Ann: Appendix 4E & Annual Report, page-182

I'm not certain about using any of the individual metrics for comparison between this product and other types of memory. If we go back to one of the original comments from 4DS, the discussion was surrounding the efficiency of the system as well as the retention and endurance.

With the retention characteristic of current technologies measured in milliseconds, I would suggest that the comparison of endurance is something of a moot point; even if 4DS produced a 10 second retention (and I don't suggest that is the level they are working with), the refresh rate is thousands of times less than DRAM, and therefore a matching endurance rating would be reduced by the same ratio.

We also find the same with speed; with no error correction required because of the high level of success at registration, and therefore only one attempt required to lodge a bit, up to 6 (? from my foggy memory) less attempts are needed to register a bit of data. That reduces the speed requirement to perform the same task by the same ratio.

One would also have to wonder if the failed attempts of registration (high error rate) in other formats count towards the number of cycles to which they are exposed (I imagine they would), and therefore reduces the endurance requirement by that ratio as well.

Methinks we need to be cautious in our comparisons of different technologies, lest we become misled by the differing characteristics.