>volatile
no

RAM and ROM are mutually exclusive.

Related question, how does the speed of XPoint compare to DDR4? I know Intel is planning on selling XPoint as both a DIMM and Disk, separately, but why would anyone buy an XPoint DIMM if DDR4 is cheaper and faster?

>The Register is aware of servers with 96 DIMM slots, which means … WOAH! … 12.2 terabytes of RAM in a single server if you buy Samsung's new babies.
But isn't Intel's max memory listed for the CPU's for the whole system, or is it per-socket?
If it's for the whole system then you're still limited to 1.5TB.

>>51535246
per socket

>>51535253
So you'd need 8S to actually get 12.2TB.
Does anyone actually make an 8S server for that socket?

>>51535276
Servers might be arm though.

>>51535276
maybe but you wouldn't even bother it would just be easier to buy more servers and hook them together

>>51535135
>128GB on a single RAM chip
You mean module, not chip.

>Is the age of hard drives truly over now?
because of 3d xpoint maybe.

>>51535225
NVRAM

>>51535313
Top kek. You know what ROM is, right?

>>51535323
Yes but he's saying RAM can't store data when powered off, which is false with NVRAM

>>51535135
what computer supports that dense of memory?
isn't broadwell and skylake limited to "only" 16 gigs per stick?

>>51535225
No they aren't. You could easily design RAM that was read-only. I don't do much electronics work, but I believe most ROM chips are also RAM (random-access).

In fact, SSDs also count as RAM because they are random access.

900 bit cpus when

>>51535347
>In fact, SSDs also count as RAM because they are random access.
by that logic then pretty much all forms of storage is ram

>>51535135
>single ram chip
>DIMM
not the same thing.

>>51535448
You show your stupidity and ignorance.

HDD is not random access. CDs, DVDs, Blu-Ray are not random access. Drums, tapes, the list goes on.

>>51535135
yeah sure, lemme just buy 180+ of those for my movies alone
legit

>>51535467
>HDD are not random access
The explain fragmentation.

SSDs have blocks like a HDD, you can't actually get a random assignment of bytes across the SSD when you ask for a section of storage.

So SSDs aren't RAM.

>>51535490
You can't address blocks on an HDD directly. You can only seek to a track and wait for the disk to spin there. Hence not random access.

SSDs are RAM because they can address the blocks directly without seeking linearly across a medium like tapes or disks.

>>51535516
That's not what RAM is.

Fuck i am buying that 2x64 gb and make ram disk and i won't turn pc for weeks
It would be better then ssd

>>51535135
yeah, when they don't lose all their data when the battery backup inevitably goes out

>>51535556
Are you literally retarded? Random Access Memory

>A random-access memory device allows data items to be accessed (read or written) in almost the same amount of time irrespective of the physical location of data inside the memory. In contrast, with other direct-access data storage media such as hard disks, CD-RWs, DVD-RWs and the older drum memory, the time required to read and write data items varies significantly depending on their physical locations on the recording medium, due to mechanical limitations such as media rotation speeds and arm movement delays.

>>51535691
On SSDs you still have to access blocks, you cannot address individual bytes directly which is a base requirement of RAM.

If you want to read a byte it will take much longer than it does for RAM, and you will load it into RAM along the way.

>>51535726
>you cannot address individual bytes directly which is a base requirement of RAM
No it's not. Stop moving the goalposts because you speak a different version of English from the rest of the world.

>>51535726
>you cannot address individual bytes directly which is a base requirement of RAM.

No it's not.

>>51535740
Frankly, you're the one moving the goalposts.

In the very beginning RAM could address individual bits directly. Ever since it has been individual bytes, but now apparently you're super special and it's allowed to reference individual blocks.

SSDs aren't RAM, just like flash drives aren't, just like any other solid state, non ROM, storage isn't RAM.

>>51535726
>you cannot address individual bytes directly which is a base requirement of RAM.
[citation needed]

>>51535819
>addressing individual bits
>on any architecture
>ever
jesus christ have you ever programmed anything more complex than fizzbuzz in haskell? the only architectures old enough to have available memory counted in bits predate RAM entirely

>>51535845
Welcome to life before multiple kilobytes.

> You will have 128 gb ram on your motherboard.
> On a stick.

>>51535726
>you cannot address individual bytes directly which is a base requirement of RAM.
false

>>51535890
Even those architectures were never able to address bits.

>>51535726
>you cannot address individual bytes directly which is a base requirement of RAM.
Incorrect

Didn't Intel and samsung develloped 3D non volatile memory that's as fast as ram, cheap as fuck and will unify ram and HDDs and replace them as the same thing?

>>51535588
Would be great except random power failures would really suck.

>>51535276
Tyan makes a 4-socket E7 server that apparently supports 12.2TB of RAM.

>you cannot address individual bytes directly which is a base requirement of RAM.

confirmed kek

>>51537124
Tyan is crazy though. Keep in mind back in the day they cooked up a dual quad-socket motherboard system (the master board on the bottom, and the slave board on top, linked together by a pair of custom riser cards) for AMD C32 chips.

>>51537124
What on earth is a practical use for that
Maybe if you want to run one really dank minecraft server