Anon (no.delete@this.spam.com) on August 1, 2022 3:09 pm wrote:
> Michael S (already5chosen.delete@this.yahoo.com) on August 1, 2022 2:47 pm wrote:
> > With endurance of just few millions write cycles?
> > I think, for that to work the cache has to be rather big, probably many times bigger than DRAM caches
> > that are used now. Say, where today they have 256MB of DRAM cache, 3DXP will have to be 4-8 GB.
> > Which is several times more expensive than DRAM.
> > Write (i.e. non-read) cache can be smaller, but still I don't see how it could be as small as DRAM cache.
>
> On a 4TB drive the cost would be viable.
>

Only assuming that they are capable to make 4-8 GB 3DXP with write bandwidth in 5-6 GB/s range.
It's not obvious that they can.
That is, if they will target cache applications specifically, by manufacturing smaller 3DXP devices, then they can do it relatively easily. But in this scenario it would be more expensive per GB (likely much more) than what they put [as a bulk storage] into Optane SSDs and DIMMs.