• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Kioxia Advances Development of UFS Ver. 3.1 Embedded Flash Memory Devices With Quad-level-cell (QLC)

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
46,383 (7.68/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
Kioxia Corporation, a world leader in memory solutions, today announced the launch of Universal Flash Storage (UFS) Ver. 3.1 [1] embedded flash memory devices utilizing the company's innovative 4-bit per cell quad-level-cell (QLC) technology. For applications needing high density, such as cutting-edge smartphones, Kioxia's QLC technology enables the capability to achieve the highest densities available in a single package.

Kioxia's UFS proof of concept (PoC) device is a 512 gigabyte prototype that utilizes the company's 1 terabit (128 gigabyte) BiCS FLASH 3D flash memory with QLC technology, and is now sampling to OEM customers. The PoC device is designed to meet the increasing performance and density requirements of mobile applications driven by higher resolution images, 5G networks, 4K plus video and the like.



The samples are POC devices under development and have some feature limitations. Furthermore, specifications of the devices are subject to change without prior notice.

In every mention of a Kioxia product: Product density is identified based on the density of memory chip(s) within the Product, not the amount of memory capacity available for data storage by the end user. Consumer-usable capacity will be less due to overhead data areas, formatting, bad blocks, and other constraints, and may also vary based on the host device and application. For details, please refer to applicable product specifications.

All company names, product names and service names may be trademarks of their respective companies.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 

ixi

Joined
Aug 19, 2014
Messages
1,451 (0.41/day)
Stop giving us lower performance for the current price... on other hand more capacity... naaa, not worth it.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2011
Messages
359 (0.08/day)
No. Just no. TLC is bad enough that we have to deal with SLC caching shenanigans and having SATA SSD type write speeds after the cache is exhausted. With QLC write speeds will get into hard drive territory.
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
1,690 (0.43/day)
Still no 1TB UFS 3.1 for some reason.

QLC should not be a problem in a mobile device.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
25,559 (6.48/day)
For applications needing high density, such as cutting-edge smartphones, Kioxia's QLC technology enables the capability to achieve the highest densities available in a single package.
Oh screw THAT. The last thing we need in a phone is this QLC garbage.
QLC should not be a problem in a mobile device.
An opinion not supported by merit.
 
Joined
Jun 18, 2021
Messages
2,286 (2.19/day)
Seems like whenever QLC is mentioned everyone looses their minds jeez

If they can produce loads of it at a good price maybe we'll finally be rid of eMMC which should have left the scene long ago
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
25,559 (6.48/day)
Seems like whenever QLC is mentioned everyone looses their minds jeez
That's because it's low durability crap and we're trying to send the message to industry decision makers that it is unacceptable and they should be looking for a better option instead of wasting their time trying to make the most of something the is inherently and fundamentally flawed. Even the highest end TLC is only just passable. QLC is flat out garbage.

If they can produce loads of it at a good price maybe we'll finally be rid of eMMC
eMMC might be slow, but it's P/E cycle durability is part way inbetween MLC and TLC NAND. For that reason eMMC is preferable.
 
Top