IBM Makes First Racetrack Memory Chip

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Makes First Racetrack Memory Chip

Posted by Soulskill on Monday December 5, 2011 @08:07AM from the write-fast-read-left-write-fast-read-left dept.

holy_calamity writes "For several years, we've followed the progress of IBM's revolutionary 'racetrack' memory, which stores data inside nanowires for several years. Now Big Blue has made the first prototype integrated onto a single chip, using the CMOS processing technique used in commercial chip fabs. It's still a research prototype, but goes some way to validate IBM's claim that the technology could be commercialized."

51 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

I was disappointed by Ukab+the+Great · 2011-12-05 08:11 · Score: 3, Funny

to find that the article has nothing to do with Deep Blue simulating a bunch of dogs chasing a fake rabbit.
1. Re:I was disappointed by Forty+Two+Tenfold · 2011-12-05 19:45 · Score: 2
  
  For several years, we've followed the progress of IBM's revolutionary 'racetrack' memory, which stores data inside nanowires for several years.
  For several years, we've been complaining about slashdot's editors' inadequate skills for several years.
  
  --
  Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
2. Re:I was disappointed by cyclomedia · 2011-12-05 22:06 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I thought it meant the data could be stored for several years?
  
  --
  If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
3. Re:I was disappointed by smi.james.th · 2011-12-05 23:48 · Score: 1
  
  I got that impression from TFS also.
  
  --
  One thing I know, and that is that I am ignorant...
4. Re:I was disappointed by Luckyo · 2011-12-06 00:22 · Score: 1
  
  Funnily, we were also complaining about readers' lack of reading comprehension.
5. Re:I was disappointed by tehcyder · 2011-12-06 02:29 · Score: 1
  
  I thought it meant the data could be stored for several years?
  It does, it's just a lazily constructed sentence
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Finally by GameboyRMH · 2011-12-05 08:17 · Score: 3, Funny

This will give computers the ability to gain performance through the use of red paint and stickers!

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
1. Re:Finally by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-05 08:19 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Stay away from the NASCAR version. It only works for programs stuck in loops.
2. Re:Finally by jellomizer · 2011-12-05 08:28 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Will this will allow Programming to become a full fledged sport. Surround by folks around the country taking it as a opportunity to drink of oversize "beer" cans. Cheering as code fails to compile or causes a major system failure in the last 10 minutes.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
3. Re:Finally by Jeng · 2011-12-05 08:30 · Score: 1
  
  Finally my Twin-Turbo video card will pay off!
  http://www.msi.com/product/vga/NX8600GT-Twin-Turbo.html
  vroom vroom
  Word of warning, do not hit the little red button when the computer is on.
  
  --
  Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
4. Re:Finally by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-05 08:30 · Score: 0
  
  As a sysadmin at a SaaS development shop, I already cheer when code fails to compile. Devs never seem to find it that funny though, no sense of humor.
5. Re:Finally by demonbug · 2011-12-05 08:37 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Stay away from the NASCAR version. It only works for programs stuck in loops.
  That's why I prefer the P2P versions, like Rally. Even with the F1 version Europeans seem partial to, no matter how fancy the execution gets you are still just running through a loop and end up back in the same place you started.
end of GC? by StripedCow · 2011-12-05 08:37 · Score: 1

Will this be the end of garbage collection?

--
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Dec 2010 Slashdot Comments by clyde_cadiddlehopper · 2011-12-05 08:41 · Score: 5, Insightful

Go back and read the comments on the Dec 2010 Slashdot item. A great deal of ire was vented over racetrack memory being in the 10-to-15-year-where's-my-flying-car distant future. And here we sit 12 months later with a functioning CMOS chip. I can't wait to fly around the block.

--
Obi-Wan: "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were sudden
1. Re:Dec 2010 Slashdot Comments by Rockoon · 2011-12-05 09:47 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  And here we sit 12 months later with a functioning CMOS chip that stores only one bit per wire instead of actually being racetrack memory.
  
  There, fixed that for you.
  
  --
  "His name was James Damore."
2. Re:Dec 2010 Slashdot Comments by mdmkolbe · 2011-12-05 09:49 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, but then the second page says "the IBM work doesn't yet demonstrate all of the key components that make racetrack memory desirable", so I guess we technically have a flying car, but not the kind that people want.
3. Re:Dec 2010 Slashdot Comments by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-05 11:01 · Score: 0
  
  So ... a Terrafugia then?
4. Re:Dec 2010 Slashdot Comments by PolygamousRanchKid+ · 2011-12-05 11:52 · Score: 1
  
  . . . that stores only one bit per wire . . .
  Yes, but imagine a series of tubes built with these wires . . . and there ya' got an Internet, don't ya . . . ?
  Oh, and the US military has funded the aviation industry and built your flying car.
  It's called a cruise missile.
  Seats four, and a bomb in the trunk.
  DVD Player extra.
  
  --
  Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
5. Re:Dec 2010 Slashdot Comments by Surt · 2011-12-05 12:08 · Score: 1
  
  It's a flying car, just with minor flaws like it only holds one passenger, and the passenger arrives dead.
  
  --
  "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
6. Re:Dec 2010 Slashdot Comments by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-05 19:46 · Score: 0
  
  I have seen seminars by the leading cientist in this line of research. They have something that works, not only with CMOS yet. I am sure the two lines will merge and it will work.
IBM rules by lucm · 2011-12-05 08:45 · Score: 5, Insightful

People underestimate the value of all the R&D IBM is doing. They spend a lot of money on this kind of research, and they do it seriously. And they don't look for the latest fad to blow the mind of consumers - they build for the long run.
Ok, their GUIs usually make my eyes bleed and the setup for some of their products is painful (Tivoli anyone?). But IBM is moving forward; their cloud offering, which was a complete joke a few years ago, is getting pretty good. Their stuff does not shine like Apple, it does not integrate like Microsoft, but it works pretty well.

--
lucm, indeed.
1. Re:IBM rules by gentryx · 2011-12-05 08:58 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  IBM is the company which gets the most patents awarded. Every single year. Since decades. The don't do research out of goodwill, but for profit. Yes, not just shortsighted, but for the long haul. That's why they still exist. Since 100 years.
  It's hard to compare IBM to Apple, since they target completely different customers: Apple is cosumers, IBM is business.
  
  --
  Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
2. Re:IBM rules by The+Askylist · 2011-12-05 09:06 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  All well and good, but "racetrack" memory, when all is said and done, is just a reimplementation of the mercury delay lines that were used for storage in the Leo machines back in the 1950s.
  Different, but still the same concept of cycling the bits round a circuit and reading them sequentially.
  I'd shout "Prior Art" at it.
3. Re:IBM rules by gentryx · 2011-12-05 09:18 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I'm not an expert on racetrack memory, but yeah: I'd love to see so much more patents invalidated because of prior art. Today, patents seldom serve their original purpose. When I was at IBM they admitted that they mostly used the patents to defend against lawsuits from other companies which were claiming infringement with their own patents. Every big player in the business does this (as can be seen in the recent smartphone patent wars), but that's leading off topic...
  
  --
  Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
4. Re:IBM rules by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-05 09:28 · Score: 0, Interesting
  
  When I was at IBM they admitted that they mostly used the patents to defend against lawsuits from other companies which were claiming infringement with their own patents.
  They were lying to you. IBM licenses their patent portfolio for *billions* of dollars every year. That's not "self defense".
5. Re:IBM rules by Freelancealchemy · 2011-12-05 09:41 · Score: 1
  
  > Ok, their GUIs usually make my eyes bleed and the setup for some of their products is painful (Tivoli anyone?)
  Definitely. Tivoli is such a pain to setup. TDI, TAM, iTIM, TEM...even the middleware is a nightmare of an install for a setup. Having to use Xming/Reflections for middleware component installation on an AIX box is just annoying....
6. Re:IBM rules by swillden · 2011-12-05 10:17 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  When I was at IBM they admitted that they mostly used the patents to defend against lawsuits from other companies which were claiming infringement with their own patents.
  Mmm, I think you misunderstood, or the presentation only addressed one sort of patents. IBM makes lots of money from licensing its patents. There is a difference, though, which is that the patents that IBM licenses (by and large, there may be exceptions) are "legitimate". They're real, serious advances in the art which are of real value to their licensees, and not something that any random engineer would come up with off the top of their head when faced with a similar problem. Most of the patents IBM licenses for big bucks are for things like lithography processes, techniques for increasing disk storage density... and this racetrack memory.
  I no longer work for IBM, but I did spend 14 years there and while I have many (many!) other criticisms of the company, I think their approach to patents is a good one.
  
  --
  Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
7. Re:IBM rules by tsotha · 2011-12-05 10:20 · Score: 1
  
  IBM is the company which gets the most patents awarded. Every single year.
  
  Sadly, in and of itself that means nothing. Patents vary widely in quality.
8. Re:IBM rules by MobyDisk · 2011-12-05 10:21 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  IBM may well cite that prior art in their patent application. Contrary to what Slashdot may make you believe, prior art does not invalidate patents. Most patents explicitly list the prior art that led them their. The fact that someone did this with a mercury delay line would in no way invalidate a patent on doing it electronically. This is certainly novel and not obvious. You wouldn't invalidate a patent on a transistor because someone created a switch out of water and gears 100 years ago.
  This is exactly the kind of good research that patents are intended to protect. Companies spending time and money to try and solve a problem no one has solved before in order to advance technology. If IBM truly delivers a memory chip that is an order of magnitude smaller and/or faster than DRAM they deserve the royalties from that patent. We should happily pay it in each chip we buy knowing that the patent system gave them an incentive to push technology.
9. Re:IBM rules by gentryx · 2011-12-05 10:38 · Score: 1
  
  I can only say what I've been told. However, I didn't want to create the impression that I despised of IBM's patent politics. The hardly ever attack (troll) with their patents and act very reasonable regarding prior art.
  That said, I'd distinguish between two issues here: #1 trivial patents vs. "real" inventions and #2 patents as a means to drive innovation vs. patents as a war chest to fight off competition. Regarding #1: while I don't have any papers to back up that claim, I've got the impression that IBM's patents are very seldom trivial ones. If a /. article raves about another trivial patent, then it's often from MS, Apple or Amazon, but never from Big Blue. Regarding #2 (patents and licensing them), I'd argue that technology is moving so fast today, that making an invention alone yields so much benefit to the inventor. He can enter the market months or even years earlier. Competition that is merely reverse engineering or imitating the products will always trail behind.
  
  --
  Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
10. Re:IBM rules by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-05 10:55 · Score: 0
  
  AIX box? how long ago was this? :P
  Damn kids, get off my lawn!
11. Re:IBM rules by DeathElk · 2011-12-05 11:22 · Score: 1
  
  38% Unix market share and growing. Just dropped some dollars on Power7 HW running AIX a few months ago.
12. Re:IBM rules by TheRaven64 · 2011-12-05 11:35 · Score: 2
  
  That was my first thought to. Of course, it's a reimplementation of mercury delay lines in the same way that an ion drive is a reimplementation of a V2, so it probably does deserve some credit...
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
13. Re:IBM rules by TheInternetGuy · 2011-12-05 12:28 · Score: 1
  
  I almost modded you down just for bringing nightmarish memories of Tivoli back into my conscious mind. Do you know how long it has taken me to successfully repress those memories? Nevertheless I will refrain from down-modding and instead I will send you the bill from my shrink.
  
  --
  If my comment didn't sound as good in your head as it did in mine, then I guess we all know who's to blame
14. Re:IBM rules by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-05 14:08 · Score: 1
  
  No. No nope no. This is the kind of tech that does deserve a patent. This isn't, "we stuck a clock radio on it." This is a spintronic device that stores data sequentially. The physics is different, the implementation is different. The fact that the output is the same has nothing to do with the originality of the device.
15. Re:IBM rules by drinkypoo · 2011-12-05 14:40 · Score: 1
  
  Heh heh. The setup for Tivoli is so bad that you can pay them millions just to get it installed... and then you have to run Tivoli. Still pretty amazing, but boy is it obfuscated. When I worked in support only one person really knew each product on average... and I knew inventory, and I don't work there any more :D
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
16. Re:IBM rules by Thing+1 · 2011-12-05 15:04 · Score: 1
  
  (Tivoli anyone?)
  Was better as just a holiday...
  
  --
  I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
17. Re:IBM rules by lucm · 2011-12-05 15:25 · Score: 2
  
  38% Unix market share and growing. Just dropped some dollars on Power7 HW running AIX a few months ago.
  Power7 is making me question the theory of evolution because it is "Intelligent Design" ;-)
  
  --
  lucm, indeed.
18. Re:IBM rules by lucm · 2011-12-05 15:32 · Score: 1
  
  All well and good, but "racetrack" memory, when all is said and done, is just a reimplementation of the mercury delay lines that were used for storage in the Leo machines back in the 1950s.
  Different, but still the same concept of cycling the bits round a circuit and reading them sequentially.
  I'd shout "Prior Art" at it.
  Let's play Prior Art Jeopardy: "I am a technology that provides an abstraction layer allowing components written in different languages to interact".
  1) What is the .Net Framework CLR
  2) What is a web service
  3) What is CORBA
  4) What is CICS
  Based on the notion of "prior art", guess who would get the patent...
  
  --
  lucm, indeed.
19. Re:IBM rules by lucm · 2011-12-05 15:38 · Score: 1
  
  I almost modded you down just for bringing nightmarish memories of Tivoli back into my conscious mind. Do you know how long it has taken me to successfully repress those memories?
  Nevertheless I will refrain from down-modding and instead I will send you the bill from my shrink.
  If you want to have a surreal experience, visit an IBM conference or trade show (such as the IBM Tech University) and go for a drink with a bunch of Tivoli consultants. Yep, people who have spent their days in Tivoli, for years. They are a special breed, very resilient.
  
  --
  lucm, indeed.
20. Re:IBM rules by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-05 15:49 · Score: 1
  
  If Dave Haynie (at the time with Commodore, I was working for Motorola) would care to contribute to what may be misremembered on my part, I had a conversation with him about how Commodore dealt with IBM. He called it the "Stack-o-Patents (tm)" attack (or was it defense?). Once a year or so, IBMs lawyers would come visit Commodore to discuss licensing issues and bring with them their Stack-o-Patents while getting Commodore's lawyers to bring out theirs, as well. A few engineers would quickly riffle through the others patents to toss out those that weren't germaine to the discussion, then a ruler would be used to measure the height of each stack. The difference in the heights determined the licensing fee for that year.
  Apocryphal or not, I always loved that story.
  And, Dave, if you are reading this, post a quick thread reply, I would like to get back in touch with you.
21. Re:IBM rules by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-05 16:41 · Score: 0
  
  Seeing the damage some claim, when infringing, they could still do it primary to defend themselves and just decide to earn some extra money on it.
  Look at the apple/samsung thing. I don't believe that that will have been a cheap thing. samsung losing the ability to do business in several countries for a bunch of time will have been costly.
22. Re:IBM rules by dkf · 2011-12-05 22:43 · Score: 2
  
  IBM is the company which gets the most patents awarded. Every single year.
  Sadly, in and of itself that means nothing. Patents vary widely in quality.
  Yeah, but most of IBM's patents are the good ones. Won't say all — someone's bound to find a counterexample — but the vast majority are in areas where patents work fine and have always worked. (For example, if you're doing advanced chip design then you're working in an area where there masses of IBM patents, mostly expired.)
  Patents are a problem only when they are unclear, over-broad, and insufficiently innovative. Alas, too many in the computing area are like that, but IBM's seem to be much less of a problem than most. Try picking on Apple or a patent troll instead.
  
  --
  "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
23. Re:IBM rules by tehcyder · 2011-12-06 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  FYI "Since decades" and "since 100 years" aren't English phrases. You need to replace "since" with "for".
  
  I have lived in this house since 2001, so I have lived there for ten years.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
24. Re:IBM rules by gentryx · 2011-12-06 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  Again what learned, as one would say in Germany -- literally. ;-) I didn't know that one, so thanks!
  
  --
  Computer simulation made easy -- LibGeoDecomp
25. Re:IBM rules by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-06 04:13 · Score: 0
  
  It is very similar to bubble or twistor memory though.
26. Re:IBM rules by hitmark · 2011-12-06 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  IBM, Samsung, Nokia, Motorola, all seem to hold technical patents of some sort or other.
  
  --
  comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
27. Re:IBM rules by hitmark · 2011-12-06 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  I wonder if we will see racetrack vs memristor benchmarks in the future, with the attendant flamewars...
  
  --
  comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
experience dress by bridedays · 2011-12-11 19:34 · Score: 1

experience dress So you have to maintain an offered views Empire Prom Dresses inside wedding experience party attire the suggestion of one's spending price range does not allow as well as much more than customized Tea Length Bridesmaid Dresses , reduce your expectations to take component in an informal wedding experience dress. it may be with the wedding experience party attire wholesale Sheath Wedding Dresses .YQ