Hacker News Reader

If I'm reading this right, I think UltraRAM doesn't solve this problem. From the article:

> its fast switching speed and program-erase cycling endurance is "one hundred to one thousand times better than flash."

I know flash can get some impressive endurance now, but if you start treating it like RAM, is 1000x that endurance even enough?

View on HN

> I know flash can get some impressive endurance now, but if you start treating it like RAM, is 1000x that endurance even enough?

Anything with limited endurance will need some kind of controller in front of it that makes sure that it wears out evenly. You'll end up with "copy-on-write" RAM that will be inherently slow/space inefficient, either due to block size being way too large for typical RAM access pattern or the data structure managing it becoming too large.

And of course you incur extra latency from having to do look-ups in the first place.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com