By submitting your email address, you agree to receive emails regarding relevant topic offers from TechTarget and its partners. You can withdraw your consent at any time. Contact TechTarget at 275 Grove Street, Newton, MA.
In this Q&A with Marc Staimer of Dragon Slayer Consulting, learn more about 3-D NAND technology, how different vendors' architectures compare and contrast, and when we'll see products based on 3-D NAND in the market.
What is 3-D NAND and why is it necessary?
Mark Staimer: 3-D NAND is the vertical stacking of NAND cells or layers of cells -- not to be confused with vertical chip stacking. It's necessary because 2-D NAND is getting close to die size limitations and chip density. It's running out of steam.
In technology, if you are not advancing, you're dying. Current 2-D NAND state of the art is 20 nm and 19 nm. Next step is 14 nm. Getting past 10 nm may be tough because of increasing electron leakage. [Three-dimensional] NAND is the industry's answer.
In 3-D NAND, what is a charge trap, and how does it differ from floating gate technology?
Staimer: Charge trap technology uses silicon nitride film to store electrons rather than the doped polycrystalline silicon frequently utilized by the floating gate technology. In a layperson's terms, charge trap flash stores electrons by capturing or trapping them in an insulator layer. Floating gate captures or traps electrons in a conductor layer. Those seemingly minor differences play out in flash endurance or wear life.
The general rule of thumb is that floating gate NAND wears out sooner and/or costs more than charge trap. Charge trapping requires a thinner layer that typically calls for less voltage, higher performance and better scaling. However, materials advancement by some vendors has narrowed the gap. For a user of flash SSDs, it is a matter of data resiliency, performance and cost.
I've heard there are different types of 3-D NAND?
Staimer: There are as many different types of 3-D NAND as there are vendors. Each one has its own 3-D NAND technology.
How do they differ in structure?
Staimer: Toshiba-SanDisk and Samsung combined own about 75% of the market share today. Both of these two giant partnerships are each developing variants of charge trapped flash technology. Toshiba calls their 3-D NAND Pipe-shaped Bit-Cost Scalable, -- acronym is P-BICS. Samsung calls their 3-D NAND Terabit Cell Transistor -- acronym is "TCAT." Although conceptually similar, they are very different metal alloys and designs. Hynix is working on a floating gate architecture. Micron is doing a variant of charge trapping based on deep-trench [dynamic] RAM.
Does one offer any benefits over the others or are they comparable?
Staimer: At this stage, it is too early to tell. It will come down to density, cost per [gigabyte], resilience, reliability, etc. Theoretically, charge trap might have a slight cost advantage. Ultimately, that will come down to yield and execution. Each vendor has placed a bet. The market will wring out the winners and losers.
Are you seeing 3D NAND flash in products on the market today? If not, when might we expect them?
Staimer: Samsung announced, in August of 2013 general mass production of their 3-D NAND and is shipping in quantities their 960-GB and 480-GB V-NAND[Vertical NAND] SSDs based on their 3-D NAND. Expect other vendors to follow suit this year.