Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Samsung Unveils World's First 10nm-class 8 Gb LPDDR5 DRAM (betanews.com)

Posted by msmash on from the for-the-record dept.

BrianFagioli writes: Today, Samsung announces yet another milestone, this time with its low-powered memory. You see, Samsung has created what it calls the "industry's first 10-nanometer (nm) class 8-gigabit (Gb) LPDDR5 DRAM." The company promises significant power reduction -- up to 30 percent over LPDDR4X DRAM. This should be important for the upcoming 5G explosion. "The 8Gb LPDDR5 boasts a data rate of up to 6,400 megabits per second (Mb/s), which is 1.5 times as fast as the mobile DRAM chips used in current flagship mobile devices (LPDDR4X, 4266Mb/s). With the increased transfer rate, the new LPDDR5 can send 51.2 gigabytes (GB) of data, or approximately 14 full-HD video files (3.7GB each), in a second," says Samsung.

The Galaxy-maker further says, "The 10nm-class LPDDR5 DRAM will be available in two bandwidths -- 6,400Mb/s at a 1.1 operating voltage (V) and 5,500Mb/s at 1.05V -- making it the most versatile mobile memory solution for next-generation smartphones and automotive systems."

30 of 56 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    14 full-HD video files (3.7GB each), in a second

    That's over 10 Trump pee-pee tapes.

    Surely that depends on how many Russian hookers he pays to pee on him and how full their bladders are.

  2. 6400 Mbps != 51.2 GB/s by sanosuke001 · · Score: 1

    Am I missing something or are the transfer amounts being interpolated over a number of 8gb chips on a single DRAM module? It says 6400 Mbps transfer which is 51.2 GB/s which doesn't seem like the same thing at all.

    51.2GB = 419430.4 Mb = 65.536 times the stated transfer speed of 6400 mbps. It seems odd that the transfer speed is exactly a power of two...

    --
    -SaNo
    1. Re:6400 Mbps != 51.2 GB/s by Desler · · Score: 2

      Yes, you're missing that 6,400 Mbps is the data rate per pin. There's more than one pin on the memory bus.

    2. Re:6400 Mbps != 51.2 GB/s by Desler · · Score: 1

      Your math is off by a factor of 8. 51.2 GB/s is for a 64-bit bus.

    3. Re:6400 Mbps != 51.2 GB/s by iCEBaLM · · Score: 4, Informative

      51.2GByte * 8 = 409.6Gbit
      409.6Gbit / 6.4Gbit = 64

      So it's 6.4Gbps (6400Mbps) per pin on a 64bit bus.

  3. Re:Bad math? by Desler · · Score: 5, Informative

    6400 Mbps is the data rate per pin. The higher data rate would be for a 64-bit memory bus.

  4. Re:Bad math? by Desler · · Score: 1

    6400 Mbps would be a 1-bit bus.

  5. Why would you need 10 gigabit on mobile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful


    This should be important for the upcoming 5G explosion. "The 8Gb LPDDR5 boasts a data rate of up to 6,400 megabits per second (Mb/s), which is 1.5 times as fast as the mobile DRAM chips used in current flagship mobile devices (LPDDR4X, 4266Mb/s).

    Full motion compressed HD video is something like 25-40 megabits/second. What could you possibly do with gigabit speeds on a mobile phone? Then, even that's not fast enough and we need it 1.5 times faster?

    Whoever wrote this article doesn't understand computing. The memory bandwidth isn't needed for WAN communication, it's needed for more heavy computing tasks.

    1. Re:Why would you need 10 gigabit on mobile? by Desler · · Score: 1

      It's a Brian Fagioli article. Of course the person is clueless.

    2. Re:Why would you need 10 gigabit on mobile? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      8K display?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:Why would you need 10 gigabit on mobile? by Desler · · Score: 1

      Huh? You're statement makes no sense. What does system memory bandwidth have to do with the video signal bandwidth of the display interface?

    4. Re:Why would you need 10 gigabit on mobile? by darkain · · Score: 1

      First, the connection isnt one-to-one, it is one-to-many. Using time-division-multiplexing (TDM), this bandwidth is shared between several client devices (cell phones, tables, etc) per radio channel. Next, as you increase bandwidth, you can decrease the length of real-time used for each time slice within a TDM system, and with a lower time slice, latency is reduced.

      So, while YOU as an INDIVIDUAL may not need 10gbps on your personal cell phone, when you're in a building with 50,000k other people (sporting event, large convention), it becomes highly worth it to have the additional bandwidth to share among the multitude of devices around.

    5. Re:Why would you need 10 gigabit on mobile? by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Full motion compressed HD video is something like 25-40 megabits/second.

      That's compressed, like you said. But before it goes to the display, it needs to be uncompressed, which involves a number of operations for each bit, involving multiple memory accesses.

    6. Re:Why would you need 10 gigabit on mobile? by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Running 3D games do require every bit you can give.
      A regular PS4 for example have 176GB/s of memory speed access.

    7. Re:Why would you need 10 gigabit on mobile? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      To make a $1100 phone stand out from a $250 phone. Why stop at 4K and HDR tech? Get more pixels per inch. That needs more hardware. Then the new device can have a 8K sticker.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    8. Re:Why would you need 10 gigabit on mobile? by ausekilis · · Score: 1

      But what if I want to watch 300 HD streams at once?

  6. Re:Bad math? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    maybe you should take this nerd shit elsewhere
    this is slashdot we are a elon musk / facebook / apple fan blog

  7. so you can hit your cap and rack up $10/gig overag by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    so you can hit your cap and rack up $10/gig overages so we can pay off the new 5G network in 6mo

  8. Latency? by lobiusmoop · · Score: 2

    Article doesn't mention if the DRAM latency is any better or not... (DRAM latency hasn't changed significantly in the last 15 years)

    --
    "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
    1. Re:Latency? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      As long as we have the speed, does the latency really matter?

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    2. Re:Latency? by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      Uh Hell Yeah?
      That's what RAM is used for after all.

    3. Re:Latency? by TeknoHog · · Score: 2

      It depends on what you mean by "speed". Usually, perceived computing speed involves both throughput and latency in some way. IMHO, interactive and realtime operations are much more about latency, while throughput only helps you process more stuff per frame. I'm not into gaming, but I'd expect that bad latency can easily make things completely unplayable. Bad throughput, OTOH, will only mean things like lower graphics quality. For a non-realtime look at latency, one of my favourite quotes:

      "Why people think "performace" means "throughput" is something I'll never understand. Throughput is _always_ secondary to latency, and really only becomes interesting when it becomes a latency number (ie "I need higher throughput in order to process these jobs in 4 hours instead of 8" - notice how the real issue was again about _latency_)." -- Linus Torvalds

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    4. Re:Latency? by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      Latency matters a lot. In computing, that's an aspect that is too often overlooked.

      Increasing speed is easy, just add more of the same, but decreasing latency is impossible. The common analogy is: no matter what you do, you won't get a baby in less than 9 months.

      Have you already wondered why oldshool computers sometimes feel faster than top of the line modern machines. You have your answer. Modern machines are extremely fast, but the countless layers of abstraction between you and the moving electrons create latency that can make your experience worse.

    5. Re:Latency? by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      If you're worried about latency, get a bigger cache. Maybe we could drop latency on RAM, but it would probably be at the expense of other important aspects such as capacity. Most people would probably prefer the added capacity since having to go to disk (even if it's an SSD) is much worse in terms of extra latency than having to go from cache (especially once you get out to L3) to RAM.

      Perhaps you could argue that now we have more than enough RAM (64GB ought to be enough for anybody) but for most of history, that wasn't the case. I believe that in general latency has improved, but it's just not going to see the same improvement as other aspects of computing since most of the focus is on increasing capacity.

  9. Re:Very Impressive. 10nm of what? by ourlovecanlastforeve · · Score: 2

    Samsung loves "class."

    They use it on their TVs to make them look larger, too.

    "50 inch class" usually means it's a TV that's 45 inches wide and 2 inches tall.

  10. Re:Very Impressive. 10nm of what? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 3, Interesting

    From https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/10_nm_lithography_process gate length 20 nm, 51 nm metal pitch. Similar to the practices of other semiconductor manufacturers, no honest person could call this a 10 nm process.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  11. Re:When was the last time we needed a faster ... by shmlco · · Score: 2

    I don't want to ask why people are so clueless... but why are people so clueless?

    Faster chips mean that processors can do more work... or do the same amount of work in less time. Accomplishing X in half the time means the processor is running at speed half the time, which dramatically reduces the amount of power needed to accomplish the task, which in turn improves battery life.

    Which, in your case, means you can spend more time trolling Facebook and news sites.

    --
    Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
  12. Online by Wijayanti · · Score: 1

    apotik jual obat perangsang

  13. Re:Very Impressive. 10nm of what? by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

    It's the 10 nm/half a gate length process.

  14. Hammer me by HalWasRight · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much design or testing they've done to prevent Rowhammer flaws. The smaller the geometry the less charge is held.

    --
    "This mission is too important to allow you to jeopardize it." -- HAL