3 ms·

I the comment you're referring to on the article by "Christian" misread the stated numbers, specifically, it seems he ignored/misread the "in about 1ns" part, a

by jcr 15y ago

I the comment you're referring to on the article by "Christian" misread the stated numbers, specifically, it seems he ignored/misread the "in about 1ns" part, and then implies "1 billion reads/writes and switches total." Article: > The cell has demonstrated an endurance of more than 1 billion reads/writes and switches in about 1ns. Christian: > With a switching time of 1ns, you could do those 1 billion writes in 1 second flat. What the the article is saying is that the device can endure more than 1 billion reads/writes and switches "within" 1ns. You could even say "per" 1ns if that reads better to you. What the device can endure within 1 full second is not stated, but may be extrapolated from the stated 1ns numbers.

Tuna-Fish 15y ago
No. Billion reads/writes within 1ns is simply not possible. That would imply that it can switch once per attosecond. Light cannot move more than 0.3nm, or one 30th of the length of this rram cell, in a single attosecond. What the text means that it can switch once per 1ns, and it has proven to have endurance of more than billion switches for the lifetime of the cell. So yes, it can do all those billion in a single second. And yes, it thus probably isn't good enough to replace DRAM yet.
- rbanffy 15y ago
  Actually, it would be possible. Under this speed, you would have an expressive delay (when compared to switching times) between the control and the output and the device would have parts of it in different states of a switch. Not a very practical idea, but it's not impossible.
  - Tuna-Fish 15y ago
    Actually, no. Memristors work by moving around oxygen atoms, and the read and write signals share wires. The write signal has to reach over the entire length of the cell, for some time, for a write to be successful. You can't even begin reading until the write has finished, and the write signal, which has orders of magnitude higher current than read, has been cleared from the wire.
    - rbanffy 15y ago
      Cool. I hadn't realized the read and write lines were the same. In that case, you really can't use the device as a delay-based sequential memory.
- jcr 15y ago
  Thank you. I still think there is something unclear or incorrect in the article, or maybe I'm just more confused than usual. ;)

by jcr 15y ago

Tuna-Fish 15y ago

No. Billion reads/writes within 1ns is simply not possible. That would imply that it can switch once per attosecond. Light cannot move more than 0.3nm, or one 30th of the length of this rram cell, in a single attosecond. What the text means that it can switch once per 1ns, and it has proven to have endurance of more than billion switches for the lifetime of the cell. So yes, it can do all those billion in a single second. And yes, it thus probably isn't good enough to replace DRAM yet.

rbanffy 15y ago
Actually, it would be possible. Under this speed, you would have an expressive delay (when compared to switching times) between the control and the output and the device would have parts of it in different states of a switch. Not a very practical idea, but it's not impossible.
- Tuna-Fish 15y ago
  Actually, no. Memristors work by moving around oxygen atoms, and the read and write signals share wires. The write signal has to reach over the entire length of the cell, for some time, for a write to be successful. You can't even begin reading until the write has finished, and the write signal, which has orders of magnitude higher current than read, has been cleared from the wire.
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    Cool. I hadn't realized the read and write lines were the same. In that case, you really can't use the device as a delay-based sequential memory.
jcr 15y ago
Thank you. I still think there is something unclear or incorrect in the article, or maybe I'm just more confused than usual. ;)