http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/ Engadget Comments for Toshiba-SanDisk claim title to highest-density 16Gb NAND flash http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/
A larger (56nm) production method can be offset by packaging - different methods of chip stacking, interconnects, etc. Obviously, the 50nm tech can still have a higher theoretical density, but only if you can package it correctly.]]>Jan 24th 2007 9:29AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/
And no, the 2G vs. 1GB discussion (how long did that go on?) with the second-gen iPod shuffle did not throw me.]]>Jan 24th 2007 9:38AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/8Gb (notice little b)/8 = 1 GB (Large B, most common usage measure).
Amount of bytes in 1MB = 1024

Ever buy a 80 GB HD and get it home only to see ~72 GB available? It's because of this offset.]]>Jan 24th 2007 9:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/
Also, the hard drive difference has nothing to do with the difference between a bit and a byte, but with the difference between a 2^10 gigabyte and a 10^3 gigabyte (often noted as GiB to prevent confusion, but not by hard drive manufacturers who want to confuse you). ]]>Jan 24th 2007 10:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/Jan 24th 2007 10:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/Jan 24th 2007 9:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/Bring on the lower priced/higher capacity flash-based hard disk replacements!]]>Jan 24th 2007 10:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/Jan 24th 2007 7:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/Jan 24th 2007 3:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/Jan 24th 2007 10:20AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/
Hmm, just in time for the iPhone?]]>Jan 24th 2007 10:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/Jan 24th 2007 8:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/
Actually, the bigger issue is that transistors and vias do not behave well at these small sizes. So, the actual logic gate densities are affected more by how the technology gets around the issues and manages errors and all. So, a smaller process size could actually have less density (of gates/logic) due to more complex surrounding techniques. It usually takes 12 to 18 months to improve density with new process.]]>Jan 24th 2007 12:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/toshiba-sandisk-claim-title-to-highest-density-16gb-nand-flash/
Dude, you got it completely wrong.

The 50nm would not only be faster but have more memory per square nanometer because you are able to squeeze more transistor into a given space. ]]>Jan 24th 2007 9:21PM