Ten Year Anniversary of Core 2 Duo and Conroe: Moore’s Law is Dead, Long Live Moore’s Law
by Ian Cutress on July 27, 2016 10:30 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Core 2 Duo
- Conroe
- ITRS
- Nostalgia
- Time To Upgrade
Looking To The Future: NAND Flash Scales Up to 64 TB SSDs in 2030
Over the past few years, the NAND Flash industry has gone through two major shifts in technology: the movement from 1 to 2 to 3 bits per cell, which directly increases bit density and capacity, and also moving from planar flash to variants of 3D stacking. Stacking can refer to individual NAND dies, as well as stacking those dies into a single package: both of these features are being extensively investigated to increase density also. There are two main drivers for this: reduction in cost, and capacity. However, despite this, the predictions in the ITRS report for NAND flash are primarily looking at improvements to numbers of layers rather than lithography changes or moving to more bits per cell.
As we can see, TLC (according to the report) is here to stay. QLC, or whatever you want to call it, is not mentioned. The two changes are the number of memory layers, moving from 32 today to 128 around 2022 and then 256/512 by 2030, and the number of word-lines in one 3D NAND string. This gives a product density projection of 256 Gbit packages today to 1 Tbit packages in 2022 and 4 Tbit packages in 2030.
If we apply this to consumer drives available today, we can extrapolate potential SSD sizes for the future. The current Samsung 850 EVO 4 TB uses Samsung’s 48-layer third generation V-NAND to provide 256 Gbit TLC parts. Alongside the 4 TB of memory, the controller requires 4 GB of DRAM, which is another concern to remember. So despite the report stating 256 Gbit in 32-layer, we have 256 Gbit in 48-layer, which is a difference primarily in die-size predictions for the report. Still, if we go off of the product density we should see 12 TB SSDs by 2020, 16 TB in 2022, 48 TB in 2028 and 64 TB drives in 2030. It’s worth noting that the ITRS report doesn’t mention power consumption in this table, nor controller developments which may be a substantial source of performance and/or capacity implementations.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
158 Comments
View All Comments
patel21 - Thursday, July 28, 2016 - link
Me Q6600 ;-)nathanddrews - Thursday, July 28, 2016 - link
Me too! Great chip!Notmyusualid - Thursday, July 28, 2016 - link
Had my G0 stepping just as soon as it dropped.Coming from a high freq Netburst, I was thrown back, by the difference.
Since then I've bought Xtreme version processors... Until now, its been money well spent.
KLC - Thursday, July 28, 2016 - link
Me too.rarson - Thursday, August 4, 2016 - link
I built my current PC back in 2007 using a Pentium Dual Core E2160 (the $65 bang for the buck king), which easily overclocked to 3 GHz, in an Abit IP35 Pro. Several years ago I replaced the Pentium with a C2D E8600. I'm still using it today. (I had the Q9550 in there for a while, but the Abit board was extremely finnicky with it and I found that the E8600 was a much better overclocker.)paffinity - Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - link
Merom architecture was good architecture.CajunArson - Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - link
To quote Gross Pointe Blank: Ten years man!! TEN YEARS!guidryp - Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - link
Too bad you didn't test something with a bit more clock speed.So you have ~2GHz vs ~4GHz and it's half as fast on single threaded...
Ranger1065 - Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - link
I owned the E6600 and my Q6600 system from around 2008 is still running. Thanks for an interesting and nostalgic read :)Beany2013 - Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - link
Built a Q6600 rig for a mate just as they were going EOL and were getting cheap. It's still trucking, although I suspect the memory bus is getting flaky. Time for a rebuild, methinks.And a monster NAS to store the likely hundreds of thousands of photos she's processed on it and which are stuck around on multiple USB HDDs in her basement.
It's not just CPUs that have moved on - who'd have thought ten years ago that a *good* four bay NAS that can do virtualisation would be a thing you could get for under £350/$500 (QNAP TS451) without disks? Hell, you could barely build even a budget desktop machine (just the tower, no monitor etc) for that back then.
God I feel old.