Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday September 09, @09:48AM   Printer-friendly

XPoint capacity to surpass DRAM by 2030

We have just learned about a report by Coughlin Associates and Objective Analysis called Emerging Memories Take Off, courtesy of Tom Coughlin. The report looks at 3D XPoint, MRAM, ReRAM and other emerging memory technologies and says their revenues could grow to $44 billion by 2031. That's because they will displace some server DRAM, and also NOR flash and SRAM — either as standalone chips or as embedded memory within ASICs and microcontrollers.

The emerging memory market is set to grow substantially with 3D XPoint revenues reaching $20 billion-plus by 2031, and standalone MRAM and STT-RAM reaching $1.7 billion in revenues by then. The report predicts that the bulk of embedded NOR and SRAM in SoCs will be replaced by embedded ReRAM and MRAM.

A chart shows XPoint capacity ships crossing the 100,000PB level in 2028 and so surpassing DRAM, whose capacity growth is slowing slightly. The chart shows XPoint capacity shipped being 1000PB this year. That number will grow 100x to 100,000PB in 2028.

Related: Micron Abandons 3D XPoint, Puts Fab Up for Sale
Micron Sells 3D XPoint Fab to Texas Instruments, Not Intel

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by takyon on Thursday September 09, @02:25PM (2 children)

    by takyon (881) <> on Thursday September 09, @02:25PM (#1176266) Journal

    It is a non-volatile memory technology intended to exist in a tier between DRAM and NAND, or replace/reduce one or the other in some cases.

    Compared to DRAM, 3D XPoint is denser, cheaper, but slower.

    Compared to NAND, 3D XPoint is faster, but less dense and more expensive. []

    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 []
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Informative=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by Booga1 on Saturday September 11, @01:25AM (1 child)

    by Booga1 (6333) on Saturday September 11, @01:25AM (#1176850)

    If it had originally launched in larger capacities, I think it would have had a serious chance of displacing the database SSD market entirely. Unfortunately, the tiny sizes were neither big enough to displace the SSD nor fast enough to displace DRAM.
    I think it would have been a hit if Intel had just been a bit bolder on making a push for a specific market. Instead, they half-assed it and set a trend. Second generation Optane was really good, but by then the SSD market was on par for capacity and "good enough" to start taking over bulk storage in the VM/VPS market.

    Optane(3d Xpoint) is great, but their timing was off. I think these predictions are seriously miscalculating the current SSD market and trends. Optane is so dead that even Intel doesn't seem to believe in it any more.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 11, @07:39AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 11, @07:39AM (#1176904)

      Maybe you are right about the botched launch strategy (similar to how SMR has been botched), but we love it in certain roles. Used correctly, we've seen increases in excess of 10x on some workloads and the minimum we see is in the neighborhood of doubling. For locality of data especially, it really is hard to beat.