Feeds

OCZ samples twin-core ARM SSD controller

Do you need a bit of TLC?

Remote control for virtualized desktops

OCZ is sampling a new flash controller that gives a picture of future solid state drives.

The company bought Indilinx for its solid state drive (SSD) controller technology in March this year and has now unveiled the Indilinx Everest controller platform.

It has a 6Gbit/s SATA III interface, a dual-core ARM processor and a number of enticing features, such as 3-bit multi-level cell (MLC) support. This is going to be called TLC, for triple-level cell, to distinguish it from today's MLC, which is 2-bit MLC.

OCZ said the platform will support flash process geometries down to the 19-10nm range (1x). Today we have flash in the 39-30nm range (3x) which is transitioning to 29-20nm (2X). With each downwards jump the number of flash dies on a wafer increases and the cost/die shrinks.

OCZ says Everest supports up to 200 mega-transfers/sec whereas today's controllers, such as the Sandforce ones used by OCZ, support up to 166MT/sec or so. The device also supports 1TB capacity SSDs and has an 8-channel design with 16-way interleaving that supports ONFI 2.0 and Toggle 1.0. This will provide sequential bandwidth up to 500MB/sec.

There is a 400MHz DDR3 DRAM cache facility that can support up to 512MB of such cache. The controller is optimised for 8K writes – which matches, the 8K page size typical of the latest flash, OCZ says.

SSDs powered by this controller can have their boot time cut in half compared to today's controllers because of OCZ's boot-reduction time algorithms. This, OCZ says, will support "instant on" requirements.

It supports TRIM, SMART, NCQ with a queue depth of 32, 70-bit ECC, and many over-provisioning options to extend the SSD's working life. It also has OCZ proprietary Ndurance technology to extend flash's working life.

OCZ says it is available for evaluation now by OEMs and, we presume, OCZ will be using it in its own flash products. We're looking at 1TB SSDs using TLC flash, shipping sequential data out at 500MB/sec which boot quickly, and could be combined to provide multi-TB flash data stores. Parallelising data access would provide multi-GB/sec I/O. The flash future looks bright. ®

Remote control for virtualized desktops

More from The Register

next story
Azure TITSUP caused by INFINITE LOOP
Fat fingered geo-block kept Aussies in the dark
NASA launches new climate model at SC14
75 days of supercomputing later ...
Yahoo! blames! MONSTER! email! OUTAGE! on! CUT! CABLE! bungle!
Weekend woe for BT as telco struggles to restore service
You think the CLOUD's insecure? It's BETTER than UK.GOV's DATA CENTRES
We don't even know where some of them ARE – Maude
BOFH: WHERE did this 'fax-enabled' printer UPGRADE come from?
Don't worry about that cable, it's part of the config
Want to STUFF Facebook with blatant ADVERTISING? Fine! But you must PAY
Pony up or push off, Zuck tells social marketeers
Oi, Europe! Tell US feds to GTFO of our servers, say Microsoft and pals
By writing a really angry letter about how it's harming our cloud business, ta
prev story

Whitepapers

Why and how to choose the right cloud vendor
The benefits of cloud-based storage in your processes. Eliminate onsite, disk-based backup and archiving in favor of cloud-based data protection.
Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
How to determine if cloud backup is right for your servers
Two key factors, technical feasibility and TCO economics, that backup and IT operations managers should consider when assessing cloud backup.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
The hidden costs of self-signed SSL certificates
Exploring the true TCO for self-signed SSL certificates, including a side-by-side comparison of a self-signed architecture versus working with a third-party SSL vendor.