Slashdot Mirror


A Magnetic Memory Alternative to Hard Disk

Dr Occult writes "Finally, a magnetic memory chip has been manufactured in volume and released by the U.S. company Freescale. Christened MRAM (magnetoresistive random-access memory),this chip will hold information even after power has been switched off. From the BBC news article: 'Unlike flash memory, which also can keep data without power, Mram has faster read and write speeds and does not degrade over time,' and 'MRAM chips could one day be used in PCs to store an operating system, allowing computers to start up faster when switched on.'"

21 of 258 comments (clear)

  1. Freescale's PR by austinpoet · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:Freescale's PR by Phreakiture · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I believe that this is an example of coming full circle

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
  2. NOT a hard drive alternative by dsginter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    MRAM is *not* a hard drive alternative because it needs to be fabricated with traditional chip lithography. Also, MRAM cells are very large, even compared with flash memory.

    It would be extremely expensive to create an "MRAM hard drive". This is just more pump and dump for Freescale daytraders.

    --
    More
    1. Re:NOT a hard drive alternative by TransEurope · · Score: 5, Informative

      _Today_ they are larger. But tomorrow Freescale

      plans to shrink their new chips (29nm) under the

      scales of the future standard 6T-SRAMs (still 45nm).

      http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/75243

    2. Re:NOT a hard drive alternative by rwven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seeing as everything in this industry gets cheaper, faster, smaller and all around better with time, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if this ends up being a widely used alternative to flash memory. It may take years, but what doesn't... There has been news of this MRAM floating around for about 5 years now (maybe more?)...it's just finally been produced in force.

    3. Re:NOT a hard drive alternative by IAmTheDave · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't be so cynical - all progress starts with a product like this. Time will see memory capacity become denser, physical space requirements smaller, etc.

      Two years ago 40G flash (hell, my 4G USB drive) would have been laughed at. Progress will continue unabated, so let's let MRAM get its foot in the door, and see where it is in a year or two. RAM sans power requirements is a nice place to be.

      --
      Excuse my speling.
      Making The Bar Project
    4. Re:NOT a hard drive alternative by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The key isn't even speed, capacity or size ... it's economics. To be a hard drive replacement, it needs to be as cheap as hard drives. Your 4GB USB drive may be 'cheap' in your mind, but if it were as cheap as any current PATA or SATA hard drive, it would have cost $4, not $40-80 ... IOW, your USB drive is at least 10x and as much as 20x more expensive than a hard drive. For MRAM to become a viable replacement for HDDs, it has to become as cheap as HDDs.

      Only time will tell if the economies of scale kick in and make this economically viable.

    5. Re:NOT a hard drive alternative by theStorminMormon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You seem to be trapped in the current (already outdated?) paradigm of hard drive usage. If I were to put together a high-end machine right now I would certainly throw in at least 2 hard drives. A very small 10RPM drive for the OS, programs, and a much larger (but probably slower) drive for storing all my files.

      If you RTFA you'll notice that that's exactly what they mention: using the MRAM to run the OS. So, yeah, it may not work to replace your entire hard drive, but it makes a lot of sense to split hard drive usage between the files you are going to be booting from, accessing constantly, and files you only access when you have a specific need to.

      Sure, 4MB is still to small to run an OS on (yeah yeah, except linux, and that's great) - but if you're goal is to get large enough to have a bootable OS and NOT to replace an entire hard drive (especially since hard drive capacity is getting cheaper and cheaper) then I think you start to see the potential of this technology.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    6. Re:NOT a hard drive alternative by Intron · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What wearout? Imagine that you start doing writes continuously spread over a 40GB flash drive for 5-years (typical high-end HD warranty period). How many times will you write to any given sector assume that you have a good load leveling algorithm?

      Assume 15 MB/s write. 40 GB will take about 45 mins. So in 5 years, you will only write each block 175,200 times which is within the 1,000,000 writes spec for flash. And this assumes that you do no reads at all.

      Wearout is a myth with modern flash filesystem software.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
  3. Price? by bookemdano63 · · Score: 4, Informative

    It will be a while before they get their $25 / 4 megabit wholesale price to anywhere close to reasonable.
    http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB11524917130 4801944-v71_ITCad7JIwzqJZ_nfN_pacDg_20060809.html? mod=tff_main_tff_top

    1. Re:Price? by cyfer2000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The major advantage of MRAM is speed. They are extreme high speed nonvolatile RAM, even faster than DRAM. So if you need such a thing, you need to pay for it. Also, the current structure of MRAM is pretty complicated. It is made of multilayers of different metals. Depositing different metals onto silicon wafer is still something nasty though people have been depositing Aluminium and Copper for some time. There are some groups working on magnetic semiconductors, so they use common fabrication method to produce MRAM. So the price of MRAM can drop dramatically if these groups succeed. However, so far, the magnetic semiconductors are even expensive than the multilayer metals structure.

      --
      There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
  4. Everything old is new again by Billosaur · · Score: 4, Funny
    Mram chips could one day be used in PCs to store an operating system, allowing computers to start up faster when switched on.

    I predict the Commodore 64 will rise again, although this time, it will be 64 Gig!

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  5. Is bootup time really that big of an issue? by Skynet · · Score: 4, Interesting

    XP boots in about a minute, and Linux never needs to be rebooted. :)

    What other applications could this have besides boot time?

    --
    Execute? [Y/N] _
    1. Re:Is bootup time really that big of an issue? by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 5, Funny

      Instapr0n(tm)

  6. Re:more vaporware by TransEurope · · Score: 4, Informative

    First: freescale aims on the usage of MRAM in embeddet devices and microcontrollers. There will be no MRAM-Harddisk next month in the shops. 2nd: There is not only Freescale. Micromem will produce MRAM-Chips for the Aerospace industry. And IBM/Infineon already have an 16-MBit-MRAM-Chip since last year. There are also Renesas/Toshiba in the race. It's a completely new tech, you heard about years ago, when the first theories about mram came from the labs. But such a thing needs everytime many years to go to the serial production lines.

  7. Old news by dpaton.net · · Score: 4, Informative

    Freescale's MRAM technology isn't all that new...it's an old Motorola technology that they kept running with when they were spun off. It's taken them a few years to get going again, but it's already been done for a while.

    That said, MRAM ain't a HD replacement yet. No one outside the aerospace industry is using it for storage right now that I'm aware of, and even if someone was, making a large enough FRAM based drive with 4Mb chips is HARD. 2 chips for every MB. 2048 chips for every GB. a 500GB FRAM disk would require 1,024,000 of these chips, requiring nearly 2,500 sqft of PCB space, and more power than a pile of overclocked P4s (~9mA * 3.3V * 1,024,000 chips = 30.4128kW at IDLE). Even if someone could build that, it'd be farking huge, run inconcievably hot, be incredibly power hungry, and sell for an obscenely expensive price, even for the most extr33m gadget hunters.

    Wait for 32 and 64Mb chips. Then we'll talk.

    Right now I'm too busy working with a serial FRAM from Ramtron to write more.

    --
    This is not a sig. this is a duck. quack.
  8. TV not PC by ds_job · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't want this in my PC to boot my O/S quicker. I want this in my TV / Video / STB / whatever so that I can turn them off at night and not have to wait for ages for them to be reinitialised / scan for frequencies / whatever they actually do when they are turned on. It would also make me not have to reprogram my favourites and display settings, which currently do not survive a power cycle. Get these into modern A/V technology and we can finally do away with the necessity of standby just to speed up watching the TV in the morning.

  9. Article misses the point almost completely... by Gadzinka · · Score: 4, Informative
    I am not really suprised, that no one bothered to google for MRAM, not even tried to look it up in WP. What's missing in the article and most of the comments is that MRAM is one of those holy grails that most of the industry is chasing, because it promises great returns on investment. Basically MRAM (theoretically) can be:
    • as fast as SRAM (i.e. cache in your processor)
    • as small (i.e. as hight density) as DRAM; single MRAM memory cell is two magnets instead of two conductors of capacitor in DRAM, but the (theoretical) size is of the same order of magnitude
    • non-volatile like Flash, but with random access and orders of magnitude faster, w/o "write penalty" and w/o erase/write cycles limit
    • much less energy-hungry than SRAM, DRAM and Flash while working; when not working it can keep information at least as well as Flash
    It's in development since the eighties and it will take time before we "get there" but it is possible, that one day MRAM could replace cache, main memory and memory cards in our computers.

    When? I have no idea, but AFAIR transistors didn't get from prototype to 65nm in a decade. Hopefully engineergs and managers in some semiconductor companies have longer attention span than an avarage slashdot reader.

    Robert
    --
    Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
  10. Slow Bubbles by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been hearing about these kinds of devices since "bubble memory.

    Why can't I get a motherboard with 500MB Flash for storing an image of system memory exactly after the OS is loaded and initialized, that is blitted over to RAM and then tweaked (system clock, network counters, etc) in a few milliseconds? All the "loading" from storage to RAM includes minutes of computation like a second "compilation" that's practically identical every time I start the machine. How much computing power is wasted on that redundant exercise every day, around the world? I'd like to reinit only when the startup becomes corrupt, which a "known good" ROM instance could avoid better than the current chaotic process.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  11. Re:Back to the past.... by WebCowboy · · Score: 4, Informative

    MRAM is in some ways a modern take on 1960's era "Core Memory" technology. There are similarities between both, however core memory was not semiconductor-based--it was a plane of copper wires woven together with little ferrite rings strung on where wires intersected. As such is is pretty low density: 16 Kbit of core memory took up 250 cm^2 of area. With MRAM the method of operation is the same and it also involves reversing polarity of magnetic fields. However there are no ferrite cores; MRAM consists of a sandwich of conductor grids around memory cells. Like with core memory an entire row of a grid can be written to in one operation--you charge one "row" line on the write grid and all the columns you want to flip and they all change at once.

    Reading MRAM is simpler than core memory becasue core memory had no read operation--it had "flip to zero" and "flip to one" and a "sense" line--the sense line would emit a pulse if a core element changed state. To read core memory, you had to do a "flip to zero" and watch the sense line--if it pulsed then a one was in the cell and you had to do a "flip to one" to restore it. If there was no pulse then it was already zero. With MRAM reading simply involves measuring the resistance of the insulating layer of a memory cell (the insulating material has the property where resistance increases as the magnetic field passing through it increases). IIRC there is nothing preventing parallel reads either. MRAMs are also much denser--megabits can fit in 0.25 cm^2

    The "MRAM hard drive" thing may be hyperbole right now, but it looks like development of MRAM rechnology is significantly outpacing Moores Law. MRAM is also potentially as fast as SRAM and as dense as SDRAM--without the need for refresh circuitry so designs can be greatly simplified. Further downsizing could make it a good flash replacement. The biggest hurdle could be reduction...

  12. Found the datasheet... by jcr · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."