Flash Memory to Rival Hard Drives 407
Skal Tura writes "Samsung will start producing 16 gigabit Nand Flash chips this year, nudging the memory technology towards use in notebook PCs and maybe even edging out hard drives in some products in the next few years."
Gb or GB? (Score:5, Informative)
Some more information about the NAND flash memory can be found here [com.com].
One nice thing about this article is that it clearly explains the difference between a gigabit (Gb) and a gigabyte (GB)...something the article referenced in the story seems confused about.
From the article referenced in the story:
And from the article referenced above:
Sorry to be picky, but I'm a stickler for detail.
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:5, Funny)
Judging by that +5, insightful, I'm tempted to make a snide remark about the ruling class (moderators). Why yes, I do have karma to burn.
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:2)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:4, Funny)
In that case, in Soviet Russia Gb is greater than GB.
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:3, Funny)
1) Confuse people about Gb vs GB
2) Invent second step
3) ???
4) Profit.
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:3, Funny)
I know the diff -- and I missed it in the article. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:3, Informative)
True. However they can be used practically as system disks. I've been using CF cards for diskless firewalls for more than a year now. With OpenBSD I use softdeps and noatime and I've had no problems. I know of others who have done the same for years.
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:2)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:5, Insightful)
i could even see myself replacing my OS disk with a flash based one, and have a secondary larger hard drive for the less-accessed files with gobs of ram. that would be a real blessing to my poor ears! give me a 4gb flash drive and i'll be all over it!
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:3, Interesting)
XPe (embedded) [or XP a'le carte] specifically has support for non-writable and limited-writable OS partitions, and cam be engineered to fit nicely on modern DOCs.
I've done several builds myself.
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:4, Interesting)
Bah. Stupid n00bs. I was in awe when my 80486 machine could, at long last and at great expense, support a whopping 550 MEGAbytes of FAT16 bliss! It was the size of a brick, and pretty dense, too, if I'm not mistaken. Of course now, I carry around more in a device so small that it's not a mere choking hazard, but an inhilation concern should anyone inhale too deeply around it.
As for cost, right now they're being used in conjunction with existing hard drives [eet.com] as extra large buffers, so that anything "written" to the HDD very rarely needs to cause it to spin up.
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:2)
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:3, Informative)
But then everyone (including you probably) also seems to confuse gibibyes and gigabytes [nist.gov] anyway.
Slightly off topic:
It's similar to the markings on watches where the maker claims 100M water resistant, but this is a ploy, since the 100M does not mean 100m and the measurement only indcates 'safe to bath'. Most buyers don't know this and this confusion has also spread to other cheaper manufacturers...
Grr. Know your SI units and you can't get fooled!
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:5, Informative)
Gartner estimates that 16GB Flash drives will cost from about $90...
Where's the conflict? Flash chip != flash drive. Flash drives can often comprise multiple chips. Let's say we stack 8 of those 16Gb chips into one drive. How big is the flash drive going to be?
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:2, Interesting)
Now, what I AM talking about is that the computers world use 1,024 as 1KILO, not 1,000. Now that's the marketing factor, inexperienced people expect to see 80Gb hdd, what do they get? Roughly 74,5Gb.
Now the rest of the computer world usees 1,024. Now tell me marketing has nothing to do with that?
Re:Gb or GB? (Score:4, Informative)
The situation worsened when hard drives and RAM started into the megabyte realm. Is a megabye 1024*1024, 1024*1000, or 1000*1000? And if a gigabyte is a thousand megabytes does it mean 1024*1024*1024, 1024*1024*1000, or... well you get the picture.
Now as computer memories grew, so did their communications speeds. The telecommunications industry has always measured information in bits, as opposed to bytes. Not constrained by having to address these bits with other bits (as RAM and ROM manufacturers are) they did not adopt the K=1024 "standard", and followed the usual K=1000 meaning. So for them, a 56KB/S channel, meant 56000 bits (not bytes) per second.
So, with no standard for whether the b in Gb meant bits or bytes, or whether it meant 2^30 or 10^9, people started to get fed up. In the late 90's the IEC standards people got together and layed out a new standard (the "bible" one might say, if one were into puns). Lower case b is for bits. Upper case B is for bytes. Kilo (K)=1000, and Kibi (Ki)=1024.
Of course, it will take a few years for the world to adopt these standards. Old warhorses like myself (who remembers when BASIC had line numbers) will still be calling things by the old names for rest of our lives. Those of you who have never seen a rotary phone, or 8-track, or have never known a time without blogs have it easy.
One Thought... (Score:3, Interesting)
What is the burnout like???
Re:One Thought... (Score:5, Informative)
M-Systems (top flash disk producer) states this:
(copied from the website)
Top Reliability & Endurance
** 99.999% reliability
** >1,400,000 hours of actual (in the field) MTBF
** Embedded EDC/ECC, based on BCH Algorithm
** Data integrity under power-cycling
** TrueFFS® technology: bad blocks mapping-out and dynamic wear-leveling algorithms
** >5,000,000 Write/Erase cycles; Read unlimited
5-year warranty
Source link:
http://www.m-systems.com/site/en-US/Products/IDES
Re:One Thought... (Score:2, Interesting)
And that MTBF you site would be 160 years. So I see no way in hell that can be in the field, flash didn't exist 160 years ago. That throws all the other numbers into the trash.
Re:One Thought... (Score:5, Informative)
Any type of failure rate is also representive of the collection of all products being tested, not a single one.
Read the Failure Rate Wiki [wikipedia.org] entry for more information.
Re:One Thought... (Score:5, Informative)
Also important: Products like harddisk have a limited life. That harddisk with 500,000 hour MTBF will wear out after five years or 50,000 hours; no way will it last 500,000 hours. The MTBF only means: If you buy 500 harddisks and run them for 1000 hours, you can expect one to fail.
Re:One Thought... (Score:2, Funny)
Boy I'm sold!
Re:One Thought... (Score:4, Funny)
"** >1,400,000 hours of actual (in the field) MTBF "
Hmmm. 1.4 million divide by 24... that's, uh, carry the one... about 58,333 days. Which would be, uh... ah, ignore the leap years... Almost 160 years. That means they've been testing this hardware since before the Civil War!
Wow, now is that dedication or what? Where do I buy me one of these babies?
Power consumption (Score:2)
With all the advancements in computing that tend to require more power, that's a nice change. Especially since my mini-ITX system currently uses around max 35-40W already, including drives... this would likely be less if I used flash drives (an quieter).
gigawhat? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:gigawhat? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:gigawhat? (Score:3, Informative)
A Correction (Score:2)
I think the post needs a correction. It should probably read:
maybe even edging out hard drives in some PAINFULLY SLOW products in the next few yearsRe:A Correction (Score:3, Informative)
I don't know any specifics (but neither did your post, so we are even) but I build computer controlled devices that need to work in a fairly high vibration environment. Our current product runs off Win2K, and boots relatively quickly off a 2GB solid state Laptop size HDD.
We are building a new product that will be running Linux off a 256MB CF card. We are not quite done development, but it seems to run OK. It isn't working that hard though, just polling a USB control panel and outputti
Vista Won't Fit? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Vista Won't Fit? (Score:2)
Flash is ready even now (Score:5, Insightful)
The current problem is that you get only a limited number of writes to flash. TFA doesn't mention that. It is a problem but not an insurmountable one.
Re:Flash is ready even now (Score:2)
With some memory management changes (swap is a crutch anyway
Re:Flash is ready even now (Score:2)
Congratulations! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Congratulations! (Score:2)
Flash is a complementary technology, not a rival (Score:5, Interesting)
We'll most likely see Flash storage grow in cell phones and PDAs, not in notebook computers. If you were a pilot, you wouldn't just have the mechanic swap out the propeller for a Rolls Royce jet engine. You'd want the whole plane overhauled to handle the increased stress on it. Better to have a system designed from the ground up that could handle the new engine rather than try to bolt it onto an older, proven design.
Re:Flash is a complementary technology, not a riva (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not like it's something new and completely unproven. Solid-state disks (SSDs) have been used for years in server-applications, especially for large databases, where the speed of harddisks or RAID just won't cut it. This is an expensive solution, but if you have gazillions of transactions (think mastercard), it might still be cheaper than more traditional solutions (add more servers, add more disk-cache, make sure things don't fail).
Given that it has worked pretty well at both the server-side as well as in gadgets and appliances, I'd say flash-memory notebooks are going to happen pretty soon. It's just a matter of hitting the right pricepoint. Today you can (theoretically) get a 2GB SSD for the same price as a 200GB HD. This is pretty uncool, although I would believe many enthusiasts would buy it, if there were producers of cheap SSDs (today only high-end SSDs exist).
But if you could get a 20GB SSD for the same price as 200GB HD (which is a sane estimate, given the article), things start to make sense. It would be enough for running MS office on a laptop, and seriously reduce startup-time, as well as battery usage. Given it's performance, it would also be a great add-on for desktop computers (put the OS, most used applications, and swap-space on it, and use traditional harddisks for your videos/music/porn).
Re:Flash is a complementary technology, not a riva (Score:2)
Flash-based drives aren't even up to UDMA66 speed yet. For notebooks, my 60G Hitachi 7200rpm drive will be faster than flash in every situation.
Re:Flash is a complementary technology, not a riva (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Flash is a complementary technology, not a riva (Score:2)
100+MB read and about 50 MB write last I read.
For comparison, a Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 3.5" desktop drive will do about ~47 MB per second.
Re:Flash is a complementary technology, not a riva (Score:2)
The future of laptop hardrive technology is going to be a mixture of hard disk and flash memory technology.
Re:Flash is a complementary technology, not a riva (Score:2, Funny)
Well done, you have truly lived up to your username.
Re:Flash is a complementary technology, not a riva (Score:2)
1. You'd save a terrific amount of power (spinning CDs and HDs kills batteries faster than about anything).
2. In a RAID 5 array (so long as only 1 drive fails at a time), if you have a drive
Re:Flash is a complementary technology, not a riva (Score:2)
EDIT PARENT: I'm sure there are other advantages too, but this is what came off the top of my head. If we could get read/write speeds on flash drives up to the speeds DDR RAM has you could have a computer that, when unplugged unexpectedly, doesn't lose anything it wasn't writing at that very millisecond. Boy wouldn't that be a leap ahead. (Windows Vista has
Not a total replacement (Score:5, Insightful)
I, for one, welcome... oh never mind.
As flash drives become more and more popular, more dollars will pour into flash research and development. And applications will learn to accomodate the strengths and weaknesses of flash. I think we'll be seeing some really neat things over the next 10 years. Terabyte flash drive, anyone?
Re:Not a total replacement (Score:2)
Rival? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Rival? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Rival? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, NAND flash like this is good for 1,000,000 writes rather than the 100,000 of NOR flash; but yeah, even that doesn't sound like enough. I don't know though. How much is enough?
Re:Rival? (Score:2)
Smaller/thinner/longer lasting laptops. I know we're not there yet, but if I could spend $300 for a 16 GB (byte, not bit) solid state drive, I'd happily plop it into my TabletPC. The desktop can be the storage device.
10,000 writes/second for 13 years (Score:5, Informative)
With a 512-byte erase block size, that is 419 billion writes. With a 4K erase block size, that's 52 billion writes. Use a 20GB drive instead of 2GB, and you'll get 10x the writes. And, the computer can warn you before the memory stops re-writing.
5 trillion writes is 10,000 writes/second for 13 years.
Everything in it's Place. (Score:2)
It's bigger than that, it's not going to rival something so big, it's going to be faster than most drives and you are so silly I wonder if you are that way intentionally. Let's quote the article:
For mobile PCs - particularly thin-and-light models that do not require the larger hard drive capacities - the technology could extend battery life because solid-state Flash desig
peace and quiet (Score:4, Insightful)
No moving parts = tough.
No activity when quiescent - no heat.
I, for one, welcome our new NAND overlords
Sandisk v Samsung et al (Score:2)
OFFS! This is stupid. (Score:5, Interesting)
Vapordeals, Mysterymem, 16GB(?) $90. Available ???
What's the R/W speed of these things? What's the R/W burnout on these?
How many writes will they take before they fail?
Maxtor is claiming a 1 million MTBF / 5 year warranty on their 300gb drive.
No way in hell flash or any other memory is every going to compete with that,
not in price, performance, capacity or endurance.
Hard drives are so big and so cheap now that they are cheaper than blank DVD media. You're better off to archive to big drives then store them in fireproof safes than ANY other backup method. I have harddrives from the 80's that STILL have data on them that I can STILL retrieve and use, right now and I've made no serious effort to be overly protective of the drives. In other words, they've been kicking around the house in boxes on the floor. And they are still good. 20+ years later.
Flash memory may have an indefinite SHELF lifespan but you can only write to them X number of times before they fail and they are slow.
Someone is trying to sell the neophytes a bill of goods.
When Vista releases there is going to be a rush to sell more silly crap to people. More upgrades.. Oh boy..
In the meantime, I'll make due with my current system and my Linux.
And as hard drives continue to get bigger and faster and cheaper I'll just add em as I need em.
Re:OFFS! This is stupid. (Score:2, Insightful)
>Vapordeals, Mysterymem, 16GB(?) $90. Available ???
No, it is 16Gb (2GB), not 16GB. That is an order of magnitude larger... making your argument even more correct. Flash memory will probably never (in the foreseeable future) overtake or even come close to what you can do with rotating magnetic media.
Someday there might just be a 20GB flash drive for $200, and at that point in time, there will probably be a 20TB hard drive that is 10 times faster f
Re:OFFS! This is stupid. (Score:2)
As for what you can do right now, ONE TB will run you about $500.
Just 5 years ago that amount of storage capacity was SciFi movie stuff of the future.
Now it's only $500 and 3 days UPS ground away from reality.
And with HTPC here, 1TB isn't all that big of a deal.
SERIOUS HTPC people will probably want 2-3TB..
As for notebooks/laptops, 2.5" drives are growing/shrinking too.
I do not believe for a minute that NV memory drives will ever replace mag drives.
I've seen these nonsense pie in
Re:OFFS! This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
A 300 Gig IDE drive doesnt fit in a laptop.
A 300 Gig IDE drive uses loads of power.
A 300 Gig IDE drive has faster sustained transfer speed but much a longer access times than flash. Horses for courses.
Wear leveling algorithms can make the write limit of flash irrelevant.
That the interface (eg, ATA) for accessing storage media usually goes out of date before the media wears out is true for both disks and flash.
The real story here is that flash is trouncing disk in improvements in Megs per $ and will one day catch up to and overtake disk. And it will be sooner than mmost people expect.
Re:OFFS! This is stupid. (Score:2)
Yes, because 1 million writes is so not worth the 100+ MB per second read/ 50 MB per second write speed. That's the industry standard. For some extra money you can bump that to 5 million with a 5 year warranty [slashdot.org].
What does my brand new laptop do? About 20. Even the newest fancy pants Raptors peak at 80 MB per second at the edge of the disk.
Considering how late your comme
Re:OFFS! This is stupid. (Score:2)
Meh, every hard drive manufacturer has a "notoriously bad reputation" to somebody. Specific lines of hard drives can be lemons if there's some small defect in the production process, and no manufacturer has always been immune to this. IBM had its DeathStar, etc.
Re:OFFS! This is stupid. (Score:2)
It happens to some people.
I on the otherhand, have had extremely good luck with hard drives,
I've had a few die on me but they were Western Digital. WD is CRAP. I've
gone through a LOT of WD drives and I finally learned my lesson, I'll NEVER buy another WD, EVER..
I fried a few by putting the power cable on backwards with the PC running, but that was my dumb fault.
As for Maxtor, people say they are crap but I've had no complaint with them at all.
11 years to replace 3.5 inch drives (Score:5, Interesting)
Read about it here:
http://www.mattscomputertrends.com/flashvsharddis
Apples ,Oranges,Chips,Disks, and Drives. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Apples ,Oranges,Chips,Disks, and Drives. (Score:2)
Amusingly, the reason why blowing on the contacts worked was because you were causing condensation to accumulate on the contacts. The reason the contact would lose connection is that if you rub two sheets of copper together, it produces a buildup of this dark gunky substance. Instert a cartridge a few times and enough buil
Re:Apples ,Oranges,Chips,Disks, and Drives. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Flash does get firkled (Score:2, Insightful)
Read Flash Specs (Score:2)
Doesn't that make them about as good as the dye based CD-Rs that people fear will not be good for archives?
I'm not saying I'm the expert on this -- I'd appreciate it if someone could explain to me that the flash memory will actually last 40 years or so. But I doubt it.
Secured OS? (Score:3, Interesting)
Larger disk space needs counterbalance this (Score:2, Insightful)
I can't say if r > r' so much that in the course of the next few years we'll see HD disapear
How bout NOR Flash? (Score:2)
I wonder if I'm misinterpreting the meaning of NAND in this instance, where the hardware uses chained NAND gates to store values. Can't the same design be implemented using NOR's?
Re:How bout NOR Flash? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:How bout NOR Flash? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.samsung.com/Products/Semiconductor/Mem
compares I/O performance of the various technologies (the chart is on page 28, so scroll down...)
For their test rig, NAND flash yields 8.8MB/sec writes vs NOR at 0.14MB/sec. That's why NOR flash is only used for BIOS memory and other things you don't have to rewrite very often. On the flip side, NAND flash gets reads at 16.5MB/sec vs NOR at 23.9MB/sec (or 108MB/sec, presumably in some kind of burst mode - that part isn't explained).
If their OneNAND performs as well as they claim, I could see using it for a boot drive; 68MB/sec read would be fine there, 9.3MB/sec write would be ok as long as you weren't paging to it or doing much of anything else. Linux would run pretty well with those parameters, its buffer cache is good at absorbing and deferring writes; Windows 2K/XP's memory manager/cache manager purges pages too aggressively though, which would make the write throughput a serious system bottleneck.
in some products [sometime]? (Score:2, Interesting)
Gordon (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I'm not surprised (Score:3, Informative)
write-only (Score:2)
Yes but flash will overtake hard drives in most Write-Only Memory [ganssle.com] applications.
Re:Well ... (Score:2)
Re:Hell Yeah! (Score:2, Insightful)
You definitely should consider that RAM price is dropping as fast as flash memory price.
Re:Hell Yeah! (Score:2)
1. Unless you are running a 64 bit system, you can only address 4GB
2. When the power goes out, you'll need to reinstall your system
Re:Hell Yeah! (Score:2)
Re:Hell Yeah! (Score:2)
Erm... ? (Score:2)
Beats swapping over the 'net to NFS...
Re:Erm... ? (Score:2)
Re:Erm... ? (Score:2)
Noted, but proper flash filesystems can address this by relocating rewritten blocks on the device.
Though, it was amusing to think about a swap-to-flash web server getting a good ole' slashdotting, and burning up... literally.
Re:Gigabit? (Score:2)