400 Gigabits Per Square Inch 131
NWprobe writes "Some scientists at Naval Research Laboratory have developed a new super disk. Nando Times has an article about it. I want a storage device like this, but will we ever see them come into production...
" "We anticipate we can put 400 gigabits in a square inch," said solid state physicist Gary Prinz of the Naval Research Laboratory, which has just contracted with a pioneering Minnesota firm to move the technology from the lab to the production line. "
Re:Thing come full circle (again!) (Score:1)
Re:Questions the article didn't answer (Score:1)
According to MVE's MRAM white paper, MRAM has been demo'd with 50ns read latency and 10ns write latency (20MHz and 100MHz, respectively). From the information in the white paper, it appears to have much the same organization as DRAM, so you could have a fairly wide bus that read/writes 64 bits or 128 bits at a time. So 20MHz @ 128 bits = 3.2GB/s throughput reading, 16GB/s throughput writing.
-- Guges
Re:Have they really thought it through ? (Score:1)
But, if you had one of these new toys, you don't need to read any data and put it in memory - its already there! and at 50GB per square inch, thats pretty good. You could (like they said in the article) have it built into the CPU, and have your OS loaded on it. Turn on the computer - Boom! It's perfect.
As soon as you request the map in Quake3, the time to load the program would be *nothing* compared to the hard drives being used today.
I hate waiting for programs to load, and I hate waiting for my computer to boot up. And I *HATE* having to delete more MP3s to get more hard drive space.
Imagine your Palm Pilot (or other PDA of choice) with 50GB of memory on it. Or how about laptops, or portable MP3 players, or a digital camera being able to store 700 pictures at a time at high resolution. The list goes on.
Disaster in the marketplace? Only if they sell for $1000's, instead of $100's
--Brandon
"WASSSSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP?"
"gigabit"? Come on.. (Score:1)
BYTES, people. BYTES. Its there! Use it!
hehe (Score:1)
wonder why?
Re:Close but not touching (Score:1)
Re:Have they really thought it through ? (Score:1)
There are only so many ways to moderate down, however.
You'll note you got moderated back up by someone who thought you were funny.
If I wasn't replying in this area, I'd have moderated you down too.
A way to vastly increase storage density with less power and faster access times?
And all you can think of is to increase HD capacity? It indicates you didn't read the article which listed many other uses.
It wasn't redundant at the time I posted it. (Score:1)
Re:Have they really thought it through ? (Score:1)
Those three happen to all be large binaries.
One 3MB MP3 would then equal 1024 3k and insightful web pages.
Not that it matters, since we're questioning your limited imagination in this product's usefulness.
BTW, how did you calculate your figure of 195 Terabytes of data on a palm top using this technology? Unless this is some obscure marketing math, that would equal 500 square inches using the researcher's projected "400GB per square inch".
That's 2 square feet!
Slight correction. (Score:1)
That's 5 square feet.
Yeah. DMG is sooooo appropriate.
I thank the supreme trickster that I work in SysAdmin.
Forget hard drives... (Score:1)
Super sized cache!!!
Re:Have they really thought it through ? (Score:1)
problems with higher areal density (Score:1)
I can't wait to have a CPU with mass storage inside the case. They didn't say whether this stuff is as fast as RAM, but I'd assume it isn't, since IIRC magnetizing something is usually a lot slower than flipping the charge on a capacitor. Read performance should be impressive, though, and in any case reads and writes should be orders of magnitude better than hard disk seek times. (HDs have decent sequential access performance, but are miserable for random access.)
#define X(x,y) x##y
Re:10,000 GIGABITS IN A SUGAR CUBE (Score:1)
#define X(x,y) x##y
Re:way to go to reach Star Trek (Score:1)
#define X(x,y) x##y
Re:No more MP3 (Score:1)
#define X(x,y) x##y
Re:Have they really thought it through ? (Score:1)
Re:nando == Raleigh's News and Observer (Score:1)
Yeah, that's just what Jesse Helms always says
They should have left me at "insightful" and given you the point for "funny".
Amazing (Score:1)
The one and (thankfully) only,
LafinJack
Selling! Selling! Very good, very good... (Score:1)
The one and (thankfully) only,
LafinJack
Re:"gigabit"? Come on.. (Score:1)
way to go to reach Star Trek (Score:1)
Re:Forget Troll (Score:1)
haha. There is no such thing. There
pfft.
Re:This could be revolutionary (Score:1)
Re:buying 5000lb SUVs that get 12mpg. (Score:1)
--Crash!!--
Your 5,000 lb. SUV just hit my little ole Saturn SL-1. I'm dead, you're not.
Of course, if my little ole' Saturn were a wee bit taller (gripe gripe), I mighta had a chance of seeing ya and getting outta da way. As it is, RIP.
Re:A new record, ladies and gentlemen (Score:1)
Forgotten about the Crusoe? (Score:1)
High speed data access, low energy requirements, tack on the DVD drive on the back, and 5-1/4" square color LCD screen...
High density PDA!
A new record, ladies and gentlemen (Score:1)
The reason I wouldn't buy a 900lb hamburger for $.10 is not "because I'd never eat it all". It's because that's a waste. There's too much cost (in environmental terms) for the value (a couple of meals at most before it goes bad). Similarly for the movie: The cost ($7.95 + 3 years of my life) is too high for the value (a movie). As an example, what if the 900lb hamburger was guaranteed to never go bad and it was easy to store at your house? The economics start to look a little more attractive, don't they?
But big harddrives don't have a cost the same way. Given a choice between a Palm with 8MB of memory for $150 and a Palm with 400GB of memory for the same price, I'd choose the later in an instant and so would every sane person. What reason would there be to NOT do it?
--
TROLL TROLL TROLL (Score:1)
In particular: "would you buy a 900lb burger ? No of course you wouldn't, because it makes no sense. "
Specifically HOW doesn't it make sense? Remember that I've posited the existence of an easy way to cart the thing home AND that it won't spoil. So you've got a big slab of meat (plus some extras) for $.20. How is that a bad thing?
--
Re:A new record, ladies and gentlemen (Score:1)
Re:think about defraging a 2T hard drive... (Score:1)
Re:Ugh! Horrible frames! (Score:1)
Re:Amazing (Score:1)
Re:Close but not touching (Score:1)
I'm wondering if there is some sort of protection the military uses for their computers in the field? Do any coroporations use these technologies?
nando == Raleigh's News and Observer (Score:1)
Re:Close but not touching (Score:1)
--
BluetoothCentral.com [bluetoothcentral.com]
A site for everything Bluetooth. Coming soon.
Re:This had to happen-slightly OT (Score:1)
Sorry for being a nit-picker, but "digital" does not mean "without mechanical pieces". I assume you mean solid-state, or completely electronic in some other way.
One can always devise a digital device which is entirely mechanical.
--
BluetoothCentral.com [bluetoothcentral.com]
A site for everything Bluetooth. Coming soon.
more and more offtopic :) (Score:1)
It just pisses me off that more and more people are buying huge vehicles to mask their terrible driving skills, not to mention road manners, consequently making the roads more dangerous for those of us who drive responsible cars.
BTW, I'm even more RIP in my Miata
Re:A new record, ladies and gentlemen (Score:1)
I have a hard time believing that very many of the full-size SUV buyers "use it all", and yet there are a lot of buyers out there.
The interesting point of this article (did you read it?) isn't that the price of storage
is going down -- I agree, BFD -- but that we might have access to "instant-on" memory. *That* would be a very big deal indeed.
Re:more space? (Score:1)
Re:Woohoo This means.... (Score:1)
Consider the fact that various groups (such as a newly announced alliance of US tech companies) are pushing for networking over power lines and accessible via power outlets, might a creative engineer eventually be able to build, say, a network-capable bug inside a power cable? Or one of those ubiquitous power adapters?
You'd have the capability to have a decent amount of code with miniature electronics; it could archive a/v recordings for a while and then xmit in bursts at hours when the owner is less likely to be awake and using the network... hrmmm.
Could be interesting, no?
Re:Have they really thought it through ? (Score:1)
Should be plenty fast. (Score:1)
--
Holo storage was *last* week on /. (Score:1)
Just remember wherever you go,.. there you are.
They were L's (Score:1)
The new stuff sounds like charge is neither moved nor accessed by wires, though the donut shape seems to be very good at holding a magnetic charge, or maybe they just shoot the charge through donut holes to reach the bottom one.. a little vague in the story.
Look into the future.. (Score:1)
Figure instead that this is a crystal ball and find out what year it is to be available with serious transfer rates.
At that time,
- All AOL's forums are digital video only viewable from Netscape 16 (forked away from Mozilla)
- RIAA distributes DVD quality music videos of the top 100 singles weekly in throwaway chips like those AOL CD's people get in the mail these days ("a great loss leader") with 2048 bit SDMI encoded in the hardware controller.
- Sony's Playstation V, having broken another sales record, is issued a recall since someone found a secret password for the test screen which renders SDMI useless! Oh Shit!
- Tons of encrypted software comes with tons more of free interactive ads and spam is a fond memory.
- Transmeta slates, which allow you to plug these memory chips into thin little bays inset all around the edges, will directly connect to fiber in public spaces (spread spectrum that can handle the bandwidth will fry your zygotes in a flash)
- Micro$oft still sux but who gives a shit. Bill sez "the consumer is happier now than every before" etc.
- You set the deSDMI chip emulator in your slate to the public key signature of the viral FiL3Z band which infects the omnipresent fiber net, dial up your favorite virtual file system (not FreeNet since they all got arrested in early 2001) and download today's news plus the latest RIAA password. Andover has been bought out by CNet and the original Slashdot crew (fired though some were coopted by the new owners) run (virtually) for the data havens where they can broadcast Geeks in Space in peace.
- As an afterthought you turn over extra computing power to the daily RIAA decryption effort. Having seen it was finished hours ago (someone in the quantum chip labs in Switzerland have been playing around over coffee break) you turn it to the distributed Seti project, having the last year of raw observatory data in an auxiliary bay. There are a couple inexplicable Wow events on the charts but more processing is needed..
- Hackers and mainstream couch potatoes incredibly unite against AOL and steal the keys to the data stream. Artists get rich from direct payments from advertisers, and with TimeWarner going down the tubes AOL is looking for an exit strategy.
- Programmers are working feverishly within the GPL liscense to support the latest quantum computing hardware (for the first time Linux may support this hardware before any OS). The only problem is when the chip delves into other universes during a computation the subjectivity breaks; it keeps finding references to OS's by Linus' parallel twin sister Eunice (who makes her own wild Mozilla skins) and strangely enough.. hot grits?
- World domination at last. Who won? Doh.
Re:Have they really thought it through ? (Score:1)
They're building a new RAID storage system for Echelon.
Mum's the word...
--
Re:400GB per square inch of MY COCK (Score:1)
Re:Have they really thought it through ? (Score:1)
Re:Amazing (Score:1)
Re:Thing come full circle (again!) (Score:1)
If you are very interested in this sort of thing, (Fatbrain doesn't have this book yet) go here:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/07923835
thoughts (Score:1)
MPEG's the MP3's of the future. (Score:1)
If people start storeing dvd's on there HD like they do with audio cd's today it won't take long to fill a few TB.
Re:Vague Memories of Bubble Memory (Score:2)
List of uses. -i.e. did you think through your re? (Score:2)
Applications:
digital cameras
wearables
smart appliances
CPU cache! (mentioned in article)
laptops
I'm sure people could think of more...
Re:Have they really thought it through ? (Score:2)
Smaller, cooler, more efficient. I'll take some.
It's Seagate (Score:2)
Interesting possibilities... (Score:2)
But, what I find interesting about this particular miracle is the possibility of putting a few gigs of storage on the same chip as the CPU. Probably not very practical for general-purpose computers (wanna reload your data just so you can have a faster CPU?), but there are other uses...
Hook a wee bit of this to the equivalent of a 386 or 486, put it in an affordable package, and you could have:
Of course, it all depends on the final cost.
Re:Fun with math... (Score:2)
This is solid-state storage, not a new type of hard disk, so it's square inch of silicon rather than square inch of disk surface.
This appears to be the latest in a long line of "hard disk killers". Remember bubble memory? E2PROM? FLASH? Who knows, maybe this one will be more successful than those. I'm not holding my breath...
Re:It's Nonvolatile Electronics Inc. (Score:2)
Re:think about defraging a 2T hard drive... (Score:2)
Factoring in access and write speed, it's actually O(n/s) where s is the read/write/access speed.
Basically, if you have a 2Tb drive that's 100 times as fast as your 20Gb drive, it'll take exactly the same amount of time to defrag, though if you wanted to sort it at the same time, it would take 7 times longer (ln 100 ~= 7.5).
Kevin Fox
Yeah, so? (Score:2)
On-die storage? (Score:2)
Access times? Latency? (Score:2)
engineers never lie; we just approximate the truth.
Re:Should be plenty fast. (Score:2)
Cool.
If speed isn't an issue, then price is. If this is faster or as fast as SDRAM, it will replace SDRAM.
However, I don't think these will ever compete with traditional magnetic harddrives. These will be VERY expensive in comparison, and only people who are willing to spend lots of money for (physical) stability (it's Solid State, ie. no moving parts) and possibly faster access time. So maybe big servers could use this, but, only if it's less expensive than RAID (but RAID has redundancy...) or if the server is located inside a paint mixing machine...
SO, sure, this will replace/compete with NVRAM.
And depending (a lot!) on price, it may replace SDRAM.
But I doubt if it will replace physical (platter) hard drives (which, I should add, they are not claiming in the article...).
I will say, though, that if they can get the price down to anywhere near traditional drives (now, about $10 per GB or less) then this will replace hard drives!
Re:think about defraging a 2T hard drive... (Score:2)
Ugh! Horrible frames! (Score:2)
--
Re:Thing come full circle (again!) (Score:2)
--
Re:List of uses. -i.e. did you think through your (Score:2)
Besides... saying that this technology wouldn't be useful and no one would care is just like saying that no one will ever need more that 640k RAM.
400 Gigabits! GREAT SCOTT! (Score:2)
---
Questions the article didn't answer (Score:2)
The rate is important, for instance memory can chage 100*10^9 bits per second (theoretically) for PC100 RAM (100 MHz). Hard disks can change 66*10^9 bits per second (ATA66), but only the bit the hard disk head is over at that time.
This is very oversimplified (all throughputs are absolute theoretical maximums), and I probably mesed up the exponents, and someone more knowledgable can refine my question...but hopefully I got enough of a point across for someone to understand my question--is this tech really feasible as a memory replacement, and where is there more hard data about it?
Re:Fun with math... (Score:2)
Re:Is this really new? (Score:2)
Re: don't be so sure, you forget about 3M... (Score:2)
640K is more than enough memory for anybody! (Score:2)
In fact, you make very little sense. For a PalmTop application, this technology would yield a sufficient storage space in a very small footprint. Gee, isn't that what we want?
I do not see how you think that this would be disaster in the marketplace. (What would you have thought of a 10GB drive back in the 80's?)
Close but not touching (Score:2)
Yet, let's not be too enthusiastic because for the moment this technology has some possible problems (at least in what concerns the military - which seem to be the first interested in it). Being a magnetic storage device a magnetic field can destabilize the data on it, thus making the computer unusable (or unreliable). Hypothetically speaking, it would be quite easy to attack a ship with some sort of radiation that will make it vulnerable to another attack that may destroy it
On the other hand, civilian users are quite protected against this, since there aren't many important secrets to be destroyed (I'm not speaking about corporate users). Then again, who will ever use 400Gb (or more) at home ? (ok I may sound silly and repeating the sentence I mentioned in the beginning). There are some limits in one's ability to gather information and one of them is the time.
Although, if I were to speak frankly, I imagine Windows 2010 taking 70% of this space (with a 25Gb Solitaire). Hopefully there will be no windows any more in 2010
They must have lots to work out yet! (Score:2)
No more MP3 (Score:2)
I will hope I longer to need a compresion format for my music. I prefer Quality.
Re:Have they really thought it through ? (Score:2)
Let me guess, you're a home user. No you won't have use for this large a storage device in the near future but many network admins work with much larger storage devices already. And while I can't speak for others, this certainly has me interested. I've had to manage as much as 240 GBs of data when 10 GB hard drives were the biggest we could get out hands on. It would have made my life a lot easier to have all that data on one drive rather than spread out on 24 (more when you count the 'lost' drives in the RAIDs).
Additionally, you have to remember this is a SOLID STATE drive. No moving parts, the tranfer times will be almost as fast as your RAM or cache. While this may not seem like that big a deal to a home user, this type of speed will allow developers (Web and other) to do more processing on their own systems and then transfer just the results to your computer. Which means better content can be delievered to the customer. Do I see a immersive 3D Slashdot environment in our future?......maybe.......lol
Dave
Vague Memories of Bubble Memory (Score:2)
Also I think that it was a linear storage medium where the bubbles were moved in a loop around the chip by placing voltages on T shaped elements. This would probably mean that the speed of retrieval is not very great, as the bubbles are led past a read-out area.
It probably was just a technology that did not offer any advantage over easier or already existing devices. One advantage was meant to be non-volatility (with a battery backup). Now we have Flash memory.
think about defraging a 2T hard drive... (Score:2)
I'm tired of this. (Score:3)
Anyway, back in reality, I'll stick to getting excited about actual product shipments.
Company website and white paper (Score:3)
Fun with math... (Score:3)
someone please double check that
And Now The Bad News (Score:3)
So what happens when that package, with a certain company's operating system permanently installed and hardwired in, is available cheaper than the same hardware without any os, or with a certain "free" os pre-installed?
If this thing is "instant-on", then either os will be right there, ready to go as soon as you hit the switch, but one certain company will be able to subsidise the purchase, whereas the other os, even though free, won't have a financial behemoth behind it (unless it's AOL, and you have to be a subscriber of theirs to get the discount, or maybe even for the hardware to work at all).
Re:wtf (Score:3)
If linking like that becomes illegal, won't that pretty much be the end of the internet as we know it?
As to whether or not Slashdot can or should provide content, I don't think that's what it's really here for. We the Slashdot audience provide the content. Unfortunately the content is sometimes of the quality of posts like yours.
Re:Thing come full circle (again!) (Score:3)
I tried a search on their website, but couldn't come up with a link, could be its only in their print version (and I'm not searching THAT!) or I just wasn't lucky.
-W
Is this really new? (Score:3)
IIRC those chips were made out of a thin layer of garnet, and the description of the individual memory cells being shaped like "tiny doughnuts" rings a bell. At the time I think the biggest one they had was about 500K, but considering how much smaller the current electronic paths are in state of the art semi-conductors compared to what was available in 1986), I find myself wondering how this "new" technology is different from the older one. Is anyone out there in /. land familiar with both enough to fill in the details?
Processor speeds, memory lagging (Score:3)
I think the key to this technology really is the size. The problem with PC's now is that even though the processor is getting faster, the rest of the system is lagging behind. With faster and smaller memory, and the ability to put the memory right on the CPU, we could really see the speed boost we are looking for.
A major advantage of the new technology is that the memory system is nonvolatile
Kiss your slow hard drives goodbye, and now almost all of the computer can fit on one card. All the case is needed for now it the expansion slots. Too bad it is too early in development, though...
Re:Processor speeds, memory lagging (Score:3)
Long wires are not the only thing that makes data storage slow; they gave no numbers on the read/write speeds here, and I'm not convinced that this is going to be fast. There is already an abundance of NVRAM (Non-Volatile RAM) available (eg. SanDisk [sandisk.com]), but it's VERY expensive (eg. 16MB = $75.00). The read is fast for Flash RAM, but writes are real slow. This, however, isn't Flash...
The real issue I see there is they're trying to say that this will be the normal RAM for a system, and that it won't be erased on reboot - think about this - if you crash WinDoze, you want the memory to be rebooted! You don't want the pooter to be in the same state upon reboot!!! If they're trying to use this as some kind of ROM that gets copied into the RAM on startup, well, that's already around. The only thing I see this doing is replacing NVRAM (eg, Flash, CMOS, etc), which will replace hard drives when it gets cheap (and fast) enough.
the real issue with memory (Score:3)
There are many very promising technologies out there. The real problem with memory right now does not seem to be the size at all. For example, hard disk density (size) doubles every year. However, the access time (speed) only decreases about 30% every 10 years.
I think these figures are correct. If not please correct me.
Ridiculous (Score:3)
10,000 GIGABITS IN A SUGAR CUBE (Score:3)
http://www.geocities.com/roman_mi r.geo/NoFCFS.gif [geocities.com]
and this is what I have to say about that.
This had to happen (Score:4)
Of course, ideally, you could have a mass storage unit that was several gigabytes of the same stuff that processor registers are made of, but I wouldn't even care to know how much one of those drives would cost.
I'm just wondering how long it will take to get one of these to market. I wish Moore's law also applied to time-to-market.
Re:"gigabit"? Come on.. (Score:4)
Memory chips are measured in BITS. We put a bunch of them together (a couple 4x128mbit's ) to make one megaBYTE, for you, the consumer who wouldn't understand bits.
Bits are more accurate. More quantifiable.
Traditionally, Kilobyte refers to 1000 bytes when dealing with data transmission, and 1024 bytes when dealing with memory.
Now, when dealing with software written by those who don't know this, it could be either.
But a kilobit is always a kilobit. 1000 bits.
Ethernet is 100 MegaBIT because it's channel usage is measured in bits Things go on and off it a bit at a time. and NOT always in even increments of 8. Same for gigabit.
The SAME FOR THE WAY hard drives encode data! What is actually stored on the drive has little directly to do with what you think is stored there. All kinds of encoding is used. Each bit may be comprised of three bits on the platter....
Thing come full circle (again!) (Score:4)
What's next? 0.6 micron punch cards?
--
Re:Lots of useful applications (Score:4)
If the per-chip cost is low enough, it would probably be more cost effective to surface-mount the components and chuck the whole unit when one went bad than it would be to have a socketed board and replace an individual chip. For a consumer product, this approach would probably work well -- when one chip died, the whole unit would keep working, giving the user time to buy a new unit and back up his data onto the new one. Considering that the MTBF on solid-state electronics is pretty high, by the time one chip died the whole unit would be effectively obsolete anyway. For a server, you'd want it to be hot-swappable; but for a consumer product a sealed unit would be fine.
"The axiom 'An honest man has nothing to fear from the police'
In further news... (Score:5)
Re:"gigabit"? Come on.. (Score:5)
I really thought the whining would stop, but instead both users and the industry have chosen to ignore the new prefixes (summarized below to emphasize the triviality of quibbling) I did not expect everyone to start doing instant conversions, but I did expect them to start using the units as a ballpark indicator of which sort of 'mega' they were using.
True, the difference between terabit and tebibit is only 10%, but if you're going to whine about that 10% (or the 5% megabit gap), presumably you should be using the new standards.
__________
Lots of useful applications (Score:5)
More importantly, because there are no moving parts, you'd have incredible levels of reliability and very low latency. This is sorely needed -- while hard drive capacity has been advancing rapidly, hard drive speed has only made modest improvements. In many applications (databases, for example) the biggest performance bottleneck is physical I/O. Even with the fastest hard drives, you still have latency measured in milliseconds (10^-3) -- because you have to wait while you wait for the platter to spin around to the byte you need (on a 10k RPM drive, you have to wait an average of 12ms to [physically] read an arbitrary sector). Conventional RAM, with nanosecond (10^-9) level latency, is 6 orders of magnitude faster -- that's roughly 1 million times faster, for the math-challenged. Getting rid of this disparity has enormous significance for I/O intensive computing.
The real implication here isn't having a multi-terabyte hard drive on your desktop, but having hard drives that actually keep up with the rest of the computer.
"The axiom 'An honest man has nothing to fear from the police'