Breaking News
Blog

Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article

Blog
7/28/2010 05:32 PM EDT

 23 comments   post a comment
NO RATINGS
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
R G.Neale
User Rank
Rookie
re: Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article
R G.Neale   8/17/2010 10:10:58 PM
NO RATINGS
ExDRAMer-When you say my number is lower, for example 6 to 10 times lower. If I multiply my numbers the range 1 to 2 x10E7Amps/sq-cm by 6 or 10. At the extremes does that not give a result of 6 x 10E7 and 2x 10E8Amps/sq-cm? You are now claiming that I need to understand the geometry and nature of the cell. I think I do. So what next do you think I need to understand. My view is what you need to understand the effect of current densities of 1x 10E7Amps/sq-cm to 1x 10E8Amps/sq-cm,, especially in relation to electro-migration. Your position appears to be that current densities of that level are safe and will give rise to reliable PCM product. Mine is I am prepared to make that statement when I fully understand the effects and consequences. Until that time I would suggest caution and you perhaps ascribing a question mark on PCM reliability and scaling. (As an aside I am reluctant to take advice from somebody hiding behind a user name I am prepared to make clear who I am, why do you find that difficult in an honest debate or discussion?)

MoreMemory
User Rank
Rookie
re: Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article
MoreMemory   8/17/2010 5:42:59 PM
NO RATINGS
As a correction - I never suggested that Numonyx had a range of current density from “6 x 10E7Amps/sq-cm to 2 x10E8Amps/sq-cm”. I stated that the range of current you gave was low by a factor of 6-10 and gave the reference to a figure and paper that showed an operating current density of 1.3 X10E8 Amps/sq-cm for the 45 nm node [3]. I should have more precisely stated that the current density range you were giving was low by a factor of 6.5 - 13. In regards to calculating current density - it is not a question on being on the generous side or erring on the safe side “for fairness” – it is a matter of understanding the geometry of and structure of the PCM cell and utilizing a correct methodology to calculate the actual current density. In the all the recent PCM cell structures by Samsung, Hynix, Numonyx and IBM/Macronix a form of sub-lithographic technique (or ebeam in the case of the IBM line cell) is utilized to reduce the PCM storage area. The proposed sub-litho methods vary drastically and for a given cell technology and one can debate the manufacturability / scalability and controllability of the individual technique. However, it is erroneous to ignore the underlying device structure and associated sub litho technique incorporated in the cell construction in any meaningful current density calculation used to compare different cell technologies and geometries

zman_tekinsil
User Rank
Rookie
re: Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article
zman_tekinsil   8/17/2010 3:16:21 PM
NO RATINGS
While the concept of "phase change in some materials such as colcogenide materials" leading to "distinct resistive states", was brilliant (several decades ago) it could not in any ways compete with current flash. Those who preached for PCM, wanted to displace current Flash they do not master well the art (current flash technology that is). Current Flash continued to scale until today. Current Flash allows precise charge trapping in floating gate. This precise control of charge led to Multiple Bits per cell. PCM would have hard time accomodating Multiple Bits per cell as excessive temperature (600C for programming) and material consistency (due to electromigration and other) "may" get in the way. Therefore, I do not believe one can adjust the cell resistance that easy considering the melten material. In addition, considering chip thermal capacitance and poor thermal conductivity of materials such as oxide in isolation or oxide/nitride used for passivations, or package, cell temperature will not drop that easy as claimed in the past (few nanoseconds)! Perhaps true in the open air. In the package, some sort of heat dissipators may be needed to prevent "thermal build-up" that can raise junction temperature leading to inacceptable leakage that may push the silicon toward intrinsec regime. Furthermore, one has to have distinct programmed / erased windows. The resistance associated with these windows must be relatively high so it is not easily affected by parasitic resistances (contact, interconnect, etc.). Therefore, one must rely on, relatively speaking, power devices (high current coupled with high voltage) to enable adequat programming. Finally, from what I see all along, I consider the PCM a laboratory curiosity and it is outdated. It could have had a place in history several decades ago, but short lived! Doing R&D on thing like PCM is fine, but for several decades at the expense of investors is wrong!

zman_tekinsil
User Rank
Rookie
re: Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article
zman_tekinsil   8/17/2010 3:15:13 PM
NO RATINGS
Some additional thoughts: Coming with one or several reliable disruptive approaches for memories do not hurt as the technologies currently used in Flash , for storage or execute in place, and DRAM are reaching road blocks. Having watched the PCM for a long time, and I happend to have worked for Intel where I could not understand the need for PCM while NAND and NOR still have plenty of room for scalability. I do not believe that one can claim victory or making claims as reported the last decade or so, mainly by Intel/Numonyx. With all the claims one would think there must be "some volume manufacturing of PCM"!

zman_tekinsil
User Rank
Rookie
re: Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article
zman_tekinsil   8/17/2010 2:24:07 PM
NO RATINGS
I hope Mr. Atwood who is missing from this discussion is paying attention to these details in this blog.So he does not compromise employees and Micron investors welfare!

R G.Neale
User Rank
Rookie
re: Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article
R G.Neale   8/17/2010 2:16:44 PM
NO RATINGS
CORRECTION To convey the intended sense please replace "Low" with "High" in the following paragraph. Low number laboratory demonstrations of PCM w/e life times, have been difficult to turn into reliable PCM array products.

R G.Neale
User Rank
Rookie
re: Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article
R G.Neale   8/17/2010 10:21:07 AM
NO RATINGS
ExDRAMer- I based my calculation for the Numonyx current density on the published reset current and used the lithographic node 45nm. In my paper, I have acknowledged that if sub-lithographic techniques are used then the (J) values will be higher. I may have been generous in my estimate but I think in all fairness it is better I erred on the safe side. I did have some concern that from my calculation that Numonyx appeared to have been able to buck the historical trend of all PCM reset current density data that I have been collecting. The range of numbers for (J) you have suggested for Numonyx, 6 x 10E7Amps/sq-cm to 2 x10E8Amps/sq-cm would put the device in what I chose to characterize as the reliability danger zone. It also might explain why the much heralded, 1 G-bit PCM product is not readily available in the market place, or has been relegated to demonstration vehicle status. Historically, it has always been possible to demonstrate high number write/erase lifetimes. When the Electronics 1970 paper was published PCM devices had W/E lifetimes of 10E6 write/erase cycles, with some under special conditions even higher. However, if you examine the data sheets of the time, they specify 600W/E cycles and suggest recovery by the use of multiple reset pulses. Low number laboratory demonstrations of PCM w/e life times, have been difficult to turn into reliable PCM array products. With respect to your comment “molten phase change volume”, in my paper, I have also discussed, the benefits of moving the active region away from the electrodes. I have characterized this as “Thermal Engineering” and how it accounts for PCM reported current densities that appear to go against the historical trend with reductions in fabrication lithography. It has both pros and cons, it may also be used to account for the apparent increase in w/e lifetime.

unknown multiplier
User Rank
Rookie
re: Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article
unknown multiplier   8/17/2010 2:01:36 AM
NO RATINGS
ex-DRAMer mentioned: "As the PCM cell type migrates with scaling to a confined (constrained) cell the high temperature molten phase change volume is moved away from the electrodes minimizing the temperature at the electrode phase change layer interface leading to significantly enhanced cycle endurance of greater 1x10E10 to 1x10E11 " We have tried this and found the confining approach definitely reduces the RESET current and theoretically reduces SET time. However, due to the longer strip of higher resistance of the confining section, the operation voltage increases. It was the opposite trend of the expectation of DRAM makers and foundries. For Flash makers, it was okay. But the power consumption for PCM is larger than for flash. So we could not make the larger number of cycles appear attractive. The last feature we tried to grab was MLC, but this is defeated even with limited temperature range when you consider the resistance drift.

MoreMemory
User Rank
Rookie
re: Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article
MoreMemory   8/17/2010 1:39:04 AM
NO RATINGS
I don’t have a crystal ball and never intended to estimate when PCM will be “billions of dollars of sales”. My main point was that PCM does not need wait until 1x or 2x production to enter the market place. It is a simple statement of fact that the NOR market has not disappeared and is still today a multi-billon dollar market. I believe a realsitic estimate for PCM market valuation was given by a Samsung interview in The Korea Herald: “Memory for portable consumer devices today is at a major turning point as mobile applications increasingly require more diverse memory technology,” said Jun Dong-soo, an executive vice president at Samsung Electronics. “The launch of our PRAM in an advanced MCP solution for the replacement of 40 nm-class and finer geometry NOR meets this need head-on,” he said. Samsung plans to increase the lineup of its large-capacity, high-performance PRAM products and expand PRAM applications to other mobile devices such as MP3 players, portable multimedia players and navigational devices, as well as solid state drives and HDTVs. Samsung expected the global PRAM market to reach $10 million this year and grow to $120 million in 2011, $350 million in 2012 “ [6] The sales of PCM in this timeframe will be on technology greater than 1x-2X nodes. Note the initial PRAM application in MP3 players and solid state drives is not to displace NAND, but rather to act a low latency buffer in the SSD / MP3 memory hierarchy enhancing the system level performance. [6] “Samsung supplies first PRAM for handsets” The Korea Herald 2010-04-28 http://www.koreaherald.com/national/Detail.jsp?newsMLId=20100428000630

MoreMemory
User Rank
Rookie
re: Phase-change memory: A rebuttal of Micron’s article
MoreMemory   8/17/2010 1:32:28 AM
NO RATINGS
Prior to publishing your article I suggest that you revisit your methodology for calculating current density because your ‘suggested’ “1to2x10E7Amps/sq-cm” for Numonyx 1 Gb 45 nm is low by a factor of 6-10 based on Numonyx’s published current density for their 45 nm technology. See figure 12 from previous cited reference where the device endurance is reported as a function of programming current density for their 180, 90 and 45 nm PCM technology nodes [3]. In the previously cited reference by Samsung the cycle endurance was reported at 1x10E11 cycles for the reported 6.3 X10E7 A/sq-cm [1]. In both the cited Numonyx and Samsung PCM technologies the PCM active region of the storage element is realized by the intersection of a lithographic feature with a deposited thin film heater that can be in the range of 10 times smaller than the lithographic capability [1.3,5] It was never claimed that Chalcogenide nor the electrodes utilized in PCM cells are rare materials free from the effects of electromigration. There have been numerous articles published on failure analysis of cycle life failures in PCM and they show electromigration / compositional changes are indeed the dominant failure mode, but the failures occur at cycle endurance values well past current flash cycle endurance values. As stated and cited previously “no impact is observed (for cycling endurance) on scaled devices where the higher current density values are needed to reach the same GST melting temperature” [3]. As the PCM cell type migrates with scaling to a confined (constrained) cell the high temperature molten phase change volume is moved away from the electrodes minimizing the temperature at the electrode phase change layer interface leading to significantly enhanced cycle endurance of greater 1x10E10 to 1x10E11 [1,5]. [5] D.H. Im et al.,” A Unified 7.5nm Dash-Type Confined Cell for High Performance PRAM Device” IEDM Tech. Dig., p. 211 , 2008

Page 1 / 3   >   >>
Flash Poll
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
Join our online Radio Show on Friday 11th July starting at 2:00pm Eastern, when EETimes editor of all things fun and interesting, Max Maxfield, and embedded systems expert, Jack Ganssle, will debate as to just what is, and is not, and embedded system.
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Top Comments of the Week