Affiliate Disclosure
If you buy through our links, we may get a commission. Read our ethics policy.

Over 6.5 million terabytes of flash storage ruined because of contamination at factory

Western Digital and Kioxia flash memory production impacted by contaminated materials

Last updated

Western Digital and Kioxia cut production at two plants in Japan after contamination was discovered in raw materials, which will likely lead to price hikes and further strain on the already-taxed supply chain.

Western Digital and Kioxia are some of the largest producers of flash memory in the industry. Contaminated materials in plants at Yokkaichi and Kitakami have led to limited production of flash memory, which is expected to impact the rest of the industry.

According to a report from Bloomberg, it isn't clear how extensive the disruption will be. Western Digital reports an expected reduction in its supply by about 6.5 exabytes (6.5 million terabytes). A Wells Fargo analyst says when combined with Kioxia's loss of production, the number would be about 16 exabytes lost.

Hideki Yasuda, an Ace Research Institute analyst, tells Bloomberg that flash memory prices will rise as a result. This will combine with other industry price hikes due to supply shortages.

However, Samsung and Micron may be able to limit industry impact with their own flash memory production. Since flash memory is an industry-standard, the components can be sourced from any company.

Flash memory is used to produce modern solid-state memory used in products like iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple Watch. While Samsung is a major producer of these components, a reduction in supply from two other major suppliers will place increased demand on Samsung's output.

Western Digital and Kioxia did not provide an estimate for when production will be restored. The total impact of their loss of production is estimated to be about 10% of the market consumption for a quarter.

Kioxia's statement did provide some positive insight by pointing out that the product line impacted produced 3D flash, which is newer and more expensive. It estimates that shipments of its conventional 2D NAND flash memory will not be affected.



9 Comments

davebarnes 19 Years · 376 comments

"Factory contamination ruins 6.5 million terabytes"
You mean 6.5 EB. See how much "ink" I saved you.

fruitstandninja 11 Years · 104 comments

"Factory contamination ruins 6.5 million terabytes"
You mean 6.5 EB. See how much "ink" I saved you.

Don’t be condescending. Most people have never worked with exabytes and have at best heard the term in passing. Almost all drives are now sold in terabytes so stating it the way the author did is completely appropriate. 

OutdoorAppDeveloper 15 Years · 1292 comments

Poor Petabyte. Never had a chance. It sounds like we are skipping it and going straight to the Exabyte.
Many years ago at a tech trade show there was an asian company at the front of the hall proudly showing of their robotic hard drive loading system with over one Petabyte of storage. They named the thing the "Petafile". I kid you not. I bet they wondered why they were getting all the smirks and snickers as people walked by.
And now you know the rest of the story.

linkman 11 Years · 1041 comments

"Factory contamination ruins 6.5 million terabytes"
You mean 6.5 EB. See how much "ink" I saved you.
Almost all drives are now sold in terabytes 

I'll have to disagree. Most devices, including plenty of Apple's laptops, are listed with capacities ending in "GB." Examples: iPhone 13 Pro lists four sizes, 128 GB. 256 GB, 512 GB, and 1 TB. The least expensive MacBook Air shows 256 GB, configurable to 512GB, 1TB, or 2TB. Dell's XPS 13 laptop has three sizes -- only one of which is listed in TB. Dell lists their XPS 8950 desktop with half of the single drive options in GB.

I think most hard drives are listed in TB but SSDs are still shown in GB.