G.SKILL 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400)

lord filbuster · 20 May 2008 at 16:16

i doubt it, ram transfer speed (assuming 128bit bus width) 128/8 which is 16 bytes per clock, so 800MHz ram has a potential bandwith of 128 hundred million bytes per second, or 11.9GB/s. This might just be the theoretical maximum though.

NickK · 20 May 2008 at 17:37

lord filbuster said:
i doubt it, ram transfer speed (assuming 128bit bus width) 128/8 which is 16 bytes per clock, so 800MHz ram has a potential bandwith of 128 hundred million bytes per second, or 11.9GB/s. This might just be the theoretical maximum though.

Not bad - graphics cards will top 120GB/sec (well optimised CTM code will do that on a X1950XTX for example).

Meanwhile my new external HD connected by FW800 drive is hitting 50MB/sec write sustained.. so I think hard drives have a way to go yet!

matt100 said:
no complaints here mate! I'll look back with a gring when I'm running 128GB ram in a few years

Any just how much RAM will the OS require.. just to simply surf the web

PinkFloyd · 20 May 2008 at 18:17

Ice Rich said:
Surely we are going to get to a point (fairly soon?) where the hard drive will replace the ram with transfer speed being so high?

Lol. More likely to happen the other way around. (well it kinda is!)

Jon1818 · 20 May 2008 at 18:24

Wow :| 16GB lol. You can buy mac pros with that, though i dont know why as OSX is a far less resource hungry OS than Vista.

Ice Rich · 20 May 2008 at 18:28

PinkFloyd said:
Lol. More likely to happen the other way around. (well it kinda is!)

But RAM is only temp. storage, perhaps we will see a hybrid of the 2 with part of the OS/common files being built into the RAM?

PinkFloyd · 20 May 2008 at 18:34

Ice Rich said:
But RAM is only temp. storage, perhaps we will see a hybrid of the 2 with part of the OS/common files being built into the RAM?

Welcome to a few months ago

These are being worked on, plus you can already get solid state hardrives

@Jon1818 - Vista just uses lots of ram because its empty. It preloads stuff to make the most of the space. From my understanding it will unload things if the memory is needed by more important things.

Talrinys · 20 May 2008 at 22:20

Harddrives won't replace RAM, simply because of latencies, it's that simple. SSD drives may, but AFAIK those latencies still do not match a good DDR module. Plus the fact that eliminating swap files because of the extreme amount of available RAM will free up the harddrive(SSD in a few years) to do all the read/write operations, much better that way.

RAM is receiving a massive bandwidth boost with Nehalem for Intel and already did in AMD system, + DDR3, no reason to just dump the technology that works.

Schnippzle · 20 May 2008 at 22:42

Think 16gig may become the norm once octa-cores are released.

JeffyB · 20 May 2008 at 23:39

My only question, how well does it clock?

matt100 · 20 May 2008 at 23:51

well I guess it'll do 400mhz is enough for most anyway, in fact I'm suprised these early 4GB modules aren't pc4200/5300 etc

PhilGQ · 21 May 2008 at 18:47

matt100 said:
no complaints here mate! I'll look back with a gring when I'm running 128GB ram in a few years

I remember when the thought of 128MB seemed silly after all what could anyone do with 128MB when 8MB was fine for most things

Tysonator · 21 May 2008 at 19:46

superflyguy said:
No way! Should manage with 16Gb tho......

Sorry, I did mean 16Gb.

Though I can remeber when I had a MMX intel and upgraded to 16Mb from 4Mb if cost me £150 !