Wednesday, June 19, 2019
We are near the end of CQ2 and data is leaking out on the future. Some predictions from MKW Ventures Consulting. Reminder: Information comes from the discussion on these points as there are pages of data and models behind each one.
1) 2H recovery might happen, but the data doesn't seem to show that. It looks like the 2H "recovery" will be described as "it didn't happen due to other issues" and "we are recovering. Earnings stopped dropping". I like to call these "alternative facts". We can discuss when the real recovery will happen and how to monitor it.
2) Inventory at end customers is dropping and will reach normal amounts in 2H. However, supplier inventory and channel inventory still exists. This causes end customers to push inventory levels below target amounts and to drive prices down
3) NAND/DRAM bit demand will start to grow again in 2H but overall bit growth will be at or below historical levels (CAGR 35% NAND, 15-20% DRAM). This will not get the market to "recovery". Revenue and earnings are still in "trough"
Bonus Prediction: There will be a recover and we can predict the timing. Inventory will go to normal at supplier and below normal at end customer. Then comes and small demand trigger and the shortage... we can discuss when this will happen.
Bonus Prediction 2: China and Trade... companies are changing their supply chain to deal with China tariffs. This will lead to shipment from and through other countries instead of China. However, uncertainty on how these tariffs play out is slowing growth and investment. China attempts to make memory in China with Chinese owned companies will continue to be VERY minor despite hype until at least 2022 ... but non-Chinese companies will continue to have lots of Fab output from China that has no trade restrictions with the US.
Just an opinion! We will have lots more data at Flash Memory Summit
Wednesday, March 13, 2019
I addressed this in a couple presentations at Flash Memory Summit but questions on cycling performance have grown based on 3D Xpoint and QLC. I will highlight why “how many times can you cycle it?” is 10x more complicated that most people realize.
Key items on cycling performance (Random thoughts.... there is a lot more detail)
- Cycling specifications are based on the criteria used to define success. Rarely do bits fail “dead”. They usually are slow to program or erase, read disturb easily, can’t hold charge for a long time, etc. A device spec could be 800us program time and 100us read time and data retention of 5 years. If I change that to 1200us program, 200uS, and 1 year retention, I could hypothetically increase the cycling capability from 3000 cycles to 10,000 cycles. And what if I changed data retention to 1 hour ???
- Cycling specs are based on allowed fail rate and die level/system level error correction to deal with it. This is published in detailed bit error rate data (BER). Basic NAND allows us to tolerate thousands of blocks failing to cycle, and millions of bits that sometimes read erratically. I can always increase redundant blocks and add more ECC capability. These “tricks” prevent the end customer from seeing errors. A QLC cell seems less reliable than TLC or MLC but it is possible to make it MORE reliable to the end user with error correction.
- In addition to all of the error correction, we can adjust for end user fail rates as well. Is 2% AFR (annual fail rate) OK? 0.7%? 0.2%? Are you willing to pay 2x the price for the 0.2% fail rate?
- Based on the above statistics and BER, the size of the array matters. This is very important when we talk about emerging memory. Without error correction, my test chip (a few bits) for MRAM or ReRAM or 3DXP may cycle 10M times. When I put 64K bits in an array it might last 1M times. A 1Gbit array will last 100K times… and then we get into error correction and fail rates.
- Theory vs Actual. I have seen multiple papers saying that MRAM has infinite endurance or something like 1E12 cycles. But MRAM is a real product now and with that comes real cycling numbers. I don't believe any MRAM product is spec’d with 1E12 cycles. Think 6 order of magnitude less….. best case. There are ways to manage the cycling up and down. The capability starts at 1E12 and then starts to drop when you actually make real devices. This is the problem with universal memory claims because … wait for it … DRAM and SRAM can ACTUALLY last 1E12 cycles in real products. No emerging memory is even close.
- So, If we just take NAND and things we have seen over the years as examples of the above.
- NAND theoretically can cycle 1E12… charge trapping is a non-ideality that I will ignore
- A small array (1K) can cycle >1M times without any fails.
- I can buy a 1Gbit chip today that can cycle >100K times (50nm SLC with ECC).
- Planar TLC can cycle 3K times…. If I allow 1% failure, it last 10K cycles, the average (median) bit in that array lasts >30K cycles.
- If I slow down the program and read timing dramatically, I can make a TLC 3K part last 10K+
- And hypothetically, If I build a QLC SSD with massive redundancy and overprovisioning (think RAID), I can have 10 drive writes per day for 10 years. Looks like 36,500 cycles to end user.. but it is not
What does all this mean? The memory companies (and some SSD companies) know all of this and have details on tradeoff and how to manage them... Sorry, it's complex. Ask the experts how it works in a given application. Asking “how many cycles does that last?” or saying “QLC isn’t good enough” may not be useful
We can discuss specific questions to ask (BER, FIT, AFR, DPM, etc) and compare NAND, DRAM, MRAM, ReRAM, 3DXP in more detail. We published estimated 3DXP cycling performance numbers. Call for more information
next blog, I will answer the question "is Schrodinger's cat dead or alive??". As I tell my kids when we discuss at the dinner table .... "It's complex"
Friday, March 8, 2019
5 Things to Know About the Current DRAM and NAND Market
Everyone is concerned about the memory market and trying to predict the future. Five Items to consider
1) Memory market is still growing long term. But the numbers matter. DRAM bits are growing at 18-20% CAGR. NAND bits are growing 35% CAGR. That is about the lowest CAGR in history, is indicative of a maturing market and includes effects of of all the buzzwords (SSD, NVMe, AI, ADAS, 5G, Edge Computing). What does this mean? On DRAM, we can’t always grow our way out of supply issues (without crashing the price) and if prices drop at all, it takes a long time for revenue to recover. On NAND, we can grow our way out but it requires massive price drops.
2) As mentioned in a previous note, elasticity helps growth but it is not as large as expected, not as quick as hoped, and whenever we are talking about significant elasticity, profits are at risk.
3) A famous man said recently “There is No Collusion!!”. IF the DRAM suppliers work together to never lower price and hold inventory until Apple, Dell, Google cave on pricing, then DRAM profits will continue at unreal levels. But even getting 3 people to collude appears to be tough… this is evident in DRAM pricing. The "MKW" report says “currently little evidence of collusion”.
4) NAND is in a time where profitability is not a given. At this time, one of the keys is “who has lowest cost (full and cash), who can best survive a zero profit market?” Historically we would often say Samsung is the low cost producer. But differences in technology and the movement from 32L-128L has changed the leaders along the way. Also, target markets from phones, to Client SSDs, to Enterprise SSDs will change this.
5) When does this bottom out? Micron will probably give us the next checkpoint on Mar 20th. But we need to un-hide the demand by fixing inventory. If Amazon knows Hynix is holding 12 weeks of inventory, they will reduce theirs to “working inventory” and demand lower prices. Starting less wafers is not a smart idea so companies build more inventory. Once corrected, long term demand, short term demand from the field, plans for supply growth and revised cost numbers all kick in to tell us whether it is a 1 quarter dip or a 6 quarter dip. We have the numbers from all of these areas and an estimate on when it will recover that is updated weekly.
Friday, February 22, 2019
When I worked in memory manufacturing, I would say "whenever people are talking about elastic demand, we are about to lose money. The memory market is more profitable today but I wonder how elastic demand is and in which markets.
- Smartphones are a leading customer of NAND memory. I just checked Apples website and they are currently charging $200 for adding 256GB of memory. The cost for this memory to Apple is about $32 and dropping. So it is pretty clear that a change in the price of NAND is not whats driving 256GB vs 512GB sales. Side note: This also the reason I refuse to let my kids get memory increases on their Iphones .... I can't get myself to pay Apple 80c/GB for NAND!
- In 2017 NAND prices were flat to up a little. While client SSD sales slowed, overall NAND bit growth was still 35% despite an increase in NAND prices when we expected a decrease of 20%+
- In Q4 2018, Client SSD unit sales were recently shown to be up 35% YoY. The client SSD pricing has dropped over 40%, which more than double the consensus ASP reduction predicted at beginning of 2018. The prediction for SSD unit growth was 30-35%. So did the crash in SSD pricing dramatically help client sales? Revenue dropped 5% YoY
We are always challenged with the unknown what if of "if prices didn't,crash, then units would have dropped"
A possible model: There is elasticity but it has two characteristics.
1) Elasticity is delayed by 1+ year. AWS is not going to redesign there datacenters in a month based on low SSD costs. They need time to redesign and show the financial benefit and to ensure it is a sustainable change. Also people based future designs and architectures on the expectation that ASP will drop. AWS is planning for NAND ASP of about $25/TB in 2025 and they are making plans based on that.
2) When it happens, Elasticity is smaller than people think. Obviously a instantaneous 50% drop in ASP could easily lead to people buying 2x the chip size or 2x the capacity in an SSD. But do more units get sold? Prices drop on average and bits grow on average. A simple proposed metric: An incremental 15% ASP reduction will lead to an incremental 5% increase in bit growth. So if ASP was predicted to drop 25% and bits grow 30%, If ASP drops 40% we will see 35% bit growth.
I have data to back these ideas up and anecdotal stories from purchasing discussions with PC, Hyperscale and Handset OEMS. We can also talk about how this affects memory revenue and margins in 2019. Call for more info and discussion
Monday, January 28, 2019
- Now that persistent memory has moved from a “wouldn’t it be great if we had this?” concept to a “we have some options, now what?” debate…. We need to define “persistent memory” based on the new reality. Rob Peglar and Stephen Bates reminded us that using the term SCM is not politically correct and can only be used in a safe space away miles from a SNIA conference (Starbucks Milpitas worked for me). This is good since it was way too vague and theoretical. Andy Rudoff offered a simple definition: it needs to be address in load/store like memory (Not blocks and pages), and persistent. Speed is in the eye of the beholder but a year ago there was a definition of <2us latency in applications which I liked. The NVDIMM-N and NVDIMM-P definitions would indicate that it does not need to be one type of memory but is a DIMM or system. These simple definitions would seem to eliminate some products that are often referred to as “persistent memory” (side discussion)
- The most common persistent memory today arguably is NVDIMM-N which provides us with up to 32GB DIMMS that can be written to like DRAM but never lose data. The challenges here are that the use of DRAM for entire capacity plus NAND plus energy support leads to a high cost that is 3x or more per bit compared to DRAM. As a result, a small amount of systems (typically SANs) use them today. Multiple providers were at the conference and you can buy this persistent memory whenever you wish.
- Frank Hady presented Intel Optane Persistent Memory and the applications. Two modes, one is persistent memory (App Direct) and one is memory Mode (which loses data on power cycle). Memory mode is great for adding tons of memory that is somewhat slower and cheaper but it is not persistent per Intel documentation. This is poised to grow rapidly with Intel backing but it is off to a slow start. From talking to customers, most say they still can’t get Optane PM to build their own system and the availability today is running apps on cloud systems. I have details on modes and projected revenue in other publications
- NVDIMM-P is proposed as an open source version similar to Optane PM where the architecture supports some DRAM plus NAND or other memory type to optimize for cost. This will allow DIMMs that are LESS expensive than DRAM, higher density, and more non-proprietary options. We need this ASAP! When can I get one???
- From the conference, it feels like Infrastructure support and application drivers are ahead of the actual hardware…. This is probably not totally true but there is drive from Intel and SNIA to get all the support in place and the OS supports it and we have applications. Once Intel ships significant volume and competitors start shipping their versions of PM, we can test out all the applications
See more info on our blogs or website. Thanks to Chris Mellor of Register fame for republishing some of my FMS work on persistent memory and Optane with all the gory details and numbers.
Tuesday, January 22, 2019
In the 6 months since, Intel has updated product roadmaps and has provided details on the Optane DIMMS. New projections are based on these changes
Revenue From FMS2018 and this Blog
Most likely 2018 sales did not quite meet expectations. DIMMs sales were fairly low pre-production (read: Samples). Non DIMM SSDs sell but at lower prices and in lower volumes than expected.
2020 Still can meet our projections from FMS.... but Intel is off to a slow start in 2019
- Cascade lake and volumes are later and lower than planned.
- Attach rate projection for Optane DIMM to cascade lake was low and we lowered it even more based on customer reports and timing. Also Intel showed and we reviewed in this blog that when used as main memory expansion, Optane DIMM is not persistent. To be persistent it is a separate memory block... More like a SSD on the DRAM bus.
- Server DRAM Demand is down, prices are down. This is not good for 2019
- The Lehi Factory is in transition to Micron ownership. Intel has plans on how to ramp XPoint internally but those are in progress most of 2019.
- Optane Memory for desktops has not taken off. Intel now plans notebook version with Optane Memory + QLC SSD which we have shown to be a cost effective performance SSD.
Unless Intel gives us data at Persistent Memory Summit or in Earnings announcement, we have to model the revenue (Intel can always correct me!). We project 2019 to be below the 2018/2020 midpoint by about $100M in DIMMs and overall Optane revenue in 2019 to be about $200M below 2018/2020 Midpoint. Micron will have no measurable revenue in 2019. As you can see, the revenue is based on DIMM sales, if those continue to slip, the numbers will get lower and competition is enabled
We have detailed data on GB shipments, DIMM vs SSD sales, Pricing, Cost, performance and endurance for 3D XPoint and Optane. We also can discuss the JV agreement changes and implications. Call to discuss. We will be at 2019 Persistent Memory Summit this week to discuss details as well
Wednesday, January 16, 2019
SNIA is hosting the 2019 Persistent Memory Summit next week. We will have detailed updates and reports on hot topics in Persistent Memory shown below
I highly recommend the people attend this as it provides are great vision for technology and markets.
While I am not presenting, I will attend and have updated data from my FMS presentations on
- 2019 Persistent Memory Revenue numbers
- Optane revenue for Intel overall and specifically the "quasi-launched" Optane DIMMs
- Hint: both applications and the market are changing
- Sometimes persistent memory is not persistent
- 3d Xpoint technology roadmap, specifications, endurance, and challenges for both Micron and Intel
- Competition to Optane from ReRAM, NVDIMM-P, Low latency NAND, ZNAND etc. Can they match or even surpass Optane?
Plus I will provide commentary on technology, market, and application presentations real time.
Hope to see you there, text me or email to set up a meeting.