Comments Locked

25 Comments

Back to Article

  • peevee - Wednesday, March 6, 2019 - link

    How does it compare with eMRAM from Globalfoundries?
  • eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, March 6, 2019 - link

    Interesting launch! MRAM is (at least right now) really interesting in situations where you want to be able to write and re-write data many times to non-volatile solid storage; current NAND flash still has significant limits on the number of write-erase-rewrite cycles. Couple that with the (theoretical) speed advantage, and MRAM could be attractive as initial fast, non-volatile storage for digital photography and burst/high-speed video. For example, MRAM integrated into with the CMOS sensor circuitry to store RAW files.
  • danielfranklin - Wednesday, March 6, 2019 - link

    Usually the more i think about newer tech like this the more use cases i come up with, im really struggling to do that here though.
    Sure there are some very specific industrial cases where writes are through the roof but data sizes are small, but in a world where 3D XPoint is going to enter 2nd generation soon and will likely continue to scale well moving forward.
    When DRAM is always going to be so much faster and a simply cap can provide the power to backup to flash when required, i just dont see many use cases.
  • saratoga4 - Wednesday, March 6, 2019 - link

    >Usually the more i think about newer tech like this the more use cases i come up with, im really struggling to do that here though.

    It is a replacement for embedded flash and especially embedded NOR flash, which is in almost every embedded device. Huge market for this stuff, just not thing you are likely to be aware of.

    >Sure there are some very specific industrial cases where writes are through the roof but data sizes are small, but in a world where 3D XPoint is going to enter 2nd generation soon and will likely continue to scale well moving forward.

    XPoint cannot be used for these applications due to fabrication requirements. The alternative is usually NOR, which is really expensive and not scaling well to newer nodes.
  • flgt - Wednesday, March 6, 2019 - link

    For an embedded microcontroller, dealing with NAND is a bit nasty without all the help from an OS and advanced memory controller (although the more advanced ones are starting to provide more support and blur the lines with application processors). NOR has good read performance for code storage but is slow to erase and write since you have to work in blocks. MRAM right now seems like a good replacement for EEPROM where you want a simple memory for logging or configuration. It’s simple and fast to write; write XX data at XX address.

    Processors like this will most likely be running out of SRAM (internal or external) or directly out of flash/MRAM, again since DRAM is a very powerful but overly complex memory. DRAM with flash is way too complex and not a competitor for these non-volatile applications, at least in the near term.
  • danielfranklin - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    Thanks, explains it well.
    The poor guy two posts below me though, i think hes a lost cause...
  • deil - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    1 Gb at starting point is not that bad.
    ANY database with transactions, where you need to update 4KB field milions of times per sec might want this.
    Question if we can add it as "cache" for NAND/bufor for now or treat it as "swap" space for SQL/NON-SQL DB's
  • name99 - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    It’s for storage ON THE CHIP. So you don’t need an external DRAM, Flash or whatever.
    Of COURSE flash can be dense — it has 128 layers! Likewise DRAM has super tall caps! But those can’t be manufactured on the same chip as your logic...

    That’s the win, get rid of one external chip, if you can.
  • Lord of the Bored - Wednesday, March 6, 2019 - link

    Core memory on a chip. Everything old is new again.
  • PeachNCream - Wednesday, March 6, 2019 - link

    Endurance? Who cares about speed? If this is supposed to be some sort of replacement for NAND flash (including that awful QLC they're foisting on us as a solution to persistent storage to replace already awful TLC that replaced marginally acceptable MLC) then they need to talk about P/E cycle endurance. Since they're not, it's probably safe to say this is a bit like 5G, you can burn through those limited P/E cycles faster than ever before. Now pardon me while I go have a drink in the name of future lost data and dead consumer electronics components that are no longer useful thanks to soldered on storage failing only a few years into its service life. Peh!
  • Yojimbo - Wednesday, March 6, 2019 - link

    If its density and capacity is lower than that of DRAM then I don't think they are considering this as a replacement for NAND flash.
  • danielfranklin - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    This isnt even for consumer devices. Its likely to have the write cycles closer to DRAM than anything you are talking about and no one is talking about replacing NAND with this, not now or in 50 years.
    Read FLGT's explanation above where this is going to replace situations where EEPROM & NOR currently works better than NAND.
  • PeachNCream - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    *taps the outside of your bubble* 50 years more for NAND before we talk about replacing it? I might agree if we're talking about embedded systems or ICs, but as primary storage, it's a dead man walking already from an endurance perspective. 3D QLC is rated for at most, about 1K program-erase cycles and the powered off data retention numbers aren't exactly encouraging either. Going 3D has helped a lot because we can get density by stacking layers so it somewhat mitigates the problem of smaller nodes robbing durability, but we are very much looking at the end of the road for consumer and enterprise storage.
  • FullmetalTitan - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    This is very clearly being sold as a replacement for embedded memory ON CHIP, not as bulk storage. You are so eager to be a contrarian on every article that you end up looking like an idiot
  • saratoga4 - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    >*taps the outside of your bubble* 50 years more for NAND before we talk about replacing it?

    Nothing in the post you are replying to says anything about NAND lasting for 50 years.
  • PeachNCream - Friday, March 8, 2019 - link

    For your ease of reference "... talking about replacing NAND with this, not now or in 50 years..."
  • jospoortvliet - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    In their video they claim it has 'better endurance' without specifying how much.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EB14K8Gq5-w
  • MFinn3333 - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    It's most likely going to replace the DRAM in the SSD's so they can survive a power loss better or AI chips so they can keep up with what it is doing algorithm wise.

    It's endurance span is 10^10 writes, 10 retention @ 85°C.
  • PeachNCream - Friday, March 8, 2019 - link

    Thanks for the numbers. The endurance and retention both look good and if it ends up as a DRAM cache replacement, that'll be sufficient to carry it there. May I ask where you found that information as I haven't had much luck scaring up anything solid.
  • MFinn3333 - Friday, March 8, 2019 - link

    I own stock in the company called 'Everspin' and that is what they are getting on their STT-MRAM products and I got it from their prospectus (voting information).
  • saratoga4 - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    >If this is supposed to be some sort of replacement for NAND flash (including that awful QLC they're foisting on us as a solution to persistent storage to replace already awful TLC that replaced marginally acceptable MLC)

    It is not supposed to be a replacement for NAND flash, nor would it work as one.

    > then they need to talk about P/E cycle endurance.

    Not so relevant for these applications, but MRAM variants in general are usually millions to billions of write cycles. Effectively infinite.

    >dead consumer electronics components that are no longer useful thanks to soldered on storage failing only a few years into its service life.

    You don't solder in on-die memory ... it is on the same die as the processor. That is the whole point.
  • ads295 - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    Am I missing something here? Why is RAM being compared to non-volatile memory such as NAND?
    Also, whats eFlash? eMMC?
  • Xyler94 - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    This Samsung MRAM (or eMRAM) is non-volatile, which normal DRAM is.

    Fun fact, SRAM, which is typically used in CPU Cache is also non-volatile and is the quickest RAM out there... but also so incredibly expensive. RAM stands for Random Access Memory, so any storage tech that does Random Access can be considered RAM.

    Comparing it to NAND Flash is acceptable, because like NAND, it's non-volatile. As for the other questions, someone smarter than me will have to answer that
  • Billy Tallis - Friday, March 8, 2019 - link

    DRAM and SRAM are both volatile in that they lose their data when the chip loses power, though only DRAM requires periodic refreshing. SRAM requires a continuous power supply and the several transistors that make up each memory cell maintain the state.

    Flash memory and MRAM are non-volatile memories that keep their data even when all power is removed.
  • MFinn3333 - Thursday, March 7, 2019 - link

    MRAM is as fast as DRAM but doesn't lose information if the power is cut.

    It's endurance is well beyond that of Flash. Like 10^10 power of writes or 10 Billion writes.

    It can write data faster than any other type of storage. 14ns to write 128Mb.

    It's going to be used in AI chips.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now