Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Samsung's Fastest Phone Memory Ever Goes Into Production at 512GB (cnet.com) 44

Posted by msmash from the up-next dept.
Samsung today said it's started mass producing 512GB mobile-focused flash memory with over twice the read speed and 1.5 times the write speed of the previous leader, the 1TB module announced last month at CES. From a report: The V-NAND (PDF) memory is based on its embedded Universal Flash Storage (eUFS) 3.0 spec -- the 1TB is eUFS 2.1. Samsung says the 512GB memory can hit read speeds up to 2,100 megabytes per second compared with 1,000MB/sec of the 1TB flash; sequential write can hit 410MB/sec versus 260MB/sec. The eUFS 3.0 1TB memory is slated to arrive in the second half of 2019.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Samsung's Fastest Phone Memory Ever Goes Into Production at 512GB More

Samsung's Fastest Phone Memory Ever Goes Into Production at 512GB

Comments Filter:

  • No mention of price, but I would imagine around 350 USD?

  • Now we can charge $14,500 per phone, excerrent! (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Because having 512 GIGABYTES of PHONE RAM is really what the consumer needs. Can you make it fold and come in pink? I'll take out a mortgage, must have the new shiny whizbang!

    • Re:Now we can charge $14,500 per phone, excerrent! (Score:5, Funny)

      by PolygamousRanchKid ( 1290638 ) on Wednesday February 27, 2019 @03:22PM (#58190226)

      Because having 512 GIGABYTES of PHONE RAM is really what the consumer needs.

      Unfortunately . . . 256 GB will be pre-filled with bloatware.

    • Not so much for iOS, but for Android phones, I find they fill up much faster.
      I am not trying to Troll. it is probably because you can do more custom stuff on Android phones, that they get filled up faster. While Apple Walled Garden approach to Apps makes storage much smaller first by reducing what you can possible use, and often rejecting apps that use a lot of resources (even it for a purpose) and also forcing apps to follow UI Policies, so there is more shared resources.

  • It stands for Unix File System, it doesn't stand for "Cheap shitty phone-related stupid-shit". Unless it comes per-initialized with UFS, then Samsung, here's a big middle finger for putting more noise and chaos into google searches. Yes, I saw the lower-case "e" in there two. Learn how to create an acronym rather than how to copy Steve Jobs (and even he would know better than to use "UFS").
    • This actually has been problem for Google. I have seen them muddy the water with reused names/acronyms more often than what I would intuit as their fair share.

    • The two most popular phone OS's are Android and iOS.
      Android is based off of Linux, while not Unix, was designed with many of the Unix principals in mind.
      iOS is based off of a Unix kernel.

      • Personally, *nix represents smart people doing cool things whereas smartphones represent retards running into walls and having nervous breakdowns. The fact vendors horked a few bits of code does not make them Unix operating systems, not even fucking close.

        • Wow, you are able to express the intelligence and ability based on the Operating System they are working on?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      It stands for Unix File System, it doesn't stand for "Cheap shitty phone-related stupid-shit". Unless it comes per-initialized with UFS, then Samsung, here's a big middle finger for putting more noise and chaos into google searches. Yes, I saw the lower-case "e" in there two. Learn how to create an acronym rather than how to copy Steve Jobs (and even he would know better than to use "UFS").

      Sorry, blame JEDEC for that - UFS is the next-generation flash interface, which is what is done at the physical connect

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by _merlin ( 160982 )

        Yeah, UFS was a decent idea back in the '80s, but filesystems have advanced a lot since then. Find an OS with UFS support and try it out. You'll find it's slow and handles power failures poorly.

        • Actually I support thousands of machines using UFS. I can debug the filesystem code and have done so many times. So, yeah, I'm quite familiar with it. It's absolutely still in use in many many places (mostly legacy Solaris machines or on new NetBSD and/or FreeBSD boxes with low memory). Just because *you* don't see it, doesn't mean it's not there. Sure there are better file systems with more modern ideas incorporated into them like btrees, journaling or logging, and many other items like pseudo-volume-manag

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by _merlin ( 160982 )

            Oh sure, UFS is better than FAT, but that's not hard to do. Just about anything's better than FAT in terms of performance and functionality. The one advantage FAT has is that it's dead simple and easy to implement. A high school student could probably implement FAT.

            The BSDs kind of cheat by doing write-ahead logging for entire partitions. It's not that the filesystem supports it, it's that the OS storage layer wraps it around the filesystem. Unlike the journaling in newer incarnations of ext and HFS it

            • There are tons of filesystems and many are purpose built for specific instances. They perform well at those jobs. So what? I never said UFS was the best filesystem for all purposes. I pointed out FAT because it's of an age with UFS and still used widely despite being "old". BTW, there is no "cheating" with filesystems. You perform well with the workload or you go away whining about "cheating". Cache safety is completely tunable and comes with very reasonable defaults on any BSD boxes I've used. UFS is stil

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by _merlin ( 160982 )

                It's not Samsung, it's good old JEDEC. The official JEDEC name for this storage interface is Universal Flash Storage, abbreviated to UFS. Initialisms are always going to be overloaded unless they're made excessively long and convoluted (hello PCMCIA). I mean, take SMBC: it's Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, Sydney Missionary and Bible College, and (webcomic) Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal.

  • Not memory it's storage (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Doesn't anyone care about the distinction between "memory" and "storage". Why are they being used interchangeably?

    • Re:Not memory it's storage (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pgmrdlm ( 1642279 ) on Wednesday February 27, 2019 @03:16PM (#58190196) Journal
      I was wondering the same thing. And the truly sad part about this. You are the only one that pointed it out. Isn't this a geek site? Shouldn't we all know the difference????

      • . And the truly sad part about this. You are the only one that pointed it out.

        No he isn't. Not only is he not the only one, he wasn't even the first.

    • Doesn't anyone care about the distinction between "memory" and "storage". Why are they being used interchangeably?

      Because an entire generation of smart phone idiots dont know how much memory they have, or even that memory is a thing.

      • Quick off the top of your head what is the Bus transfer rate of your motherboard?

        The thing is, sometime technology reaches a good enough state, that for normal use, knowing how much you have isn't a big deal anymore.

        Mobile devices are not well designed for heavy multi-tasking like your desktop is. And with rather fast storage of state when you switch apps, Having dozens of Gigs of Volatile Ram isn't as needed on such a device.

    • How do they handle the heat? Many nvnm desktop solid state storage have heat sinks and they are bigger too.

      As for memory versus storage this used to be a continuum . Old computers leaned heavily on virtual memory page swaps. And newer ones have a continuum of speeds for memory caches and dram and memory backing the ssd and then ssd fused with spinning disk.

      On cellphones Apple initially only let one app be active at a time in memory .

      And future designs show even more memory types . Many core machines have

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by jellomizer ( 103300 )

      Because it is still Memory, and it is still RAM (Random Access Memory). The difference is that this product is Non-Volatile RAM that data will not go away after its power is turned off and what you call Memory is Volatile RAM, which will go away after power is lost.
      However both is Memory and RAM. As it hold data given to it for later retrieval. And they are Random Access meaning you don't need to sift threw a blocks of data you don't need until you happen to get to your useful memory spot.

      Historically Sto

      • Nope, Flash can't be accessed randomly, only by a block of the whole page. And even worse, those blocks need then to be erased in large groups. Actual memory not only is byte addressable, but also has around 4 orders of magnitude better access time than the flash disks in the article. As for non-volatile memory, it's 2-3 orders of magnitude faster than this fancy flash.

        Per your definition, a spinning disk would also count as memory, as you don't need to read it sequentially but can seek to a given sector

    • The product is a memory, the application is storage.

      So yeah, Samsung is producing a 512GB memory chip.

      Note: I work in semiconductor manufacturing

    • It is memory, Storage is one class or use of memory, usually non-volatile.

  • I look at my server raid array using 512G SSDs, and think wow, all those drives could now sit on a stick of gum with the same performance.... well maybe not write endurance... but
    What time we live in!

    • Chances are you SSD's arn't really that big, A good portion of it is protective casing, and connectors spreading out so they can be clipped in, and even spacing for anything that will need a human to be able to solder together. The big point about RAID, is if one fails, you can replace the failed component with a new one. Having an embedded RAID device the size of a stick of Gum would be counter productive.

    • Have you seen inside a 2.5" SSD? Here's the inside of the 1TB SSD I have: https://images.anandtech.com/d... [anandtech.com]

  • It would be good to know the IOPS for the new chips. The pdf suggests it should be significantly higher with random read time dropping from 49us to 35us.

Slashdot Top Deals

In the long run, every program becomes rococco, and then rubble. -- Alan Perlis

Close