Intel Previews Potential Replacement for Flash Memory
GeeksAreSexy writes "Eweek has an article up about the invention of a new kind of nonvolatile memory technology that could one day replace traditional flash memory. Unlike traditional flash memory, chips using this new technology will be able to execute code with performance, and sustain millions of read/write cycles without dying." From the article: "This is a case in which 'Necessity is the mother of invention' is very true. We were forced to look for something else, completely different. That's why we decided to invest in PCM ... There are definitely limits to what you can do with our current flash methodology. There needs to be a complete quantum leap somewhere along the line to push everything forward. We believe PCM are going to be that quantum leap."
... and here I tought naively we could kiss goodbye to Macrobe Flash.
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up.
Just my 2c worth but I remember seeing this in a story (from Samsung) using the same technology at least 12 months ago Is this a reissue?
So is this better or worse than that other "flash replacement" memory we heard about on /. the other week? You know, the one that's supposedly got the best parts of DRAM, hard disks and flash all in one?
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Hardly news then, right?
Meta will eat itself
"...We believe PCM are going to be that quantum leap." Shouldn't it be ...We believe PCM is going to be that quantum leap?
Quoth the article:
PCM chips use the same material, chalcogenide, that's used inside to store data in a rewritable optical discs.
For a system designed to "sustain millions of read/write cycles", this seems a bit strange -- last I heard, CD-RW disks were limited to a few hundred rewrites, never mind millions.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
The main problem that I forsee is that it seems to me like os many different companies are pursuing their own form of what will be the successor to flash. What kind of implementation will this have, and is it going to negatively affect the customer by increasing the number of devices that are incompatible?
Justin - Don't be afraid of my blog, it won't bite.
PCM? What happened to the nanotubes? I wan't my petaflop-performance-lighter-than-air-stronger-tha n-steel-elevator-into-space-that-will-store-my-pr0 n-collection to replace my flash thumb drive.
(sigh) So many empty promises.
Nothing sucks like a Vax, nothing blows like a PowerMac G4
that they were manufacturing this new memory out of the recycled parts from millions of discarded RDRAM chips.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
... I had a faint hope of Intel having a Flash Player 9 for Linux and AMD64 ready. Yes, I feel stupid now, but I'll call it preoccupation.
my other sig is a 500 page novel
This is so offtopic it's not even funny. Have you ever even considered RTFB? (blurb)
Global warming is a cube.
...they'd end up on Enterprise.
These stories are free but worth money.
I know this is off topic, but there is never anything interesting about how annoying Flash SDK costs are.
Errrm, never mind RTFA, RTF-summary!
Flash memory, not web-animation-Flash. (Not The Flash who runs very fast, and not Flash Gordon who fights Ming the Merciless. Also, not Flash the bathroom-cleaning liquid).
What the hell? I want two hundred lines of "I will RTFA", and I want it handwritten.
I just hope Intel will use time travel to fix the brain-damaged design of their early processors, instead of just using them to ensure that Gordon Moore doesn't lose that famous journal.
would people please stop using "quantum leap" a say "giant leap"??
pretty please?
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
The headline has been changed clandestinely and the word "memory" has been added... in case you are wondering about some of the comments before this one.
Like many people here, I too saw the headline and thought some replacement for macromedia flash was on its way...
int i=0;
while (i200)
std::cout "I did RTFA, but flash memory is as exciting as concrete pouring." std::endl;
The chief technology officer for Intel's Flash Memory Group, Ed Doller, is the guy quoted as calling for a quantum leap. He's probably a marketing guy, not a technologist. No harm done because CTO tends to be more of a marketing position than a tech one. You would hope for a stronger mind in that position though.
Or perhaps he's typical of the slashdot posters who don't understand basic quantum theory. Check wikipedia under the vernacular usage heading.
Personally, I like the phrase "quantum leap" because it is a handy litmus test. Folks using the "big big jump" interpretation go into the talking head bin. Others go into the technologist bin.
What? Me? Sig?
... if only Intel (or at least Freescale) was behind it. With Ramtron beeing the champion of FeRAM ( FRAM(R) ) and producing only FeRAM memory products (and a 8051 clone micro) for niche applications, it simply won't fly. Both Intel and Freescale are following their own paths of finding Flash replacement.
Ferroelectric RAM - no heating memory cells to erase them as in PCM. I see it as denser, faster, more cool, more mature tech. Alas it uses lead-zirconium-titanat (one toxic notorious polutant, one rare, one expensive element compound)
...was certainly a "quantum leap", not a small step. I don't know the etymology of the phrase, but I always thought it had something to do with the revolutionary transition from classical to modern physics, and all the resulting technology that stemmed from that. I could be wrong of course, or right. I won't know until I measure.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Why are we stuck recycling an acronym already done to death by analog-to-digital and Mexican communists?
I say, bring back twistor memory and bubble memory. Sure, they worked like crap, but their names were just so much cooler!
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
No RAM, just a BFO RAMdisk and a big on CPU cache.
Deleted
[snip] execute code with performance, and sustain millions of read/write cycles without dying.
Wow! That means that in the worst case, it will last SEVERAL seconds!!!
(Wouldn't it be better to have something like trillions of read/write cycles, so we know it will at least last a few years?)
An excellent regurgitation of this whole thing is over at mymac.com
SOLID STATE MACINTOSHES?
. . . PCM chips do seem to be the long term replacement for flash memory chips, which is why you are reading this blog at MyMac.com. Apple Computer has a vested interest in INTEL and its advances, and we all know, if only subconsciously, that all computers some day will be driveless solid state devices with no moving parts at all (right?). Therefore, it is just a matter of time, because with the new PCM volatile/solid state chips, it may not be long before we see Steve Jobs introduce one of these in Macintosh form, at the Keynote at MacWorld.
. . . In fact I have one of these self-same PCM chips, wired into my portacath in my chest. It is excellent for waking-up-running, hitting-the-deck, raring-to-go, sort of experience in the morning. Although, the programmed chip does take into account my bum ticker, so the experience is sort of in slow motion, but still better than a double shot from the nearby FourBucks coffee shop, and I don't have to get dressed to go get it.
Regards,
Ro-ge'r Bo r*n
"I am really looking forward to living in the moment."
I can see a day where this memory is used in place of DRAM and application files are permanently stored in memory even when the system is off.
I think when people talk about "quantum leaps", they are forgetting two things: (1) quantum leaps are usually tiny, and (2) it is unpredictable when they happen. Is that the metaphor Intel wants?
Quantum is used in quantum mechanics because classical chemistry said that electron energies (for example) scale continuously, but experimental work shows that there are discrete energy jumps, i.e. there are fractional energy levels that are not phycically possible for a given system. The language itself doesn't care that this happens on the Angstrom level or the kilometer level. A "quantum leap" does not mean a "giant leap" or a "small leap," it means a "discernable, measurable leap."
Spanish speakers (similar words exist for other Romance languages) will if they think about recognize that the word "cuanto" is descended from the Latin "quantum." "Cuanto" is usually translated into English as "how much" or "amount of."
"You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
PRAM has been in development for years, and intel is nowhere on the map until now... too many "new memory" types and who knows which will win out... FeRAM, CRAM, MRAM are just a few that immediately comes to mind...
Actually, it's worth noting that NEC got access time for bubble memories down to 16.5ms, roughly a third the speed of disk drives at the time. The only machine I ever used that had bubble memory was a TI 765 portable data terminal. It had 20K, which allowed the user to enter text (or in our case, enter data in response to a canned program) off-line, then upload it the next time they could get to a phone. Bubble memory was far preferable to the cassette tapes used in the earlier models of the "Silent 700" series, as our users were dragging these terminals from cornfield to cornfield, entering insect infestation data. More dust, dirt and industrial chemicals than most systems get, that's for sure.
Just junk food for thought...
What the fuck does "execute code with performance" even mean? Does it imply good performance, or just some arbitrary kind of performance? If I give it a chance, will it do a hip-hop dance?
---GEC
I'm but the humble pupil, seeking to snatch the scratchbuilt pebble from the master's fully articulated hand
Is this *really* a quantum leap?
To me, PCM stands for "Pulse Code Modulation" because that's how what my childhood Casio synth referred to its drum samples.
I don't want to disturb you but doest't "quantum" mean "amount" or "magnitude"?& searchLoc=0&cmpType=relaxed&relink=on§Hdr=on&s pellToler=std )
(See http://dict.leo.org/?search=menge&lp=ende&lang=de
In that case shouldn't you ask "quantum of what size?" or "quantum of what?", because the quantum of the leap is undefined?
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Did anyone else have a momentary mental picture of a bloated Kirk gasping out "Set Phase Ram to stun!"