Samsung Electronics on Thursday said it has used its 50-nanometer circuit technology to develop the first 4-Gb DDR3 PC memory chip, which the vendor claims offers more capacity at significantly less power consumption than current DDR3 products.
Thats pretty awesome, but honestly not needed unless you are using it for game servers or something.
"640k is more than enough for everyone!" I know that isn't actually a real quote (Bill gates was said to have said it, but he never actually did), but it still applies. 5 years ago, people would have said 4Gb was overkill on anything other than a server, but today a lot of people (including myself) are making use of it. Memory is still actually a huge limitation, especially in games (Textures EAT memory - a 2048x2048 texture, which is not all that high this generation, takes up 16Mb of memory. A 4096x4096 texture takes 64Mb of memory - Both the 360 and PS3 have 512Mb of memory for EVERYTHING), having more memory will always be a good thing. The reason why 4Gb is "plenty" for the moment is because developers have to assume that you might only have 512Mb or less, but if nearly everyone had 8Gb of memory, developers could easily make use of it.
Ya I didn't mean that it won't ever be needed, perhaps I should have said... "Thats pretty awesome, but honestly not needed YET"
its a great breakthrough although RAM may disappear in the future. As new technologies come in. we may end up using future HDDs to run at those speeds. Keep your eye on IBM
Yeah, I remember reading about a new technology rather recently that could mean persistent RAM (I.e. RAM that doesn't disappear when you pull out the plug), but I reckon there'll always be a divide between memory (in terms of RAM) and storage. However, with the advent of SSDs and such, the speed gap may get considerably more narrow.
that's where the speed of the RAM comes in. and thankfully the XDR is much much faster than the GDDR3 that the xb360 uses. For non-volatile ram, you might as well just be page flipping on a high bandwidth SSD.
I'm lonely over here...
you put 3 of them in triple channel... 96gb of ram. That is a lot.... load 3 blu ray movies in ram alone... :~ This might be good news for HD special effects editing and such.
Too bad we don't have motherboards that don't support that..lol.
XP or Vista or 7... is it too soon to make jokes about it?
Cool break through, a little too ahead of its time right now though. Especially with OS limitations I see a lot of proprietary applications with this in the future with consoles however. 64GB RAM computers, wow. If the technology keeps this level of intricacy consistent, I predict full photo-realistic graphics by 2020.
RAM is way too expensive and it doesn't matter how much there is if it cannot be accessed in high volumes. We are long far from 64Gigitty equipped consoles. I'm certain we will move out of RAM into other technologies as time and new materials are progressed.
Yeah, ram still seems kinda analog in comparison to other technologies, still a big break through for one stick of ram. You have to wonder how this will be used though? Most OS don't even support 25 let alone 32GB. Also yeah you're right it's a long while off for consoles to use these high volume ram.
Most x64 platforms support up to 128GB of RAM. As for how it's possible to utilize 32GB of RAM simultaneously...I can open up 32 copies of Photoshop in a single environment.
Random Access Memory? That is, if you want the number 7, you go straight to 7. Versus sequential access. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 - ahh, there is my 7. The technologies behind RAM will no doubt change. But the theoretical concept behind RAM will not change, and RAM will be around forever. Also, RAM is expensive when compared to storage (like a HDD) but 10 bucks for a gig of RAM isn't that expensive. http://www.newegg.com/Produ... May not be the fastest RAM in the world, but 4 or 5 gigs per second is good enough for me.
Fantasy, Most OS don't support past 16GB ram fully, I don't know where you pulled that number out of. In photoshop your pulling CPU power, I'd brush up on your tech-know-how. @Proxy The hardware behind how ram is processed seems analog, a term I mean almost archaic it hasn't gone through many major over hauls like HDD compared to SDD. ---- 4GB Tiff image? That's an extreme example.
In photoshop you need ram to load an image. now say you want to open a 4Gb Tiff image and apply numerous layers on it. a lot of ram would be need for it to be put into.... ram. cpu power is called upon when processing.
You sound a lot like bladestar. You know nothing yet you pretend to know what you are talking about. In the next 5 years you will find out why RAM will be replaced by different technologies. Even as we move to the cloud racetrack will take over. Hybrid HDDS with turbo memory and the upcoming interfaces will take over.
GW, I got it right here. http://msdn.microsoft.com/e... Also I'm pretty sure of my "tech-know-how". Open up 32 copies of Photoshop: and use 1 program at a time, leaving the other 31 in the RAM pool for almost >90% RAM usage. Whether all 32 copies of Photoshop can be used simultaneously is entirely up to the CPU and HDD. I'll thank you not to question my technical knowledge again.
You're taking the virtual and active RAM way out of context. It does not support 128 GB of active usable RAM. It's way different if you're using a computer as a SERVER than an active PC. So yeah, I'll question your technical know how when you don't even know the proper amount of Ram OS limitations. As a PC Vista x64 has a max of 16 GB's. Only Enterprise holds up to 128GB's and it's not consumer friendly seeing as it directly targeted for business -only- application. I'm not sure where you got all this gobbly-gook about the majority of OS' have a cap of 128. "However, with Windows Vista, there is a clear distinction between the maximum supported physical memory and the virtual addresses that the operating system will use. The x86 editions of Vista will not deliver full support for all the RAM installed in the case that this amounts to 4GB. And there are also some limitations involving x64 platforms."
GraphicsWhore: Maybe you should have actually read the page he linked to. http://msdn.microsoft.com/e... And your right, enterprise supports 128GB. And so does Ultimate :). Ultimate isn't less user friendly. It's just more bloated with extra crap. You were thinking of Home Premium. If your someone who would actually need more than 6GB of RAM, then chances are your going to be getting Ultimate. This would be most useful in the 3D design industry, allowing for even huger, more detailed scenes.
I have a hard time accepting that RAM will be replaced. If you could show me (link please) a new technology that offers random access and 5 or 6 gigs per second transfer speeds, then I will be willing to consider the possibility.
@Proxy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... And eventually, in the far future, we should have quantum dot memory.
I was going to do it this year but with all the new stuff coming out, I think it's better to wait. USB 3.0 faster and bigger ram 8/16 core CPU's Blu-ray RW PC's are going to be crazy in the next few years I can't wait.
If you think 2010 looks good, just wait till you see what 2011 will bring. You should probably wait...
Dude, 2012 is where it's at.
Is 32gb modules even necessary? I barely use up my 8gb of ram now(I never even hit 80%), how will 32gb+ benefit me? LOL. Overkill if you ask me.
This can actually create 64GB sticks. The current design right now is only a 1 sided RAM stick. But you can double side them. I have double sided sticks in my PC right now.
It is if running Linux. :-D Dang! I hope they keep the DIMM form factor!
Too bad most OSs won't benefit from it.
It's not about the OS benefiting from it. Most OS's don't need to much memory. This is for other applications that need large amounts of memory. Such as Servers and 3D design.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.