Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Scientists create world's densest memory circuit

Scientists create world's densest memory circuit

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharphtmlcomtoolsperformance
11 Posts 7 Posters 1 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • B Offline
    B Offline
    Bassam Abdul Baki
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Nice.[^] Not nice: :-D Heath said it's the sort of device that a semiconductor company like Intel Corp. would contemplate making in 2020. CPhog didn't appear so my sig is the default CP one. :confused:


    There are II kinds of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who understand Roman numerals. Web - Blog - RSS - Math

    C D C 3 Replies Last reply
    0
    • B Bassam Abdul Baki

      Nice.[^] Not nice: :-D Heath said it's the sort of device that a semiconductor company like Intel Corp. would contemplate making in 2020. CPhog didn't appear so my sig is the default CP one. :confused:


      There are II kinds of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who understand Roman numerals. Web - Blog - RSS - Math

      C Offline
      C Offline
      CastorTiu
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      What I'm missing here. I guess I lost something here. >> The circuit has 160,000 bits of capacity, compared with previous generations of molecular circuits that were demonstrated at 64 bits. >> But researchers point to the circuit's density as the real breakthrough: 100 billion bits per square centimeter. 100 billons bits = 100.000.000.000 bits 100.000.000.000 / 8 (or 9) = 12.500.000.000 Bytes 12.500.000.000 / 1024 = 12.207.031 KB 12.207.031 / 1024 = 11.920 MB 11.920 = 11 GB :doh: Today technology: http://www.sandisk.com/Products/Item(2318)-SDSDM-4096-SanDisk_miniSDHC_Card_4GB_miniSD_HighCapacity.aspx[^] >> Intel Corp. would contemplate making in 2020. :doh:

      -- If you think the chess rules are not fair, first beat Anand, Kasparov and Karpov then you can change them. Moral is, don't question the work of others if you don't know the reason why they did it.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • B Bassam Abdul Baki

        Nice.[^] Not nice: :-D Heath said it's the sort of device that a semiconductor company like Intel Corp. would contemplate making in 2020. CPhog didn't appear so my sig is the default CP one. :confused:


        There are II kinds of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who understand Roman numerals. Web - Blog - RSS - Math

        D Offline
        D Offline
        Dan Neely
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        "Each bit is just 15 nanometers wide, compared with the most dense memory devices currently available that measure 140 nanometers in width, the researchers said. A nanometer is a billionth of a meter." I'm wondering about this part, with CPUs transitioning from a 90 to 65nm process, is even ultrahighend memory lagging that far behind in terms of production or is the 140nm scale described here something different?

        -- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.

        C 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • D Dan Neely

          "Each bit is just 15 nanometers wide, compared with the most dense memory devices currently available that measure 140 nanometers in width, the researchers said. A nanometer is a billionth of a meter." I'm wondering about this part, with CPUs transitioning from a 90 to 65nm process, is even ultrahighend memory lagging that far behind in terms of production or is the 140nm scale described here something different?

          -- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.

          C Offline
          C Offline
          CastorTiu
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          http://www.sandisk.com/Corporate/PressRoom/PressReleases/PressRelease.aspx?ID=3693[^]

          -- If you think the chess rules are not fair, first beat Anand, Kasparov and Karpov then you can change them. Moral is, don't question the work of others if you don't know the reason why they did it.

          M D 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • C CastorTiu

            http://www.sandisk.com/Corporate/PressRoom/PressReleases/PressRelease.aspx?ID=3693[^]

            -- If you think the chess rules are not fair, first beat Anand, Kasparov and Karpov then you can change them. Moral is, don't question the work of others if you don't know the reason why they did it.

            M Offline
            M Offline
            Martin Haesemeyer
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            Now I'm not getting something here. The mentioned 8-Gigabits are 8 billion bits in my book. That would make it considerably less than the 100 billion wouldn't it??? Or is this 8-Gigabits measuring something completely different and if so than how is the link relevant to the article mentioned??? :confused: Cheers Martin

            "When your own heart asks - how will you respond?" Gosen waka shū "Situation normal - all fu***d up" Illuminatus! My photos on flickr

            D C S 3 Replies Last reply
            0
            • C CastorTiu

              http://www.sandisk.com/Corporate/PressRoom/PressReleases/PressRelease.aspx?ID=3693[^]

              -- If you think the chess rules are not fair, first beat Anand, Kasparov and Karpov then you can change them. Moral is, don't question the work of others if you don't know the reason why they did it.

              D Offline
              D Offline
              Dan Neely
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              That's what I thought, so I rephrase my question. Is the 140nm for current memory mentioned in the article something other than the process size?

              -- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.

              A 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M Martin Haesemeyer

                Now I'm not getting something here. The mentioned 8-Gigabits are 8 billion bits in my book. That would make it considerably less than the 100 billion wouldn't it??? Or is this 8-Gigabits measuring something completely different and if so than how is the link relevant to the article mentioned??? :confused: Cheers Martin

                "When your own heart asks - how will you respond?" Gosen waka shū "Situation normal - all fu***d up" Illuminatus! My photos on flickr

                D Offline
                D Offline
                Dan Neely
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                I was commenting on the statement in the article that current memory was at a 140nm size. That link was refering to sandisk moving from a 70 to 56nm process.

                -- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M Martin Haesemeyer

                  Now I'm not getting something here. The mentioned 8-Gigabits are 8 billion bits in my book. That would make it considerably less than the 100 billion wouldn't it??? Or is this 8-Gigabits measuring something completely different and if so than how is the link relevant to the article mentioned??? :confused: Cheers Martin

                  "When your own heart asks - how will you respond?" Gosen waka shū "Situation normal - all fu***d up" Illuminatus! My photos on flickr

                  C Offline
                  C Offline
                  CastorTiu
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  8 Gigabits or 8 billions bits is 1GB but I showed there that the technology is already here so they will put togheter more to get the 2GB, 4GB, 8GB, etc. The link I put on the previous link shows a MiniSD with 4GB (capital B = Bytes) = 4 billion Bytes or 32 billions bits which is not so far from the 100 billions that the article tells. Also the article talk about 140nm memory when SanDisk is already producing memory with 56nm

                  -- If you think the chess rules are not fair, first beat Anand, Kasparov and Karpov then you can change them. Moral is, don't question the work of others if you don't know the reason why they did it.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • D Dan Neely

                    That's what I thought, so I rephrase my question. Is the 140nm for current memory mentioned in the article something other than the process size?

                    -- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.

                    A Offline
                    A Offline
                    Andy Brummer
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    I think the smaller number is the size of the transistors used on the chip, but it takes more then 1 transistor to store a bit.

                    Using the GridView is like trying to explain to someone else how to move a third person's hands in order to tie your shoelaces for you. -Chris Maunder

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M Martin Haesemeyer

                      Now I'm not getting something here. The mentioned 8-Gigabits are 8 billion bits in my book. That would make it considerably less than the 100 billion wouldn't it??? Or is this 8-Gigabits measuring something completely different and if so than how is the link relevant to the article mentioned??? :confused: Cheers Martin

                      "When your own heart asks - how will you respond?" Gosen waka shū "Situation normal - all fu***d up" Illuminatus! My photos on flickr

                      S Offline
                      S Offline
                      Steve Mayfield
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      The SanDisk product is FLASH memory while the original article refers to DRAM which is faster and, I believe, more complex. Steve

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • B Bassam Abdul Baki

                        Nice.[^] Not nice: :-D Heath said it's the sort of device that a semiconductor company like Intel Corp. would contemplate making in 2020. CPhog didn't appear so my sig is the default CP one. :confused:


                        There are II kinds of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who understand Roman numerals. Web - Blog - RSS - Math

                        C Offline
                        C Offline
                        code frog 0
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        So they asked the local high school varsity football team to memorize the Pledge of Allegiance?:laugh:

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Don't have an account? Register

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • World
                        • Users
                        • Groups