Samsung Begins Mass Production of Industry's First 16GB LPDDR5 DRAM

[btarunr]

Samsung Electronics, a world leader in advanced memory technology, today announced that it has begun mass producing the industry's first 16-gigabyte (GB) LPDDR5 mobile DRAM package for next-generation premium smartphones. Following mass production of the industry-first 12 GB LPDDR5 in July, 2019, the new 16 GB advancement will lead the premium mobile memory market with added capacity that enables enhanced 5G and AI features including graphic-rich gaming and smart photography.

"Samsung has been committed to bringing memory technologies to the cutting edge in allowing consumers to enjoy amazing experiences through their mobile devices. We are excited to stay true to that commitment with our new, top-of-the-line mobile solution for global device manufacturers," said Cheol Choi, senior vice president of memory sales & marketing, Samsung Electronics. "With the introduction of a new product lineup based on our next-generation process technology later this year, Samsung will be able to fully address future memory demands from global customers."



Data transfer rate for the 16 GB LPDDR5 comes in at 5,500 megabits per second (Mb/s), approximately 1.3 times faster than the previous mobile memory (LPDDR4X, 4266 Mb/s). Compared to an 8 GB LPDDR4X package, the new mobile DRAM delivers more than 20-percent energy savings while providing up to twice the capacity.

Samsung's 16 GB LPDDR5 mobile DRAM package consists of eight 12-gigabit (Gb) chips and four 8Gb chips, equipping premium smartphones with twice the DRAM capacity found in many higher-end laptops and gaming PCs today. Along with the blazing-fast performance, the industry's largest capacity supports dynamic and responsive game play as well as ultra-high-resolution graphics on premium smartphones for highly immersive mobile gaming experiences.

As Samsung continues to expand LPDDR5 mobile DRAM production at its Pyeongtaek site, the company plans to mass-produce 16Gb LPDDR5 products based on third-generation 10 nm-class (1z) process technology in the second half of this year, in line with the development of a 6,400 Mb/s chipset. Such relentless innovation is expected to well-position Samsung to further solidify its competitive edge in markets such as premium mobile devices, high-end PCs and automotive applications.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Valantar]

I really wish the memory market wasn't dominated by flagship phones with idiotic specs. I mean, the industry has a limited bit output per year, and there are devices that can put those bits to so much better use than smartphones. While I will freely admit that Android smartphone memory management is rather terrible, forcing memory capacities up, no smartphone needs 16GB of memory. Period. There isn't software capable of utilizing that, nor will there be in the foreseeable future. Google should just get this stuff fixed. Apple gets by admirably with just a few GB, after all (yes, fast (and thus expensive) storage is also a part of that equation, but these flagships really ought to have that too), so there's no reason an Android phone should need 4-5x the capacity of an iPhone, even if there is more freedom in what software is run on the former.

 

[R0H1T]

no smartphone needs 16GB of memory

That's like the infamous Gates' quote & no I don't agree with that one bit especially given smartphone memory cannot be upgraded. More memory, & storage, would mean that your phones can last much longer. We're already at a point where top end/specced phones have more than enough horsepower to last half a decade or more, also depending on their durability. In the past we've had to switch smartphones because of the memory or storage running out, especially with Apple & they continue to be the front-runners in planned obsolescence to this day. You don't have to do that with your Android flagship & that can only be a good thing.

 

[Valantar]

That's like the infamous Gates' quote & no I don't agree with that one bit especially given smartphone memory cannot be upgraded. More memory, & storage, would mean that your phones can last much longer. We're already at a point where top end/specced phones have more than enough horsepower to last half a decade or more, also depending on their durability. In the past we've had to switch smartphones because of the memory or storage running out, especially with Apple & they continue to be the front-runners in planned obsolescence to this day. You don't have to do that with your Android flagship & that can only be a good thing.

Going overboard on memory won't help whatsoever when the device stops receiving software updates two years into its lifecycle, which for many OEMs is generous. Nor does it help when the sealed-in, glued-in battery fails (or at least loses capacity dramatically) after <1000 charge cycles or 2-3 years. Sure, there are options for loading other OSes on there, but those are complicated and thus irrelevant for >99.9% of users. Nor does it help when the build quality issues of the phone start showing themselves; these devices are not built to last but rather to be as thin and good-looking as possible, making them wear poorly and start failing. Lack of repairability means that something as trivial as a button not working can lead to replacing the entire device. I'm all for combating planned obsolescence, but unnecessarily boosting specifications is not in any way whatsoever the way to do this. The population of users where this might be relevant is also extremely likely to be users who use their phones hard and wear them out quickly, and/or want better performance and faster hardware when it becomes available.

Putting this much memory in even flagship smartphones means that for the vast majority of users something like half of it will be entirely wasted, never actually being utilized. 6-8GB? Sure, that can be made use of, particularly given the poor state of Android RAM management. But 16? Not a chance.

Phones should definitely be designed to last 5+ years, including making them easily serviceable and making spare parts broadly available. But again, boosting on-paper specs with limited real-world use is not how to do this.

Also, the Gates quote is rather specific in saying that "X is as much as anyone will ever need", while I said "no smartphone needs...". The use of the present tense there was intentional, which should be obvious. Your simile is as such invalid.

 

[Cheeseball]

That's like the infamous Gates' quote & no I don't agree with that one bit especially given smartphone memory cannot be upgraded. More memory, & storage, would mean that your phones can last much longer. We're already at a point where top end/specced phones have more than enough horsepower to last half a decade or more, also depending on their durability. In the past we've had to switch smartphones because of the memory or storage running out, especially with Apple & they continue to be the front-runners in planned obsolescence to this day. You don't have to do that with your Android flagship & that can only be a good thing.

While Apple is guilty of planned obsolescence in many of their previous business decisions, the choice of having minimum RAM for iOS devices is not part of that. The majority of the apps on the Apple AppStore are AOT-compiled code (C++) with no garbage collection, where any native code is faster at first execution. Due to this, apps are not stored in memory longer than they should as the CPU is ready to "execute the code". It's quite optimal for iOS and is the reason for the current maximum 4 GB of LPDDR4X memory in the phones and 6 GB in the newer iPad Pros.

EDIT: (Adding more to the discussion)

Putting this much memory in even flagship smartphones means that for the vast majority of users something like half of it will be entirely wasted, never actually being utilized. 6-8GB? Sure, that can be made use of, particularly given the poor state of Android RAM management. But 16? Not a chance.

The reason for the more recent (2015+) increase in RAM for Android devices is mostly because of the multi-tasking feature introduced with Android 6. Memory would've been managed better if the majority of apps were still built on ART (from the inefficient Dalvik), but now that RAM is more abundant(???) they went back to a JIT-compiler back in 2017. Android can kinda still run AOT stuff, but it can tend to hamper the OS because now it would have to prioritize the app over the other OS-functions. This can seem inefficient when compared to iOS, but because each OS-function (the VM, JIT-compiler, garbage collector, etc.) is compartmentalized, more memory = better performance.

 

[R0H1T]

Going overboard on memory won't help whatsoever when the device stops receiving software updates two years into its lifecycle, which for many OEMs is generous. Nor does it help when the sealed-in, glued-in battery fails (or at least loses capacity dramatically) after <1000 charge cycles or 2-3 years.

There's enough flagships out there supported by XDA or even the manufacturer, the OS updates 5 years down the line are a reality now. Of course you have to know what you're buying into, that is the least bit of homework one needs to do if he/she wants their phone to last 5 odd years & receive OS updates.

Sure, there are options for loading other OSes on there, but those are complicated and thus irrelevant for >99.9% of users. Nor does it help when the build quality issues of the phone start showing themselves; these devices are not built to last but rather to be as thin and good-looking as possible, making them wear poorly and start failing.

I can assure you there's enough phones out there which can last a very long time. Heck I haven't exhausted 200 (re)charge cycles on my battery in well over a year, at least as per accubattery. Now whether such phones are available in the US or not is not something I can't attest to, but we have them in Asia & much of the rest of the world. As for usage, that's also totally subjective based on lots of other factors.

Also, the Gates quote is rather specific in saying that "X is as much as anyone will ever need", while I said "no smartphone needs...". The use of the present tense there was intentional, which should be obvious. Your simile is as such invalid.

You do realize that with extra RAM, more apps & games can stay in memory without the need for them to be reloaded? Now one could argue about Android's memory management ad nauseam, but that is one obvious & current advantage of having something like 16GB of memory. So no they can make use of it, although that word "need" is user dependent not on the actual smartphone.

 

[Valantar]

While Apple is guilty of planned obsolescence in many of their previous business decisions, the choice of having minimum RAM for iOS devices is not part of that. The majority of the apps on the Apple AppStore are AOT-compiled code (C++) with no garbage collection, where any native code is faster at first execution. Due to this, apps are not stored in memory longer than they should as the CPU is ready to "execute the code". It's quite optimal for iOS and is the reason for the current maximum 4 GB of LPDDR4X memory in the phones and 6 GB in the newer iPad Pros.

Never actually saw an explanation of this before, interesting stuff! Anyhow, the lack of effect of RAM on iPhone obsolescence is easily demonstrated by how an iPhone 6 or 6s still works perfectly fine as long as the battery is okay. Good luck finding an Android phone doing the same. (I'm talking as an Android user who has never used or owned an iPhone, btw.) iPhones generally tend to last longer than many other phones, though that is likely partially due to the extensive 3rd-party service network and access to spare parts.

There's enough flagships out there supported by XDA or even the manufacturer, the OS updates 5 years down the line are a reality now.

Are you joking? Show me a single OEM supporting their phones for more than three years. Please. OnePlus is among the better in this regard, and they dropped my old 3T (late 2016 launch) early last year. That's three years, not five. And there's no indication that they are extending this.

As for "supported by XDA" - that depends on there being a big enough community of skilled coders using the phone to actually make a working OS for it. And do these OSes receive updates that don't force you to wipe your phone? I'm hoping that has changed since I last dabbled in ROMs, but I wouldn't be surprised if it hadn't.

Of course you have to know what you're buying into, that is the least bit of homework one needs to do if he/she wants their phone to last 5 odd years & receive OS updates.

Sadly, the only homework that can result in this is deciding to buy an iPhone. No Android phone has that kind of support.

I can assure you there's enough phones out there which can last a very long time. Heck I haven't exhausted 200 (re)charge cycles on my battery in well over a year, at least as per accubattery. Now whether such phones are available in the US or not is not something I can attest to, because we have them in Asia & much of the rest of the world. As for usage, that's also totally subjective based on lots of factors.

Given that I'm in Norway, US phone availability doesn't affect me much. As for phones with battery capacities like that, they're relatively rare, especially in the flagship space. Flagships tend to burn power like there's no tomorrow (logical, given that they have the most powerful SoCs) and thus wear out their batteries relatively quickly.

You do realize that with extra RAM, more apps & games can stay in memory without the need for them to be reloaded? Now one could argue about Android's memory management ad nauseam, but that is one obvious & current advantage of having something like 16GB of memory. So no they can make use of it, although that word "need" is user dependent not on the actual smartphone.

...where's the real-world benefit of keeping a bunch of stuff in RAM when it's not being actively used? Sure, if you're jumping between a game and 3-4 applications (let's say messaging, a browser and a music player, which isn't unrealistic even if it's a (very) edge use case) you'd still struggle to use 16GB of RAM unless said applications are terrible memory hogs (in which case the solution would be writing a better app, not getting more RAM). And if you aren't, you're just wasting power on keeping stuff in memory when it should be shuffled off to non-volatile memory. Which should be fast enough (and combined with a fast enough SoC) that launching the app should be near-instantaneous anyhow. Your argument has but the most tenuous relation to actual reality. It sounds logical in theory, but in practice it's full of holes.

 

[Cheeseball]

Never actually saw an explanation of this before, interesting stuff! Anyhow, the lack of effect of RAM on iPhone obsolescence is easily demonstrated by how an iPhone 6 or 6s still works perfectly fine as long as the battery is okay. Good luck finding an Android phone doing the same. (I'm talking as an Android user who has never used or owned an iPhone, btw.) iPhones generally tend to last longer than many other phones, though that is likely partially due to the extensive 3rd-party service network and access to spare parts.

I also edited my reply above with an explanation why Android needs more RAM. It's not inefficient per se, but the OS is now being developed around that. Much like how newer versions of Windows (and similarly the majority of GNU/Linux distros) work better with more memory.

I cannot agree with Apple's (previously) forced limitation on reducing performance due to battery life expectancy. That is planned obsolescence. They should've marketed to users that they have an option to throttle the SoC to save more battery life instead of forcing it on.

 

[Valantar]

I also edited my reply above with an explanation why Android needs more RAM. It's not inefficient per se, but the OS is now being developed around that. Much like how newer versions of Windows (and similarly the majority of GNU/Linux distros) work better with more memory.

I cannot agree with Apple's (previously) forced limitation on reducing performance due to battery life expectancy. That is planned obsolescence. They should've marketed to users that they have an option to throttle the SoC to save more battery life instead of forcing it on.

Entirely agree on that latter point - it's a very shady way of doing things, particularly when not giving users a choice. Having the option could be nice, being forced into it (without even being told) is very dishonest.

As for the former, I get that this is just a different approach, but it's still done rather poorly when relatively simple and feature-poor phone apps use as much memory as their much more fully featured desktop variants. And Windows does a lot of clever stuff by using "unused" RAM, but that doesn't mean you get a performance increase by moving from 16 to 32GB of RAM (or heck, even 8 to 16) if your workload doesn't send you above 80-90% RAM utilization. There might be some performance increase, but it's small enough not to actually matter, so upgrading hardware based on it is a poor choice.

 

[Cheeseball]

As for the former, I get that this is just a different approach, but it's still done rather poorly when relatively simple and feature-poor phone apps use as much memory as their much more fully featured desktop variants. And Windows does a lot of clever stuff by using "unused" RAM, but that doesn't mean you get a performance increase by moving from 16 to 32GB of RAM (or heck, even 8 to 16) if your workload doesn't send you above 80-90% RAM utilization. There might be some performance increase, but it's small enough not to actually matter, so upgrading hardware based on it is a poor choice.

Agreed, but remember this also relies on the app developers themselves and not necessarily all on the Android OS. A good example of really good memory management on Android are with the Microsoft apps (LOL!), especially Excel and RDS. MX Player is another good optimized app (it was reaaaallly bad back then when it was JIT-compiled) that takes advantage of memory and unloads it ASAP. If you compile the Android port of VLC using ART (and not the newer JIT-compiler), you will see a nice performance jump, but it breaks some codecs.

 

[R0H1T]

Are you joking? Show me a single OEM supporting their phones for more than three years. Please. OnePlus is among the better in this regard, and they dropped my old 3T (late 2016 launch) early last year. That's three years, not five. And there's no indication that they are extending this.

Samsung, if you need more there's always Google which can help?
Samsung Android 10 Device List

As for "supported by XDA" - that depends on there being a big enough community of skilled coders using the phone to actually make a working OS for it. And do these OSes receive updates that don't force you to wipe your phone? I'm hoping that has changed since I last dabbled in ROMs, but I wouldn't be surprised if it hadn't.

Yes & that's why I said it depends on the device, to counter that you're adding another caveat? If you're gonna continue doing "what if" might as well write your own summary of why Android is <insert your feelings> or why phones don't "need" 16 GB memory. Why bother having counterpoints when you're constantly shifting goalposts?

Sadly, the only homework that can result in this is deciding to buy an iPhone. No Android phone has that kind of support.

Ok, if you say so.

Given that I'm in Norway, US phone availability doesn't affect me much. As for phones with battery capacities like that, they're relatively rare, especially in the flagship space. Flagships tend to burn power like there's no tomorrow (logical, given that they have the most powerful SoCs) and thus wear out their batteries relatively quickly.

Given that I'm in India, the second largest phone market outside China, I know they aren't as rare as you're making them out to be.
As for your second point, that also depends on what people are using them for. The flagship SoC are also generally the most efficient, and if you know how phone (or laptops) work your screen & network will drain/kill your battery way before just the SoC will.

Your argument has but the most tenuous relation to actual reality. It sounds logical in theory, but in practice it's full of holes.

Full of holes ~ oh really? What you're basically saying is that Chome doesn't "need" 16GB of RAM, I mean what sort of a logic is this

It clearly depends on the user & if you think reloading tabs (notwithstanding the ads or poorly written websites) is also not a major issue, well good luck with whatever direction you're trying to pull this into!

 

[Valantar]

Samsung, if you need more there's always Google which can help?
Samsung Android 10 Device List

Galaxy S8 and S8+

Not eligible

Those are 2017 flagship phones not getting the 2020 OS update. < 3 years.

Yes & that's why I said it depends on the device, to counter that you're adding another caveat? If you're gonna continue doing "what if" might as well write your own summary of why Android is <insert your feelings> or why phones don't "need" 16 GB memory. Why bother having counterpoints when you're constantly shifting goalposts?

I'm not shifting goalposts, I'm discussing this based on actual value to real people, not the .0001% of users that are able to and want to sideload ROMs on their phones. If we're fighting planned obsolescence this needs to happen on an actually relevant scale, no?

Given that I'm in India, the second largest phone market outside China, I know they aren't as rare as you're making them out to be. As for your second point, that also depends on what people are using them for. The flagship phones are also generally the most efficient, and if you know how phone (or laptops) work your screen & network will drain/kill your battery way before just the SoC will.

Sure, those are very signficant power draws too. And yes, flagship SoCs tend to be more efficient - but no other level of SoC pushes the thermal/power envelope that far either, as flagships are the only ones trying to be the best in absolute performance. And while I agree that phone longevity is thankfully improving, we have a long way to go yet, and too-low specs is not the biggest problem by any measure.

Full of holes ~ oh really? What you're basically saying is that Chome doesn't "need" 16GB of RAM, I mean what sort of a logic is this

Well, I switched to Firefox last year, so I can't speak to Chrome since then, but I've used it just fine on systems with 8GB of RAM - I just don't keep more than 7-8 tabs open at any one time. That obviously depends on your workload, but then you also get to the question of having the right tool for the job, and, well, a phone isn't the right tool for the job if your job requires multitasking of the type where 16GB of RAM can actually be utilized - the interface, screen size and other limitations would be limiting your productivity at that point no matter what (unless you're specifically using some form of phone application which is an immense memory hog).

 

[R0H1T]

Those are 2017 flagship phones not getting the 2020 OS update. < 3 years.

Yeah wrong link, I messed up with the other one which was AOSP based.

I'm discussing this based on actual value to real people, not the .0001% of users that are able to and want to sideload ROMs on their phones. If we're fighting planned obsolescence this needs to happen on an actually relevant scale, no?

Ok, let's say 16GB isn't being used today or even next year. Aren't you then just guessing if it will still be useful 4-5 years from now, admittedly on phones that may not have the latest OS & better memory management at that time? Your point on OS is more valid than I'd like to admit but I don't see how more RAM is not a good thing. As with LPDDR4x & even LPDDR5 the power draw at idle would be minimal if not irrelevant, especially when the app doesn't need to reload.

 

[Upgrayedd]

I mean, the industry has a limited bit output per year

There's a bit limit? You mean chip output limited by manufacturing capabilities. Bit limit just sounds funny.

 

[R0H1T]

There isn't, new capacities are added each year & old fabs do move to better/newer nodes increasing the said output annually & then of course there's China.

 

[Valantar]

There's a bit limit? You mean chip output limited by manufacturing capabilities. Bit limit just sounds funny.

Total bit output is the term for the total amount of memory produced by the industry in a year across all (relevant) memory types. Saying this is limited = saying production isn't infinite. This increases every year, but is still limited. We're also heading into a slump as memory makers are moving to new process nodes in an effort to combat profitability drops in the previous year(s).

 

[Arpeegee]

Just want to add that I currently have a Note 8 from 2017 that at the time had a "ridiculous" 6GB of LPDDR4 RAM. Still holds up to any other flagship today and most recent security update was last week.

As someone pointed out before, this is more future proofing and the workloads will be more intensive in 4 years time. Plus the extra RAM is useful for emulators in my case or having my most common used apps at the ready.

You don't have to buy a 16GB RAM phone if you think it's a waste...

 

[Valantar]

Just want to add that I currently have a Note 8 from 2017 that at the time had a "ridiculous" 6GB of LPDDR4 RAM. Still holds up to any other flagship today and most recent security update was last week.

As someone pointed out before, this is more future proofing and the workloads will be more intensive in 4 years time. Plus the extra RAM is useful for emulators in my case or having my most common used apps at the ready.

You don't have to buy a 16GB RAM phone if you think it's a waste...

There's a point of diminishing returns somewhere though, and I would place its corresponding cut-off point for reasonable future-proofing somewhere between 6GB and 16GB. Remember, 8GB was recommended for PCs in the late 2000s, while 16GB is still plenty for common desktop usage/gaming/medium intensity workloads today. Memory needs don't grow linearly (unless developers are doing something seriously wrong).

 

[yotano211]

Going overboard on memory won't help whatsoever when the device stops receiving software updates two years into its lifecycle, which for many OEMs is generous. Nor does it help when the sealed-in, glued-in battery fails (or at least loses capacity dramatically) after <1000 charge cycles or 2-3 years. Sure, there are options for loading other OSes on there, but those are complicated and thus irrelevant for >99.9% of users. Nor does it help when the build quality issues of the phone start showing themselves; these devices are not built to last but rather to be as thin and good-looking as possible, making them wear poorly and start failing. Lack of repairability means that something as trivial as a button not working can lead to replacing the entire device. I'm all for combating planned obsolescence, but unnecessarily boosting specifications is not in any way whatsoever the way to do this. The population of users where this might be relevant is also extremely likely to be users who use their phones hard and wear them out quickly, and/or want better performance and faster hardware when it becomes available.

Putting this much memory in even flagship smartphones means that for the vast majority of users something like half of it will be entirely wasted, never actually being utilized. 6-8GB? Sure, that can be made use of, particularly given the poor state of Android RAM management. But 16? Not a chance.

Phones should definitely be designed to last 5+ years, including making them easily serviceable and making spare parts broadly available. But again, boosting on-paper specs with limited real-world use is not how to do this.

Also, the Gates quote is rather specific in saying that "X is as much as anyone will ever need", while I said "no smartphone needs...". The use of the present tense there was intentional, which should be obvious. Your simile is as such invalid.

The lithium ion batteries used in phones can only be cycled to 500-1000 cycles. There are other Lithium-ion battery chemistries but they dont have capacity for the same amount of space.
My boat has 3 Lithium-ion LiFePO4, Lithium-ion iron phosphate. The capacity is much less than used in phones, but I dont run the risk of a thermal run away problems.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Total bit output is the term for the total amount of memory produced by the industry in a year across all (relevant) memory types. Saying this is limited = saying production isn't infinite. This increases every year, but is still limited. We're also heading into a slump as memory makers are moving to new process nodes in an effort to combat profitability drops in the previous year(s).

I was just saying it sounded funny. Like someone told Samsung they can only produce 3 septillion bits per year and no more.

 

[Valantar]

Ok, let's say 16GB isn't being used today or even next year. Aren't you then just guessing if it will still be useful 4-5 years from now, admittedly on phones that may not have the latest OS & better memory management at that time? Your point on OS is more valid than I'd like to admit but I don't see how more RAM is not a good thing. As with LPDDR4x & even LPDDR5 the power draw at idle would be minimal if not irrelevant, especially when the app doesn't need to reload.

These are valid points, the issue is that there will be other significant bottlenecks holding you back much before lack of RAM at this point, as I've argued above. Worn-out batteries, cluttered and full storage slowing down, an OS in desperate need of a reinstall to clean up its files, a bloated user profile with the husks of five years of app installs and uninstalls, an SoC that's likely 1/3rd the performance of concurrent flagships, etc. As such, I don't think there would be a noticeable improvement in useability in 4-5 years for a phone if you increased its RAM and nothing else; in other words the RAM increase would be a waste.

For 16GB of RAM on phones to be anything more than yet another megapixel race-like spec sheet gimmick, they would need an OS and software ecosystem capable of doing actual work, including simultaneous multitasking on a large(r) screen (otherwise you could load the app from a flash-based page file in the time it takes the app switch animation to finish) and actual heavy software. Yes, sure, you can open a bajillion tabs in your phone browser, but is that in any way practical? Can you actually use them, and switch between them in a useful way? No; the physical interface of the phone becomes the limitation then. And with smart app development and fast storage there's no reason to keep the entire app in memory unless it's actually needed, so for background tasks you could easily shuffle off unnecessary/idle parts of the application (such as anything UI-related) to a page file.