Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.



Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline News  
#1 Posted : Monday, February 20, 2012 11:24:00 AM(UTC)

Rank: Member


Groups: Administrators, Registered
Joined: 9/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 25,073

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
NAND Flash and SSDs have become the darling of enthusiasts in recent years, thanks to a potent combination of improved read/write performance, virtually no latency, and lower power consumption compared to hard drives. A new report from the University of California San Diego, however, casts doubt on the long-term scalability of the format. The International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors (ITRS)' most recent report backs up such statements.

Flash's fundamental problem is that the same technological innovations that are improving performance, power consumption, and cutting costs are also biting into its durability. The problem is illustrated in the graph below. Note that the best results, in this case, are at the bottom of the graph. The higher the data points are on the y-axis, the greater the bit error rate (BER). This data isn't theoretical; the research team tested a total of 45 flash chips made by six different manufacturers.

The chart shows that flash reliability remained constant or improved as manufacturers shifted from 72nm to 50nm production; 50nm MLC was capable of matching the reliability of 72nm SLC. 40nm designs also held reliability constant; the first TLC design appears at this node. Below 40nm, durability takes a marked turn for the worse; TLC error rates at 22nm are very high.

Poor reliability isn't the only concern. As process technology shrinks and transistors become more dense, the latency associated with the read/write process increases. This occurs with all types of NAND (SLC, MLC, and TLC), but TLC will suffer the most dramatic impact. The chart below shows the associated performance hit. The team states that "With current trends, our SSDs could be up to 34x larger, but the latency will be 1.7x worse for reads and 2.6x worse for writes. This will reduce the write latency advantage that SSDs offer relative to disk from 8.3x (vs. a 7 ms disk access) to just 3.2x."

According to the ITRS' 2011 report, even that 34x capacity is a pipe dream. While the researchers in California assumed Flash could scale to 6.5nm on conventional CMOS, the ITRS sees Flash possibly hitting a wall within six years. "For NAND flash...This geometric limitation will severely challenge scaling far below 20 nm half-pitch. In addition, fringing-field effect and floating-gate interference, noise margin, and few-electron statistical fluctuation... all impose  deep challenges."

The report goes on to detail a number of avenues that might extend Flash's roadmap, including the widespread adoption of 3D manufacturing technologies, the availability of alternative types of memory, and the tremendous difficulty of ensuring that whatever solutions are designed match or exceed current reliability requirements. 3D stacking will allow Flash to continue pushing densities, but even the ITRS' most optimistic projections don't show solutions for the variety of problems confronting long-term scaling. The group's comprehensive tables are too extensive to reproduce here, but by 2016, an increasing number of technologies are labeled in red and denoted as "Manufacturable Solutions are NOT known."
Offline AKwyn  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, February 21, 2012 5:14:20 PM(UTC)

Rank: Advanced Member


Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/18/2010(UTC)
Posts: 3,215
Location: California

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)

Interesting. I always told people that SSD's needed to be more reliable before they could replace HDD's but with this chart, it turns out that type of reliability may never be achieved; additionally, the fact that performance degrades as time goes on is also scary. It's no secret that every technology has a wall that'll be hit and when they hit that wall they'll either have to find a way to get through that wall or develop new technology if that wall can't be broken; to hear that flash's wall is going to be tough to break is disheartening due to the fact that SSD's have been hyped as the successor of HDD, the one that'd bring faster writes, faster reads and lower latency; while the read speeds will be more or less uneffected; the write speeds and the latency will take a major step backwards, the major drawing point of SSD's will be marginalized and soon there will barely be any difference between HDD's and SDD's as a whole.

I think what they need to do is find another storage method or work with what they have; it may mean starting from scratch or dealing with high prices but it's better then wondering whether or not the cheaper TLC will be able to be reliable enough without affecting the speeds. MLC and SLC may be expensive right now but from the charts above, it's better to keep those instead of trying to lower prices further through TLC; if anything it would help SSD's get by for at least a few years.

Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.