3D NAND Memory Comparison 2021

NAND revenue is expected to expand over time as cost reductions enable further penetration of NAND-based storage. Revenue is expected to increase from $56 billion in 2020 to $70 billion in 2021, a huge increase of 25%. By 2026, NAND market revenue is expected to exceed $90 billion.

NAND is the most common and widely used type of non-volatile memory technology because it offers a combination of high storage capacity and low cost per bit. Demand for this memory technology continues to grow (2020-2026 NAND bit growth CAGR of 29%), led by important megatrends such as mobility, cloud computing, AI, and the Internet of Things (IoT).

This report focuses on technologies from Samsung, SK Hynix, and Intel, who respectively held market shares of 34%, 11%, and 9% in 2020.

3D NAND technology continues to rapidly develop. NAND memory improves device capacity by stacking memory cells into vertical layers. In 2015, commercialized 3D NAND memory used 32-layers, while in 2021 most manufacturers are mass producing 128-layer 3D NAND memory. The progressive addition of wordline layers results in significant changes in the manufacturing processes of memory devices. Storing multiple bits per memory cell equates to improved capacity without any additional manufacturing process steps.

In this report, three memories taken from solid-state drives are analyzed: Samsung’s 128-layer, SK Hynix’s 128-layer, and Intel’s 144-layer. This report presents a detailed study of Samsung’s latest 128-layer V-NAND using charge trap flash and triple-level cell NAND memory cells; SK Hynix’s 128-layer (also referred to as the ‘4D NAND’ by SK Hynix) using periphery under cell technology (PuC); and Intel’s unique technology, which combines floating gate architecture with CMOS under array (CuA).

Also included in this report is a full analysis and comparison of the NAND memories.  Details on package teardown are provided as well, accompanied by optical and high-resolution SEM images of the memory dies that show the dies’ features and process. The die cross-section reveals Samsung’s single deck, SK Hynix’s double deck, and Intel’s wordlines in three decks. The cross-section images disclose the memory floating gate or charge trap technology used by each memory. Also furnished is the manufacturing process of the 3D NAND memory and the cost analysis and comparison. Finally, this comparison report includes the manufacturing process comparison and the cost comparison detailing the NAND array wafer cost, CMOS cost, die cost, and cost per gigabit of the three memories.

Overview/Introduction

• Executive Summary
• Reverse Costing Methodology

Company Profile

• Samsung/SK Hynix/Intel – Financial Results
• 3D NAND Memories

Physical Analysis

• Samsung Memory
• SK Hynix Memory
• Intel Memory
  • SSD overview
  • Memory package view & dimensions
  • Memory package cross-section
  • Memory package opening
  • Memory die view & dimensions
  • Memory die cross-section
  • Memory die process

Physical Analysis Comparison

• Memory Package
• Memory Die Area and Density
• Memory Die Cross-Section
• Memory CMOS Transistors

Memory Manufacturing Process

• Memory Die Front-End Process
• Memory Die Fabrication Unit
• Packaging & Final Test
• Process Comparison

Cost Analysis

• Summary
• Yields & Hypothesis
• Memory Die Front-End Cost
• Memory Die Cost
• Memory Packaging Cost
• Memory Component Cost
• Memory Cost per Gb

Cost Analysis Comparison

• Wafer Cost Comparison
• Die Cost Comparison
• Packaging Cost Comparison
• Component Cost Comparison
• Cost per Gb Comparison

Selling Price

Complete teardown with:

• Detailed photos
• Precise measurements
• Materials analysis
• Manufacturing process flow
• Supply chain evaluation
• Manufacturing cost analysis
• Physical analysis, manufacturing process, and cost analysis comparison