16 layer TSV .... that's going to be cheap !
Western Digital Corp has won a temporary restraining order (TRO) preventing its flash joint-venture partner Toshiba from impeding the shipment of engineering wafers and samples to WD in Milpitas, CA, as well as preventing it from blocking certain Western Dig employees from accessing shared databases. The two parties are in an …
While 1 TB in a single package is cool, I'm not sure what the market is for it. That's great for saving space in a phone or tablet, but no one is shipping 1 TB phones or tablets, or is likely to do so in the next few years. I suppose that would be handy for building a 100 TB SAS SSD, but the market for those is tiny.
I guess 8 TB m.2 SSDs could use these - four chips on each side?
It's nothing to do with Metric and Imperial.
RAM and ROM from the beginning used binary addressing. Thus 10 wires = 1024 addresses. "Proper" k, M, G is 1000, 1000 x 1000 and 1000 x 1000 x 1000. Floppy drives and Hard Drives didn't originally use fixed physical address lines, but cylinders (basically tracks x heads) and sectors per track and then what ever number of bytes fitted into a sector. Floppy disks might even have had a hole to mark each sector, or start of all sectors. Density was thus lower at outer edge. Later they varied the number of sectors upwards as you moved out from hub, but the controller mapped the old system to the real geometry.
So spinning disks count actual number of usable bytes and use multiples of 1000.
RAM and ROM and CPU address line capacity are more naturally counted as multiples of 1024
see Wikipedia Mebibyte a largely ignored attempt to end the confusion.
So nothing to do with Metric and Imperial, but simple convenience for semiconductor addressing.
The bit about why disks use multiples of 1000 is creative revisionism. Until the mid-late 80s disk vendors normally used multiples of 1024 for disk sizes. When disks got into 100s of MBytes, drive manufacturer marketing departments realized they could sell their drives (especially PC drives to nontechnical customers) with bigger numbers using 1000 bytes/KB than 1024. Put simply, why sell it as a 95MBytes drive when you can sell it as a huge 100MByte drive?
There was a bit of "they are lying!!!" complaints in trade press and the old USENET, yet obviously it stuck. But it was all about marketing and money, not convenience or natural counting.
Next move. Slice most of the wafer away (and reuse it) to make them about 30x shorter.
My instinct is WDC don't want to pay the price Tosh need for this to get them out of the s**t they got into buying the Westinhouse nuclear construction operation, itself well f**ked by buying what looked like a large construction company but was actually cobbled together by some "entrepreneur" (does this word really come from the same root as "entrap"? It looks like it ought to).
If the plan is to wait till Toshiba tanks then buy the other half of the JV at fire-sale prices, they might get gazumped by, say, Seagate or a Vulture Capitalist house.
Sad that they are prepared to lay waste to a great corporation like Toshiba to save a few shekels.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019