Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Intel's Ultrasmall Flash Hard Drive

The chip maker has announced a drive that could bring the power of desktop computers to handheld devices.

By Kate Greene

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

Last Friday, Intel introduced one of the smallest flash-memory-based hard drives on the market. The chip, also known as a solid-state hard drive, competes with similar chips from Samsung, which store data in gadgets such as Apple's iPod nano and iPhone. But the Intel chip comes with a standard electronics controller built in, which makes it easy and inexpensive to combine multiple chips into a single, higher-capacity hard drive.

Light as a feather: This flash-memory-based hard drive comes in two- and four-gigabyte versions and weighs less than a drop of water. A two-gigabyte version will be available in small, portable computers, such as tablet PCs, early next year.
Credit: Intel

The move highlights Intel's effort to establish itself as a leader in flash-memory chips and to make them a replacement for the bulky and conventional magnetic hard drives that store data on most of the world's computers. Smart phones and so-called ultramobile computers will require some kind of dense, durable storage system in order to bring the power of desktop computers to handheld devices.

Since it found its way out of the lab in the late 1990s, flash memory has revolutionized consumer electronics. Because flash-memory chips are smaller, more rugged, and more energy efficient than magnetic hard disks, they have been the ideal replacement for hard drives in handheld devices such as MP3 players, and even in some high-end laptops. Flash is a solid-state memory technology, which means that it has no moving parts and stores data using silicon transistors like those found in microprocessor chips. Because it uses microprocessor technology, it also roughly follows Moore's Law, the prediction that the number of transistors on a chip doubles about every two years. For processors, this means that they get faster, but for flash-memory chips, it means that data storage doubles. And the market has responded to flash's burgeoning capacity: in 1999, the flash-memory market was nonexistent, but in 2007, it amounts to $15.2 billion.

At a press event, Don Larson, the marketing manager of Nand products at Intel, showed off the new chip. Called the Z-P140, it's about the size of a thumbnail and weighs less than a drop of water. It currently comes in two- and four-gigabyte versions, which are available to manufacturers for use in handheld devices. The first products featuring the new chips will be available in January.

Since the new solid-state drive has standard control electronics built in, it can be combined with up to three other Intel chips that don't have controllers, for a maximum of 16 gigabytes of storage, says Troy Winslow, flash marketing manager at Intel. While that may not seem like a lot compared with the 160-gigabyte hard drives in desktop computers, Larson pointed out that two gigabytes is enough to run some operating systems, such as Linux, along with software applications. The chip's electronics also allow it to work well with Intel processors, which make it useful for the ultramobile-PC market. And by 2010, Larson said, Intel expects to be able to cram 64 gigabytes of storage into a piece of silicon about the size of the new chip.

Story continues below


Flash has drawn criticism because its memory cells, which hold the electrical charges that represent data, tend to wear out quickly. But Winslow says that in the new chips, a memory cell can have data written to it and erased from it up to 100,000 times. And to ensure that no single cell gets overused, the chips have "wear-level" algorithms programmed into them, which evenly distribute reading and writing. Thus, flash memory could start to show signs of wear in about five years, depending on how it is used. In addition, the static electric field that holds charge tends to degrade over time; data losses in this case could occur after about 10 years.

Researchers at Intel and other companies are looking for the next solid-state technology that could replace flash. Winslow says that Intel is currently testing phase-change memory, a type of memory in which the crystal structure of a material changes in response to heat; particular orientations of the crystal correspond to 1s and 0s. Phase-change memory has many of the benefits of flash, such as its ruggedness and small size. But data can be written to it many thousands of times faster than it can to flash.

Comments

  • Joint Venture
    As far as I know Intel doesn't have their own flash department, they only make flash through joint ventures...I think this article is giving them too much credit.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    IronGoober
    12/18/2007
    Posts:1
    Avg Rating:
    5/5
    • Re: Joint Venture
      Fairly close

      Intel did a JV, of sorts, with Micron, as part of the big production ramp-up for the initial flash based iPod Nano.  It's called IM Flash (creative, huh).  I believe that Intel provided NOR flash IP to this venture.

      Last summer they announced a spin-off of the remainder of the flash technology and IP, including phase change memory (using technology licensed from Ovonyx). 

      This spin-off is with the flash side of ST Microelectronics and is called Numonyx.  They just announced that this venture is delayed from end of 2007 to March 28, 2008:
      http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aJjzWct6Pnck&refer=home
      Rate this comment: 12345

      smithsomian
      12/26/2007
      Posts:71
      Avg Rating:
      4/5
  • ONLY 2 GB???
    "Larson pointed out that two gigabytes is enough to run some operating systems, such as Linux, along with software applications."

    Oh, come on!  We used to run DOS from 5-1/4" floppies.  Yeah, granted, that was primitive, but still: even 1/10 GB ought to be PLENTY of room for ANY operating system.  Why is there even a question for 2 GB?  I think OS programmers are just spoiled and sloppy nowadays.  (Just checked my hard drive.  Month-old install of XP.  The "Windows" folder is 4.2 GB.  Unbelievable!  What kind of crud are they shoving in there?)
    Rate this comment: 12345

    dmm
    12/18/2007
    Posts:207
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
  • Forgot to say how cool this is
    OK, I said it.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    dmm
    12/18/2007
    Posts:207
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
  • What to do with all the old HDD
    As the world moves towards FHD (which I think is a great move) we should collectively come up with a good plan of what to do with the old HDD of which there must be billions which will become obsolete in the next 10 years...
    Rate this comment: 12345

    weee
    12/19/2007
    Posts:34
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
  • 4 GB?
    i can already go into a local electronics chain and pick up a 4 GB SDHC card so how is this such a great development.
    also in regards to operating systems (os). operating systems are so huge because microsoft is too cheap to right code from the ground up. instead each new (os) is just layered code built onto the original win nt. now if we were running a mac os there would not be this problem as they do start with a clean code each new os.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    urian1975
    12/19/2007
    Posts:16
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
    • Re: 4 GB?
      "i can already go into a local electronics chain and pick up a 4 GB SDHC card so how is this such a great development."

      The controller is built into the chip, and you might notice the size is somewhat smaller than you can buy in the shop.

      "also in regards to operating systems (os). operating systems are so huge because microsoft is too cheap to right code from the ground up.
      instead each new (os) is just layered code built onto the original win nt. now if we were running a mac os there would not be this problem as they do start with a clean code each new os. "

      Yes, of course.  That's exactly how people write Operating systems.  In fact Apple, when they chose to develop OS X past it's initial version decided to throw all of their previous work away.  "To hell with all the code that already works, we'll just scrap it and start again". 

      You really and quite obviously have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about.  Worse than that, you can't even see how illogical your statements are.  If that's how apple wrote their operating system it would mean there was no backward compatibility between Leopard, Tiger, Panther etc etc.  They would simply re-write every single line of code just for the hell of it, regardless of whether they needed to or not.  And not only that, they would have dropped Open BSD as the basis for OS X after it's first incarnation as they would have to start from a clean code base.  Not a particularly sensible strategy. 

      Also, Windows (2000, XP, Vista) are not simply a revision of Win NT.  Among many other things, the driver model was completely redone for Win2k and has been revised in each subsequent version.  Vista is again very much a new operating system that bares little resemblance internally to XP.  Not that I think this is a justification for an operating system install that is measured in the GB range.  There is indeed a massive amount of bloat in MS OSes
      Rate this comment: 12345

      bravid
      12/19/2007
      Posts:5
      Avg Rating:
      5/5

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

Malleable Maps, Artistic Robots and Bubble Interfaces
Technology Review January/February 2010

Current Issue

Security in the Ether
Information technology's next grand challenge will be to secure the cloud--and prove we can trust it.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2010 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.