Toshiba Sampling 64GB UFS-Based NAND chips

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Kevin Parrish
Contributor

Kevin Parrish has over a decade of experience as a writer, editor, and product tester. His work focused on computer hardware, networking equipment, smartphones, tablets, gaming consoles, and other internet-connected devices. His work has appeared in Tom's Hardware, Tom's Guide, Maximum PC, Digital Trends, Android Authority, How-To Geek, Lifewire, and others.

  • saturnus
    UFS, or in laymans terms USB gone SCSI, is a very interesting technology for mobile devices that could over time make actual separate volatile memory redundant as the transfer rates using only a single lane offer half the transfer rate as current LPDDR2 memory. One could easily imagine that with several lanes to each module and more modules in parallel could replace the need for DRAM in mobile devices altogether.
    Reply
  • master_chen
    Why do I feel like "Rambus 2.0"?
    Reply
  • ojas
    saturnusUFS, or in laymans terms USB gone SCSI, is a very interesting technology for mobile devices that could over time make actual separate volatile memory redundant as the transfer rates using only a single lane offer half the transfer rate as current LPDDR2 memory. One could easily imagine that with several lanes to each module and more modules in parallel could replace the need for DRAM in mobile devices altogether.Give it 5 years and Intel will integrate this into their CPUs... :lol:

    But actually...if what you're saying is correct...it would be kind of cool, to have one of these as an expansion card to your mobile devices. Increase RAM and storage simultaneously.
    Reply
  • icemunk
    heh. 169 balls. :P
    Reply
  • shriganesh
    169 balls.........! Wow! That's a lot of balls for a tiny chip :D
    Reply
  • josejones
    The article discusses "64 GB embedded NAND flash memory modules" but doesn't explain what the previous specs were so, how are us noobs suppose to know what the upgrade really is when the article doesn't give us the last model specs to compare it to?
    Reply
  • master_chen
    10435262 said:
    169 balls.........! Wow! That's a lot of balls for a tiny chip :D
    Those balls are still "small balls"...geddit?
    Reply
  • richwaa
    @saturnus: Sorry to disagree with you about UFS eventually making the need for separate volatile RAM redundant; it will not. UFS is an evolved interface spec for flash memory and does nothing to eliminate the inherent limitations in the flash memory itself. The number of memory operations that occur with code execution would create inherent instabilities in the current flash technologies that we don't know how to overcome --- yet. Running flash modules in parallel, as you suggest, would greatly exacerbate the already known problems with flash technologies; there's are really good reasons why disk/flash access moved from parallel to serial access such as clocking, capacitance, etc.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory#Limitations
    Reply
  • richwaa
    @saturnus: Sorry to disagree with you about UFS eventually making the need for separate volatile RAM redundant; it will not. UFS is an evolved interface spec for flash memory and does nothing to eliminate the inherent limitations in the flash memory itself. The number of memory operations that occur with code execution would create inherent instabilities in the current flash technologies that we don't know how to overcome --- yet. Running flash modules in parallel, as you suggest, would greatly exacerbate the already known problems with flash technologies; there's are really good reasons why disk/flash access moved from parallel to serial access such as clocking, capacitance, etc.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory#Limitations
    Reply
  • richwaa
    @saturnus: Sorry to disagree with you about UFS eventually making the need for separate volatile RAM redundant; it will not. UFS is an evolved interface spec for flash memory and does nothing to eliminate the inherent limitations in the flash memory itself. The number of memory operations that occur with code execution would create inherent instabilities in the current flash technologies that we don't know how to overcome --- yet. Running flash modules in parallel, as you suggest, would greatly exacerbate the already known problems with flash technologies; there's are really good reasons why disk/flash access moved from parallel to serial access such as clocking, capacitance, etc.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory#Limitations
    Reply