Buckminsterfullerene Strikes Again - Nanotube RAM 262
putaro writes "Nanotube based RAM, under development by Nantero, promises to deliver densities of over 1 terabit per cm^2, is non-volatile and faster than current DRAM. The Economist has a nice story. Forget about just kicking DRAM's and FLASH's butt, is this finally the end of magnetic storage as well?"
story (Score:4, Informative)
WAITING for a computer to turn on is a nuisance. That is why manufacturers have been trying to create "non-volatile" memories. These would be fast, like the random-access memory (RAM) chips that are currently used for often-accessed memory, but they would also continue to store information even without power, like hard drives, which are too slow to use except for long-term storage.
Several technologies have been competing to become the standard for fast, non-volatile memory. The best known is magnetic RAM, which IBM and Motorola are touting. Others are based on polymers or on strange-sounding metal alloys called chalcogenides that change shape when an electric charge is applied to them. But there is now a new entrant to the field: carbon.
Carbon comes in many forms. Diamonds and graphite are two of the most familiar ones. A less familiar variety is the nanotube, also known as a "buckytube" after Richard Buckminster Fuller, whose geodesic domes have a framework similar to the arrangement of the atoms in a nanotube. Nanotubes consist of a cylindrical array of carbon atoms whose diameter is only about 1 nanometre (a billionth of a metre). If Nantero, a firm based in Woburn, Massachusetts, proves correct, such tubes will soon be an integral part of computer memories.
Nantero's memory chips consist of billions of nanotubes, each a few hundred nanometres long, suspended from a silicon wafer. Another wafer sits about 100 nanometres below the first. Because the nanotubes that Nantero uses conduct electricity, a small electric charge at one point on the second wafer will draw several dozen nanotubes towards it. Once they are there, they stay there. That is because they are bound by Van der Waals forces--intermolecular bonds that do not depend on external power for their maintenance. An additional application of current, however, will release the nanotubes. This means that a group of a few dozen nanotubes can act as a memory element, storing a single bit (either a one or a zero) of the binary code that computers use to operate. If the connection between the wafers is live at a particular point, the bit represented is a one. If not, it is a zero.
If nanotubes were not so small, this would not be a big deal. Because they are, though, Nantero's technology can already achieve a data density considerably higher than existing RAMs. And because the wafers are so close together, those data can move rapidly from place to place. Nantero's new memory can read or write a bit in as little as half a nanosecond (billionth of a second). The best RAM chips, by contrast, need ten nanoseconds to perform a similar operation.
At the moment, Nantero has only a working prototype. But the firm aims to have memories on the market within a year. It thinks it will be able to tool up for commercial production quickly, because the fabrication technique it uses, though novel, relies on standard semiconductor-making technology.
The main difficulty faced by others who have tried to go down the buckytube route is getting the tubes to align with each other when they are hung from the first wafer. Until now, the approach has been to try to grow all of the tubes in the correct orientation to start with. But Nantero's founders came up with a simpler, if less elegant, solution. They use established lithographic techniques to get rid of tubes that are pointing in the wrong direction by zapping them with an electron beam. That leaves only those that are hanging down towards the opposite wafer.
Though the recent chip is certainly impressive, the reason for getting excited about Nantero is not so much the present as the future. Unlike silicon, which is pushing against its physical limitations, carbon-nanotube technology is in its infancy. Greg Schmergel, Nantero's boss, says that within the next few years the firm's engineers may be able to achieve data densities of a trillion bits per square centimetre (more than 1,000 times that available on existing RAM) and it will be possible to read those memories 100 times faster than can be done at the moment. The days of silicon-based memory may be numbered
Excellent... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Excellent... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Excellent... (Score:4, Funny)
I'm not sure that's quite what I want.
Re:Excellent... (Score:2)
If you can't laugh at yourself [you being anyone] then life isn't going to be much fun.
Just playing the stereotype joke.
Re:Excellent... (Score:2)
Re:Excellent... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Excellent... (Score:5, Funny)
knowing full well i'll have to sell my wife
Well, you're off to a good start, having just placed an ad in perhaps the most undersupplied market in the world: Slashdot.
The dome is great (Score:3, Funny)
--
Need a calculator [webcalc.net]?
Details (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a little details that pretty much summarize the docs:
How it works. Nantero's memory chips consist of billions of nanotubes, each a few hundred nanometres long, suspended from a silicon wafer. ... This means that a group of a few dozen nanotubes can act as a memory element, storing a single bit (either a one or a zero) of the binary code that computers use to operate. If the connection between the wafers is live at a particular point, the bit represented is a one. If not, it is a zero.
Speed. Nantero's new memory can read or write a bit in as little as half a nanosecond.
Availability. At the moment, Nantero has only a working prototype. But the firm aims to have memories on the market within a year.
Hurdles. The main difficulty faced by others who have tried to go down the buckytube route is getting the tubes to align with each other when they are hung from the first wafer. Until now, the approach has been to try to grow all of the tubes in the correct orientation to start with. But Nantero's founders came up with a simpler, if less elegant, solution. They use established lithographic techniques to get rid of tubes that are pointing in the wrong direction by zapping them with an electron beam. That leaves only those that are hanging down towards the opposite wafer.
I wonder.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
Now all we need (Score:3, Funny)
Finally... (Score:2, Interesting)
wow (Score:3, Interesting)
Though the idea of using a material that burns when exposed to a camera flash, for storage, is a little unnerving... Anyone know how they plan to address that and other problems/inherent properties of nanotubes?
Re:wow (Score:2, Funny)
Re:wow (Score:5, Funny)
Now, I'm not there, not involved with the company at all, but I'm going to venture a guess and say that maybe, just maybe, they won't have the nanotubes exposed and just lying around? Maybe, just maybe, the nanotube wafers will be, oh I dunno, enclosed in something? Cause where a flash would hurt it, I imagine a well-placed finger would hurt them too.
Just a thought.
Re:wow (Score:2)
Re:wow (Score:2)
No more of your fancy windows [antec-inc.com] in computer cases.
Paper's far more efficient (Score:3, Funny)
I can write a byte's worth on a cm^2 piece of paper; Just repeat many times and stack; when measuring measure from above.
Check out the press release (Score:2)
"Nantero, Inc. Creates an Array of Ten Billion Nanotube Bits on Single Wafer Standard Semiconductor Processes Used"
Sounds like the real deal....
And the skeptic says... (Score:4, Interesting)
Bitter... No, not me.
Re:And the skeptic says... (Score:2)
OLED are just around [kodak.com] the corner:
Fuel cells are due for next [slashdot.org] year [slashdot.org]
And after years of slashdot ranting about true-3d displays, holodecks [kodak.com] are finally on sale!
Cool, but... (Score:2)
Will it be electronically durable? (Score:3, Interesting)
Ryan Fenton
Re:Will it be electronically durable? (Score:2)
The Science Behind the Technology (Score:5, Informative)
For those who are interested, the Nantero's technology is based on earlier work in the lab of Charles M. Lieber [harvard.edu]. The original paper was published in the journal Science [sciencemag.org]. Rueckes et al, Science, Vol 289, P. 94. [sciencemag.org] Rueckes went on to found Nantero. [nantero.com]
The original experiment worked as follows:
The original experiment was done with bundles of carbon nanotubes. In principle, the concept should work at much higher densities for single nanotubes, but the technology still has hurdles to cross. Currently, the tubes conduct because ropes of tubes are likely to contain both semiconductor type and metal type tubes. Since metal type tubes are fantastic conductors, having even a few of them in a rope will allow a device to work. However, when one crosses the threshold to single nanotubes, the device will only work if the tubes are metal type. Hence, an important problem will be finding a way to produce only metal type single walled nanotubes. Currently, carbon nanotubes are produced in a mixture of semiconductor type and metal type nanotubes. It's difficult to control that property because it depends sensitively on the way the sp2 bonds on the nanotube sidewall line up, something that no one yet knows how to control.
Re:The Science Behind the Technology (Score:3, Informative)
Just one more link : a direct link to the Nantero press release (pdf) [nantero.com].
Re:The Science Behind the Technology (Score:2)
Re:The Science Behind the Technology (Score:3, Informative)
Better be well shielded (Score:2)
Finally... (Score:5, Funny)
Just kidding, in fact I just want to run Nautilus.
Re:Finally... (Score:3, Funny)
Great for security, too! (Score:5, Interesting)
You couldn't even track it by user at the OS level (user a has memory x and y allocated, so user b can't use that.) because I could still boot it into a different OS through a removable drive...
Of course, you could just eliminate all caches of keys or passwords... But do you really want to have to re-enter your slashdot password everytime you hit refresh, or click on a link to the comments page, or click to read a reply?
Maybe the solution would be to specify a certain area of RAM that would get initialized on power-up (be it a reboot or just waking up from an NVRAM suspend), and get apps to put any sensitive information in that area... Which would probably require additions to your favorite OS's API, in addition to new versions of a lot of apps...
Just thinking 'out loud' here... Anybody else thought about this?
Re:Great for security, too! (Score:2)
Otherwise, as you point out, what you describe is no different than accessing the hard disk to collect data.
Re:Great for security, too! (Score:2)
But do you really want to have to re-enter your slashdot password everytime you hit refresh, or click on a link to the comments page, or click to read a reply?
Slashdot authentication is stored in a cookie called "user". Browsers typically save cookies to a file on your hard drive, and may do so even if the cookie is set to expire at the end of the current session - the cookie could simpl
duh? " could get those with this method now" (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Great for security, too! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Great for security, too! (Score:2)
Personally, I think that just hooking the data read/write head up to a high voltage source making it into a powerful electromagnet that will make all the data on the harddrive unreadable is a lot easier. You could even make the modification to existing designs without
Re:Great for security, too! (Score:5, Insightful)
Technically, you're right. If someone wanted real security, they would have to make some changes to the OS&Apps and/or system acritecture.
But really, you have to look at the reality of your system right now. Unless your disk is encrypted, and you need something like a smartcard to access the data, you're hosed if someone gets physical access to your machine even once.
There's nothing that stops them popping open your case or booting from CD and copying your whole HD onto their Ipod or whatever. Even if the important bit of info they want is your password, they can always install a keylogger, and have that send them an email with your password (or even post is to a messageboard somewhere, just to aviod being traced).
Actually, I'm willing to state a stronger case. You are screwed if someone can get (unsupervised) physical access to your machine. Period. Even if you encrypt everything. There are so many clever things someone could do to your system in order to get your data that you just could never know you're safe.
I mean, even if you have the system wipe passwords from this new RAM on power down, it won't protect you. I could just open up your case, and stop the clock. All of a sudden, none of that stuff designed to wipe your data is working. I can then hook a logic analyzier and pattern generator up to your RAM, and just read out all your data. If your system wipes its RAM too frequently for that, I could just have an ASIC fabbed and put in on a little board which plugs in between your motherboard, and your RAM.
The only way to stop this is to basically turn your RAM into and uber-smartcard, but even then, it's possible to hack a smartcard too.
I guess my point is your thoughts are basically academic. Yes, this tecnology would add another way to exploit physical access to a PC, but there are already so many of those that I really don't think it matters. The only way you're going to get real security from someone with physical access to the system is to encrypt all chip-to-chip interconnections, and use whatever neat packaging technology the military uses for the chips in its military GPS units. Not very likely to happen.
Best way around this? (Score:2)
Modify the Kernel so the last thing it does is wipe the RAM clean.
It has to be on shutdown, or someone can pop open the computer and take out the RAM without booting it.
Or, design each RAM chip to dump its own data if it doesn't get a fresh charge from the motherboard every so often. This way, even if all attempts to flush RAM fail, the chip wipes itself clean before the power LED fades.
Re:Great for security, too! (Score:2, Informative)
Use whatever encryption or security precautions you like. At the very least, a keyboard sniffer can easily compromise the enitre system.
This technology changes nothing.
Re:Great for security, too! (Score:2)
Another Idea? (Score:2)
after about 30 minutes an entire hard drive could be there, and it could connect via some standard connector. use the hard drive as secondary storage backup, and when the machine turns off, it dumps the harddrive back on it at boot
So should I postpone buying my new computer? (Score:3, Funny)
Working Prototype - Size (Score:2, Informative)
"Dr. Thomas Rueckes, Chief Scientific Officer
and Co-Founder said, "This gets around
the problem that nanotubes cannot reliably be
grown in large arrays. At the end of our
process only the nanotubes in the correct
positions are remaining. This process was
used to make a 10Gb array now, but could easily
be used to make even larger arrays--
the main variable now controlling the size is the
resolution of the lithography equipment."
Oblgitory Tenacious D Reference (Score:2)
- Jable, "Two Kings"
How about motherboards? (Score:4, Funny)
Oops, sorry. I forgot cases, where usually there is not enough of power sockets and spaces for additional hard-drives. And don't forget floppy drives - they are still here, in most PCs I see in the store.
I can easyly imagine to see, in a year or two, a PC with several TB of nanotube-based RAM and 1.44MB floppy drive, all connected to AOL with 56K modem.
Re:How about motherboards? (Score:2)
Daddy like!
Re:How about motherboards? (Score:2)
However we can still have alot of benefits as soon as this comes out!
Loading Windows2k, mozilla, and openoffice would be almost instantaneous on startup, even with the bus bottleneck. Ask anyone with a ram drive? Todays storage is slow as hell with primptive hard drives. In the 21st century its silly to keep using mechanically based storage methods. Its so early 20th when tapes and punch cards ruled the
Screw the memory applications.... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's a very cool idea, but I'm wondering why they didn't mention these issues. Is it an unmentioned limitation of the technology, or a limitation of the Economist's journalistic scope?
Re:Screw the memory applications.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Just to remind you, 1ns == 1GHz. What is the clock speed on the latest Pentium/Athlon?
Re:Screw the memory applications.... (Score:2)
The clock speed is the time it takes to go through the longest segment of the pipe. A few hundred transistors if its anything of any use at all.
Re:Screw the memory applications.... (Score:2, Informative)
This is a static and nonvolatile technology. Think of a CPU that can be dynamically switched to zero hz while keeping its state - a complete machine that can be frozen and reawakened in an instant.
If you have the memory structure, why not have 256 bit parallel data paths? Or, why not have megabytes of fast memory right on the CPU die? Or array
Re:Screw the memory applications.... (Score:2)
Now HERE's a really strong argument... (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have this wonderfully fast and compact memory, the simplest way to exploit it is to access it in a linear manner with a whompin' huge address space.
Who needs VM? -- Actually, we'll still need mechanisms to isolate processes from each other, so virtual addressing will still have a place. But not as a means to accomodate logical address spaces larger than physical address spaces.
I want a fuel-cell powered, IBM 970 Powerbook with buckytube memory and an OLED display. Never mind the power switch, I'll just refuel it every other month or so.
Ok thats it... (Score:2, Interesting)
Look out! Here comes the RIAA (Score:2)
Wanna bet that the RIAA's gonna want a tax so high on this technology that it will become completely impractical to ever own?
Materials lead technology (Score:5, Insightful)
First, I have to confess that I am a Materials Engineer and not some ubergeek with a CSE degree.
But it's a definite fact that technological advances are only made possible with the precedence of metallurgical advances.
Silicon wafers today wouldn't exist without the metallurgical backing to create high purity Silicon, Aluminum, and so on.
The point being that with the discovery of the buckey ball, we are entering a new age of history. We're not there, but we're working on it really hard.
Before you toss me out as flamebait consider that each primary age of human civilization is named as a metallurgical Age: Bronze, Iron, Steel. Some might argue that we are in the Silicon Age right now. However, the impact of Silicon is not as ubiquitious as the impact of the discovery of Bronze, Iron, or Steel.
But the Buckey Ball is going to be similar in the scope of impact as Steel or Iron. Why?
SRAM (Score:4, Insightful)
So, instead of merely replacing system RAM or storage this would replace the CPU, the memory controllers, the video card, the sound card --it would be the ultimate SoC platform.
with this operating systems will change for ever!! (Score:2, Insightful)
so to get full potential from this we will have to redesign our OSs otherwise if we stick it in the current system it will be a fraction of its potential.
Can I claim prior art? (Score:2, Interesting)
Mark Brehob
Re:too bad (Score:3, Interesting)
A lot shorter than ten years, hopefully. Though I'm skeptical we'll see them commercially available within a year...
I hope it would be compatable with existing memory systems, though. It would be nice to just swap out existing RAM for a NanoRAM module and get an instant performance and capacity boost (Providing the controllers don't become an issue, but that's where AMD's 64-bit chip and i
Re:too bad (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe you didn't notice - it said TERABIT/cm^2. Your current system probably can't handle more than 2Gig of RAM - let alone hundreds and hundreds of gig. Hell, your BIOS may not even be able to handle a HD that large.
I mean, really. 100x faster, and >1000x the storage. Think about that for a minute. Who gives a fuck if you have to toss your HUGE SLOW FUCKING SYSTEM and buy a new one?
If they do pull this off (and I think they're blowing smoke), it will make today's computers look like the vacuum tube machines of yore.
Hope to drop in upgrade... Come on.
Re:too bad (Score:2)
Re:too bad (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, you're missing the point. This would represent a fundamental change in computing. 1 terabit/cm^2. Imagine having 50 GBytes on your wristwatch.
Half a terabyte on your cell phone.
As many terabytes as you can imagine on a laptop that runs for a day because it doesn't have a HD and all the RAM is NVRAM, and it's 100 times faster than your current system.
Really. Think about it. Who gives a shit if you can upgrade your current machine. Did you see the article recently about AppleII users getting together? You'd look as silly as any of them... (no offense - I've run a IIe emulator within the past 3 months, and it was fun; a lot like it will be amusing to be able to store all of silentbozo's files on my cell phone many times over)
Re:too bad (Score:2)
Justin Dubs
Re:too bad (Score:2)
Apple already ships laptops with 4 (6 if you believe them) hour batteries. If you cut me some slack and figure that a day is a working day - 8 hours - then I'd imagine it'd be no problem. But I'm really guessing here. You're right, of course, about the LCD issue. I guess that is where more than half the juice goes.
The thing I worry about... (Score:4, Interesting)
--After all, if the scale is NANO, one cosmic ray or stray electro/magnetic field can potentially screw up a lot more percentage of memory... Massive redundancy, high speed and constant bit cross-checking would seem to be a reasonable requirement for these chips.
--For just one example, look what a few scratches can do to a CDR - or worse, a DVD. If you can't read it (use it reliably XMillion times) it's basically not very useful...
Re:too bad (Score:2, Insightful)
Or, if you prefer, new computers that can still use the older (and likely cheaper, at least initially) silicon memory.
I don't know about you, but I certaintly don't throw out my system every ti
Re:too bad (Score:5, Insightful)
The hardware aside, in software this memory could easily replace the hd and ram, at least on a linux system. The problems I see are that all software is currently designed to use both memory and disk as if they are two separate things... and to use one device in place of both would require a rewrite. In linux talking to hardware is done through the kernel, so changes to the kernel to "emulate" ram could get this hacked into usability fairly quickly. It could allow the amount to use as ram to be passed as a kernel parameter.
Re:too bad (Score:2)
Re:too bad (Score:2)
Re:too bad (Score:2)
--You mean ya can't do that TODAY... All it needs is BIOS support, and you're good to go. (But please don't forget reliable LINUX support too, before it goes on sale!)
Re:too bad (Score:2)
Another poster said why not just use a ramdrive... well the OS has to live and boot off it. I'm talking about completely eliminating the concepts of "hard drive" and "ram" altogether and having just one disk in the system. There still needs to be bios and hardware support of course.
Re:too bad (Score:5, Interesting)
No. Silicon RAM is to NanoRAM as Vacuum tubes are to Silicon. They're both there to do the same thing, it's just that nobody bothers with vacuums (except for a very few special purpose - like audiophiles) because they're old and clunky.
The point is that you would have faster, non-volitile RAM that would fit into existing hardware.
No. The point is that you could easily have so much RAM that it would make retrofitting it into a current system look like putting an spoiler on a model-T.
I'd also imagine that this non-volitile RAM uses next to no power, making it a great potential drop-in replacement for laptops and other portable devices.
Good thinking. Oh, and let's not forget you wouldn't need to spin a disk at 1000s of RPM, which uses some energy as well.
This is not an upgrade. It is a change.
Re:too bad (Score:2)
If it's as cheap, revolutionairy and fast as they promise it to be, why not let it be usable on retro hardware? Simply create a whole wad of those things with extremely low densities so you can get a nice 1 or 2 gB strip of memory for 10 Euro. Just add a throttling system (enough space on the modules themselves left!) that makes it act like an equivalent memory module in mhz, so it can be set to perform like a 100mhz DIMM or like a 800mhz Rambus, at will.
And yes, if it'd work out and is real to start with
Re:too bad (Score:2)
Of course if they knew anything at all about basic bus architecture (aside from obscure acronyms), it would be obvious.
The only conceivable 'drop-in' on current machines this might be useful fo
Re:too bad (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that AMD built a memory controller into the Opteron is not necessarily something to be happy about. On the one hand, it greatly reduces latency of memory reads/writes, on the other hand you can't upgrade the memory speed beyond what your entire CPU supports -- you have to upgrade your entire CPU. Which means AMD has to redesign the CPU to take advantage of faster (or different types of) memory. And Opterons aren't that cheap yet...
Re:too bad (Score:5, Interesting)
you can't upgrade the memory speed beyond what your entire CPU supports -- you have to upgrade your entire CPU. Which means AMD has to redesign the CPU to take advantage of faster (or different types of) memory. And Opterons aren't that cheap yet...
Not so. The opteron has 3 hypertransport busses which can be connected to alternate memory controllers - the onboard one is then disabled. What I want to know is whether AMD plans to maintain separate part numbers for each speed/controller combo, or if they're just going to band them, with higher clocked Opterons getting faster memory.
Re:too bad (Score:4, Funny)
Wow, I have to upgrade the entire CPU. Like, I get a new motherboard with 128Gbytes of nanotube memory, but I can't put bits and pieces of my old Opteron on it. Perfectly shocking. What was AMD thinking.
Re:too bad (Score:2)
Compatible (Score:2)
I'm betting that when this first comes on the market, it's packaged in hard-disk sized boxes and has a SCSI connector.
SCSI?! What a waste! (Score:2)
Using this technology requires rebuilding entire system busses to use it effectively.
Not a waste, a sensible intermediary step (Score:2)
(disclaimer: my h/w knowledge is not vast, I picked SCSI as a widely-adopted standard for ultra fast HDs; if there's a better one, assume I said that instead)
still won't be that fast. (Score:2)
If this new ram were to be added on to current systems, it would likely be in the form of a PCI add-in card. That's still a bottleneck, but nowhere near as slow as using a bus spec for mechanical subsystems.
Re:Compatible (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:too bad (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What does that mean in practical terms? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What does that mean in practical terms? (Score:2, Informative)
well... if your name is minime disregard this ;-)
Re:What does that mean in practical terms? (Score:2, Funny)
Libraries of Congress measurement (Score:5, Insightful)
Theoretical Nano-Ram storage capacity == 1x10^12 bits / cm^2
1x10^12 bits = 1.25x10^11 bytes = 116.4 Gigabytes
That's 0.114 Libraries of Congress per cm^2.
An iPod, according to Apple's website, is 4.1 by 2.4 inches (it's also
1in = 2.540cm
4.1in = 9.840 cm
2.4in = 6.096 cm
Let's chop a cm off each of those to account for the casing, structural bits, and soldering points that aren't actually storage space. That gives us a size of 8.840cmx5.096cm for our hypothetical nanoPod (so on a tangent, how long before some company introduces the new 'e' and starts dubbing products 'nRAM', the 'nPod', 'nTel nSide', etc?). That's a surface area of 45.049cm^2.
Given our previous determination that we can store 0.114 LoC on 1cm^2, we arrive at a figure of 5.136 LoC/i(or LoC/n for nPod, as the case may be).
Re:Libraries of Congress measurement (Score:2)
Re:What does that mean in practical terms? (Score:2)
Re:What does that mean in practical terms? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Unfortunately (Score:2)
Re:Unfortunately (Score:2)
Re:Hmmm... (Score:2)
compared to now... yes... compared to anything else using the same technology? still no.
Re:how do we dispose of them (Score:3, Funny)
Re:how do we dispose of them (Score:2)