Australian startup claims RRAM breakthrough

[Idontcare]

Australian startup claims RRAM breakthrough

Startup 4DS Inc. has emerged from stealth mode and claims to have made a major breakthrough in resistive random access memory (RRAM) technology.

The company is now looking for a manufacturing partner to bring its so-called ''4DS memory'' into mass production, said Kurt Pfluger, chief executive of 4DS. "It's a simple process,'' Pfluger said. ''This has the potential to replace DRAMs and flash.''

4DS' RRAM is a high-capacity, non-volatile memory with fast switching speeds measured below 5-ns, and with an endurance of 1 billion write/read cycles. Compared to flash memory, RRAM requires lower voltages and lower currents, enabling its use in low power applications, he said.

RRAM exhibits lower programming currents than phase-change memory or PRAM, the company said. Compared to MRAM, RRAM has a simpler, smaller cell structure. MRAM has a 16F2 structure, while 4DS makes use of a 4F2 technology.

http://www.eetimes.com/news/se...cleID=213400587&pgno=1

Interesting, potentially disruptive technology for current flash business with their 5ns switching speed versus the current µs-to-ms range of flash memory switching speeds.

Of course there is high probability this falls in the dud-bin along with all the other previously hyped alternative memory approaches (zram anyone), but there's no harm in knowing a little bit about the next hyped contender as it steps into the ring.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Australian startup claims RRAM breakthrough

Startup 4DS Inc. has emerged from stealth mode and claims to have made a major breakthrough in resistive random access memory (RRAM) technology.

The company is now looking for a manufacturing partner to bring its so-called ''4DS memory'' into mass production, said Kurt Pfluger, chief executive of 4DS. "It's a simple process,'' Pfluger said. ''This has the potential to replace DRAMs and flash.''

4DS' RRAM is a high-capacity, non-volatile memory with fast switching speeds measured below 5-ns, and with an endurance of 1 billion write/read cycles. Compared to flash memory, RRAM requires lower voltages and lower currents, enabling its use in low power applications, he said.

RRAM exhibits lower programming currents than phase-change memory or PRAM, the company said. Compared to MRAM, RRAM has a simpler, smaller cell structure. MRAM has a 16F2 structure, while 4DS makes use of a 4F2 technology.

http://www.eetimes.com/news/se...cleID=213400587&pgno=1

Interesting, potentially disruptive technology for current flash business with their 5ns switching speed versus the current µs-to-ms range of flash memory switching speeds.

Of course there is high probability this falls in the dud-bin along with all the other previously hyped alternative memory approaches (zram anyone), but there's no harm in knowing a little bit about the next hyped contender as it steps into the ring.

They should name it xram. Isn't everything that is super cool and awesome X-something. They built a product, they need to market it to make it successful.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
They should name it xram. Isn't everything that is super cool and awesome X-something. They built a product, they need to market it to make it successful.

Ha! Good point 🙂

How about iRam! It can't fail.

 

[SunnyD]

I don't understand how they can possibly state that it could replace DRAM if it has any sort of limited read/write cycle duty. 1 billion cycles for DRAM probably happens in the span of a few hours at best for DRAM.

 

[pm]

A wikipedia link since I hadn't heard of this technology before:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RRAM

Creating filaments of conductivity through an highly resistive materal and then repairing it by applying a "reset" voltage? Sounds about as crazy as the idea of heating up a tiny cell of material inside an array of billions of other cells until it melts and then varying the recrystallization time to determine ones and zeros (PRAM technology).

Still, I would think that long reliability as it scales down would be the problem with this technology - which I notice is what Wikipedia says too at the bottom so it's nice to know that my first thought matches up with what Wikipedia says.

As far as names for non-volatile technologies... I think "Spin-transfer torque RAM" has them all beat. It just sounds like a technology that would beat the heck out of any other contender. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_torque_transfer )

 

[taltamir]

I don't think it is disruptive technology:

In contrast to "disruptive technology", a "revolutionary technology" introduces products with highly improved new features into the market, such as the automobile or telephone. A "sustaining technology or innovation" improves product performance of established products. Sustaining technologies are incremental.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: taltamir
I don't think it is disruptive technology:

In contrast to "disruptive technology", a "revolutionary technology" introduces products with highly improved new features into the market, such as the automobile or telephone. A "sustaining technology or innovation" improves product performance of established products. Sustaining technologies are incremental.

You are applying the distinction with a tad too much prejudice.

If you make flash, evolutionary improvements in the technology of flash would include node shrinks etc.

Replacing the industry of Flash with one of RRAM (or FRAM, or any other non-Flash technology) would most certainly qualify as disruptive and non-evolutionary.

Now if you USE flash chips to make thumb-drives, then in your industry segment the technology introduction of a memory that displaces Flash but still enables you to produce newer better thumbdrives would be viewed by you and your customers as simply evolutionary.

Disruptive/incremental isn't really a litmus test, it is subjective. But usually the terminology is employed to describe the ramifications to an industry segment at the level that the technology makes the largest impact.

It would be most disruptive to IM Flash and Toshiba if RRAM took off at say Samsung and within a span of two years the Flash market shrank by 90% (just an excessive example), but the SSD markets would likely not see RRAM as enabling them to produce a further disruptive technology for the consumer. The consumer might see RRAM SSD's as just an incremental improvement in some metrics over their SSD's of the prior year.

Personally I like to categorize technologies in terms of disruptive versus complementary. Flash and DRAM are complementary, the existence of either really doesn't disrupt the viability of the other's existence.

Competing non-volatile memory technologies are not entirely complementary, and for good reason as they are created with the very goal in mind of displacing the dominant memory technology as a justification for the early R&D $'s invested. If you target your product to be capable of dominating an existing $20B industry it is an easier sell to venture capitalists than targeting your product to create an otherwise non-existent industry. Disruptive technology is what startups do.

 

[taltamir]

I didn't say it was evolutionary... for it to be disruptive it HAS to be an inferior product that is either:
1. cheaper (low end) and has the potential to eventually become better due to heavier research investment
2. appeals to new markets (either has new features despite being inferior in traditional approach, or being cheaper), and again, the new market is so big that it will take over the original market due to increase in research expenditure.

What I think it is, is REvolutionary. It is an entirely new product, that will replace an older and inferior product that has no benefits over it.
For example, the car vs the horse. The car is a revolutionary new product that is clearly better than the horse, it is not a cheaper and inferior product that will eventually overtake the horse due to increase in research due to massive use due to it being cheap.

PS. that is only if their claims are real of course.