Gauss one didn't do squat to a part.
          -nB

  • Errata + Info + Opinion (Score:5, Informative)

    by AKAImBatman (238306) * <akaimbatman.gmail@com> on Monday September 11 2006, @11:32AM (#16081801) Homepage Journal
    1. Someone's getting their MBits and GBits mixed up. Samsung has announced 32-gigabit (4GB) flash chips, not 32 megabit.

    2. NAND has traditionally been shunned in many uses because it can usually only be accessed as a block device, and not a standard ROM device. Which makes it unsuitable for many embedded applications. Thus this chip is probably targetted at the thumb drive market.

    3. This is exciting stuff! According to the article, PRAM is supposed to have processing speeds similar to RAM, and does not require erasure or sectoring. The only downside is that they don't give any hard figures on what "fast processing speed" means. Depending on what that actually means, we could start seeing machines that are able to instantly hibernate like EROS [wikipedia.org], but without the added step of writing to disk.

    4. The 512 MBit (64MB) device may sound small, but I imagine that more than one chip will be chained together to create a larger storage device. Samsung will probably also work to produce larger chips once they have all the early production issues worked out.

    5. The CIO article is already slow, so I'll add one tidbit they had. According to CIO, Samsung is considering PRAM to be a good fit for replaceing Flash memory in mobile phones. Considering the lower price, this could be a good fit. The only question is, does it use more or less power during read/write cycles?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Manchot (847225)
      Also, what exactly does "three-dimensional transistor structure" mean? All major transistor structures are three-dimensional. In fact, I don't know how you could even make a useful device with photolithography that isn't three-dimensional.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by AKAImBatman (238306) *
        Also, what exactly does "three-dimensional transistor structure" mean?

        Usually it means that the circuitry is layered or "stacked" in a 3D matrix rather than the traditional "flat" 2D matrix. This means that you can cram more parts per square centimeter because your circuits have depth as well as width and length.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by mabhatter654 (561290)
        no, current chips are 2.5D. basically they're just a series of circut "maps" laid on top of each other. Not much is different from circuit boards except they're a lot smaller. Look at it this way, no matter how many "maps" you pile on top of each other, you'll never have the simplicity of a globe, or a stack of blocks. Some of the new stuff does actual processing in the 3rd dimension.. in other words components and processing are stacked thru the layers, touching directly, which something that most chips
        • no, current chips are 2.5D. basically they're just a series of circut "maps" laid on top of each other.

          Which of course introduces limitations such as:

          1. You can't put one ledge on top of another, which limits specific types of gameplay

          2. Non-map opjects are sprites, which don't look so great, and dead bodies tend to rotate on the floor when you're not looking (which is a little unsettling)

          On the plus side, you can generate maps using only a single 2D or stacks of 2D blueprints.
      • One problem with stacking is heat; the transistors give out heat and if there's another transistor on top of it also giving out heat there's no place for that heat to go, eventually melting/burning the chip.

        In processors and ordinary refreshing RAM, the transistors are continually being exercised. I wonder if part of the solution in this case is that stable memory exercises the transistors less often, giving more time for heat dissipation. You'd risk overheating if you continually read the same block, thoug

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by kdawson (3715)
      Gbit erratum corrected, thanks for spotting.
    • What's with the wrong use of data capacity measurements? n-bit is only useful for network speeds (historical I'm assuming since 1 baud = 1 bps), encryption, and very small data sizes (e.g. CPU register sizes; places where every bit counts). The article should use n-byte measurements since it's measuring storage...

      • What's with the wrong use of data capacity measurements?

        Memory parts are always referred to in bits rather than bytes, since the actual storage is usually at the bit level. Bytes are only used once the device has been packaged, and only accepts requests on a byte, word, or dword basis. So it's not really incorrect. You're just unfamiliar with the terminology. Do a bit of circuit design and you'll hear a lot more numbers given in bits rather than bytes. :)

    • ..what "fast processing speed" means

      I assume it means time taken for a cycle of read/write/erasure. If it's based on Chalcogenide phase change materials (typically found in optical media) I suspect the timescale for writing and erasing will be ~10s of nS.

  • Good (Score:5, Funny)

    by MindStalker (22827) <jlarsen@@@fsu...edu> on Monday September 11 2006, @11:32AM (#16081809) Journal
    Cause I'm sick of how long it takes to load those damn Flash ads that hang over my browser window.

    • Heh heh - good point. And don't forget to reset the PRAM hold down ++P+R and wait for the double bong.

      (personally I'd be happy with one bong but some people are greedy that way)

    • You do realize that now you could have 30x as many of them before your computer slows to a crawl. I somehow think that you should be unhappy about this.

      (Yes, I do realize he is joking. So am I.)

  • Ob. Python (Score:3, Funny)

    by TexasDex (709519) on Monday September 11 2006, @11:40AM (#16081868) Homepage
    I have to push the PRAM-a-lot!

  • A pram that is 30 times faster? (Score:3, Funny)

    by bmo (77928) on Monday September 11 2006, @11:41AM (#16081878)
    Since a pram is generally used at walking speed, doesn't anyone think of the baby's safety when it's rolling 30 times faster, i.e., 90 miles/hr or 145kph?

    Think of the children!

    --
    BMO
  • PRAM is Parameter RAM in Apple Macs, and that's a vital part of the computer (well, logic board). Maybe Apple will start using PRAM for its PRAM?
    • And zapping PRAM just became more fun. Toss it in the microwave instead of having to hold down 15 (exaggeration) keys at the same time in some sick attempt at becoming Digital Twister Champion.
  • With all our luck, it's probably going to turn out to be destructive to the ozone layer or cause cancer in lab rats. Whenever someone discovers something amazingly useful, it always turns out to have negative side effects. I believe that's called the Law of Unintended Consequences.

    Sorry to rain on the parade.

    • Whenever someone discovers something amazingly useful, it always turns out to have negative side effects. I believe that's called the Law of Unintended Consequences.

      There's a belief that women are starting to get bigger breasts as a result of the various hormones that are pumped into chickens to give them bigger breasts.... all this to say: the Law of Unintended Consequences does not only refer to negative side effects.

      My sources for this belief are strictly anecdotal and generally as a result of seeing

      • My assumption is that if there is a difference (who says there is? with all the sizing changes in women's clothing and style differences it could be just that) was due to the fact that at 12 years old, the average Westerner kid has eaten 3 times as many calories than other kids.

        More calories and more fat and more protein equals more stuff built earlier.

  • Pauly Shore (Score:3, Funny)

    by RudeDude (672) * <RudeDude@@@gmail...com> on Monday September 11 2006, @11:48AM (#16081944) Homepage Journal
    Your PC got harshed, right, 'cause your
    system heaps at the wrong parameter.
    So l toasted the dated directory,
    tweaked the P-RAM...
    and reglazed your subroutine.
      - Crawl, in "Son In Law" (Pauly Shore)
  • What I really want is not more super-duper fast RAM but real cheap and abundance of FLASH - to replace (at least partially) hard-drive. Not only performance but reliability will be better for a system overall.
  • More immediately, this announcement means that Flash prices should start dropping even more. Maybe not to $0.25:GB like desktop HDs today, but maybe $2:GB (instead of today's $16:GB), for mobiles. When they release PRAM devices in 2008, they'll sell them for much more money than Flash because of the speed, but start dropping prices faster because of the cheaper manufacturing. By the time PRAM costs $2:GB, they'll be dumping Flash for $0.25:GB. HDs will probably cost $10:TB, if they're used outside datacente
  • New PRAM 30 Times Faster

    Go BABY, Go!
  • pram powns 'puters

  • Cheaper? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Roadmaster (96317) <roadmr@to m e c h a n g o s u banana.com> on Monday September 11 2006, @12:39PM (#16082395) Homepage Journal
    Cheaper to produce, my ass. They'll be charging an arm and a leg for this type of memory.
  • I.... have... to-o-o-o.. push.... the.... PRAM a lo-o-o-o-o-t!

    (quick montage of knights dancing and kicking chickens)

    No, on second thought, let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place.

  • Storage should be stated in megaBYTES and gigaBYTES not bits. No one uses bits anymore, we've all upgraded to bytes. Then there was that half standard of nibbles, what the heck was that all about.

  • FTA:

    ...availability beginning sometime in 2008...

    You decide.

  • will we have to call them "pr0m" disks?

    • Re:New tech? We still get stuck (Score:4, Insightful)

      by mabhatter654 (561290) on Monday September 11 2006, @11:56AM (#16082019)
      It's business... they are selling something that does more for only a little more money. That makes them a tidy profit!!! That's what they develop new chips for is PROFIT. In another year or two, the prices will drop to be lower, or we will have devices so large we couldn't have afforded them at all... i.e. price of a 4GB SD card isn't going down any time soon due to complexity of manufactureing.. but the new chips may make 4GB as affordable as 1GB sooner.
      • That's what they develop new chips for is PROFIT

        Its funny how people (like the grandparent) usually don't get this. They expect companies to develop new tech and loose money doing it.

        Interestingly, I've never met someone who says this and pays to go to work... that would be sticking to your guns.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Znork (31774)
          CDs and music in general are subject to monopoly rights, and thus have no actual competition. Prices on them will rise to absorb any economic elbow room available, and even worse, the cost structure will adjust to the revenue, essentially negating the entire purpose of a free market economy.

          Memory on the other hand is interchangable with other memory, thus subject to a much more fierce competition, which drives prices down.
        • You can also seen this done with hybrid engines costing more yet not costing more to make. Though I dont know enough about that to make a solid arguement. Feel free to shred what I just said.

          Yet a hybrid DOES cost more than a non-hybrid of the same power, especially when you consider the whole fuel train. Going to a hybrid power solution adds complexity, additional materials, etc... Right now that cost is $3-5k for automobiles.

          As for this tech, even if it's ultimately cheaper to produce, you're still goin
    • You can attribute the higher price to the R&D costs.
      Why should a company invest in R&D? To get a return on investment!! (and to stay competitive)
    • New semiconductor technologies consume a lot of cash to develop, test and put into production so then, maybe, they can cover development costs. Most of them never reach this last stage and with luck, become patents so their owners can sue whoever solves the problems they didn't.
    • "It made me think back about 15 years to when 1GB hard disks were new"

      They were actually out quite a bit earlier than that
      Wikipedia's article on Hard drives [wikipedia.org] has some interesting timeline information
      1982 - Hitachi 1.2 GB H-8598 consisted of 10 14-inch platters and two read-write heads

      Not exactly a laptop sized hard drive though..

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.