SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: wily who wrote (103735)5/27/2000 9:56:00 PM
From: Elmer  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
Re: "It's actually faster than SDRAM. The limited testing they did before the Intel collaboration was done with 5ns write pulse-widths. I believe that's a good bit faster than SDRAM"

Faster than off die SRAM but it'll have to be faster than that to replace on die cache but with wider data paths who knows? Wish Paul was around because I seem to remember him commenting on this a while back.

Do you have a position in ENER?

EP



To: wily who wrote (103735)5/27/2000 10:30:00 PM
From: kash johal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
Wily,

You are way off here.

OUM is unproven in yield.

Even if it works we are talking 2-3 yrs before it is productized.

And On chip sram has speeds of sub 1ns.

At 2Ghz processors a year or so from now we are talking sub .5ns cycle times.

Having said that there are several interesting NVM approaches that folks are working on.

They will provide major challenges to rotating magnetic memory and traditional Flash, IMHO.

regards,

Kash


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News