Daily reminder that the slowest DDR RAM is faster than the

They do different things and the cost per GB is completely different.

What is your point exactly besides being a retard?

>>56250987
im not op, but ramisk is pretty freaking cool dude.

>>56250987
If you were to make a RAMdisk our of one it would be faster, how OLD AS HELL tech can be faster than a 400 dollar SSD

>>56250984
>Daily reminder that the slowest DDR RAM is faster than the fastest NVMe SSD.
Oh no it is not.

>>56250984
>use ram as storage
>blackout
>everything lost

>use ram as storage
>plug it out to replace it
>everything lost

how fast is ddr 233mhz?

File: ram-disk-comparison.jpg (94KB, 830x272px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 830x272px

>>56251003
yeah, but arent you limited to only like 1gb using DDR? also, there's a reason ramdisk is used alot...

>>56251003
yeah but currently the highest density RAM you can get for a normal motherboard is going to be 128GB.

So even if you set aside a full 120GB for a RAMDisk, you're looking at $700+ for 120GB.

Sure it's faster than even the fastest NVMe drive, but a 500GB NVMe drive costs like $400.
So almost 1/2 the cost for 4x the storage space.


Unless you actually NEED 10gb/s+ read/write speeds, the cost per GB just doesn't make sense.

>>56251033
using ramdisk in music production makes sense tho, you load all your samples into the ram and you remove clipping!

>>56251051
Sure, but in those instance an NVMe drive will likely give you the same or similar experiences, and if you REALLY need the RAMdisk, get enough RAM for a RAMDisk, i'm not saying there aren't things that can take advantage of it. But in general the things that can use the extra speed tend to be fairly small files.

NVMe drives can hold 300GB+ files at 2-3gbps. RAM can hold at MOST ~120GB at 10-20gbps.
The NVMe drive will cost 1/2 as much though.

>>56251028
M.2 drives read up to 3,000 MB/s, nominally slower than the ramdisk in your graphic.

File: r_600x450 (1).png (167KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 600x450px

In few short months we'll be seeing the 3DXpoint hit the market and that's hell of a lot faster than any NVMe.
RAMDisk is going to become nearly obsolete.

Xpoint is actually so fast that it's getting bottlenecked.

>>56251007
>plug it out
>unplug

ftfy

File: file.png (183KB, 954x722px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 954x722px

>>56251695

>RAMDisk is going to be obsolete

Based on that picture, even if it was bottlenecked, unless that bottleneck was removed and it is a magnitude slower, it would still be slower than RAM.

See pic related. That's with 16 GB of DDR3 1600 ECC RAM on a professional workstation. DDR4 is even faster. Unless XPoint can push anywhere near a million IOPS, it's just an improved SSD that is nonvolatile.

>>56251051
Not sure you understand what clipping is...

>>56251901

http://hexus.net/tech/news/storage/95524-micron-demos-3d-xpoint-memory-packing-quantx-ssds/

> With access to four PCIe channels Micron QuantX drives could deliver up to 900,000 IOPS, or with eight lane PCIe connections up to 1.9 million IOPS.

It's getting there.
And keep in mind that this is tech is very new.
Give it few years and I bet it's going to land very close to RAM speeds.

File: irambox2.jpg (58KB, 500x349px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 500x349px

>>56251003
They did make ramdisks for consumers more than a decade ago, they never caught on.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/1742

These ramdrives truly feel like the pre-cursor to the SSD era
Feels that before every jump/evolution in design/hardware that is some bastard implementation of it that never got any traction or just faded away into obscurity once the other technology matured.

>>56252321
That was a piece of shit, though, compared to actual RAM disks. Though it had way better seek and random performance than the disks at the time.

File: ram.png (34KB, 592x639px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 592x639px

>>56250984
Except it's not...

http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=339089