Slashdot Mirror
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."
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?
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...
Ummmm.....No. Beach sand is mostly silicon dioxide, whereas computer chips are fabricated starting from wafers of very pure silicon.
Diamond (pure carbon) and carbon dioxide don't have similar properites either.
Sorry to get pedantic, but I'm a materials scientist, and it really pisses me off when people get these things mixed up. It is even worse when people confuse silicon (the base material for computer chips) with silicone (a polymer material used in caulking and breast implants).
--
The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.
I'm afraid >a href="http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?k ey=64758&dict=CALD">it's too late.
Besides which, the "original" quantum leap isn't "the smallest possible leap", it's a movement of a particle that should be impossible - iirc, it's either when a particle moves from point A to point B without passing through the intervening space, or when it crosses a potential barrier that (classically speaking) it's impossible for it to cross.
The idea being not that it's a giant leap forward, but that it's an unexpected, seemingly impossible event; it has since come to mean an important improvement. It does grate a little on me too, to be honest.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Will people stop confusing the word "quantum" with "small"?
A quantum leap does not mean "the smallest possible leap"; it just so happens it is the smallest possible leap. However, it means a jump from one discrete energy level to another, without passing through anything in between.
To me, that makes "a quantum leap in technology" a perfectly resonable metaphor. Albeit completely overused by marketing droids.
Carpe Daemon
OK, I'll give you a big chunk of quartz (SiO2), and you make a transitor out of it.
There are a lot of materials that go into a computer chip, and SiO2 plays an important role (mostly as a gate dielectric), though as you say, other materials have started to be substituted in. But to say that SiO2 is the useful part? You can't make a transistor out of SiO2 only, it doesn't conduct electricity.
Take a look at the MOSFET illustrated here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lateral_mosfet. svg. The oxide is SiO2, the material above that is polysilicon, but everything below that is doped single crystal silicon. You don't want grain boundaries in your transistor mucking up the electrical properties. The transistors are connected with metal interconnects, usually copper these days because it has the second-highest conductivity of all metals (only silver is better, but not by much).
Now, I'll admit that my specialty these days is oxidation of nickel-based superalloys, but I still have a Ph.D. in materials science. I'm sure someone out there knows the details of current transistor design, but I'm sure the core of it is all still silicon. The reason that you don't hear much about the silicon part is that there aren't many opportunities to improve that part of it, whereas there is a significant opportunity to make improvements to the gate dielectric. SiO2 is only used because it is easy to make by oxidizing silicon and it does not react with silicon. For a long time, it was "good enough". Low-k materials would be better, and that is why you hear about them more.
--
The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.
Actually I thought the same thing at first until I read TFA. This one uses resistor heat (retarded idea in a PC, IMO) and that one uses magnetism.