The future of RAM?

[miecz]

Where is RAM going in the next few years? Are we going to see 2gigs in one stick? I ask because it looks like RAM has gotten cheaper, while slots on motherboards (to myknowledge) have notchanged. I am guessing that 8 slots for 8 sticksof 1gig RAM would not be very bright.

Can anyone tell me what is going to happen in the future with RAM and MOBOs?

 

[apt403]

2gb sticks are already on the market.

4gb sticks as well, but they're FB-DIMMS made for servers.

I dont think RAM requirments will go up a whole lot in the next few years, with 64bit OSes becoming more widely used now 2x 2gb sets will probably become the standard, with 2x 4gb, 4x 4gb, and 2x 8gb sets in high end rigs.

 

[CompTIA_Rep]

I cant wait for MS to put out an OS that recommends 2x8gb of ram. AWESOME.

 

[apt403]

I think the computer industry will boycott M$ if that ever happens.

 

[CompTIA_Rep]

You think they would. But remember there was a time when 64 was a ton of memory (more then most people). Then 128, then 192, then 256, then 1gb, then 2gb, now 4gb.


Like 16 will be a big deal when each 2/4 gb stick is $100.


It is inevitable.

 

[miecz]

I just looked at 2gig RAM and I see that it is more expensive that 2 x 1gig Dual-Channel RAM. Are not they supposed to be the same in terms of output? Does one have more output than the other?

 

[flasher702]

DDR2-800 1gb modules will be mainstream by next summer with DDR3 starting to show up around the end of this year. Beyond that I don't know.

Not sure what you mean by "output". 2x1gb sticks in dual channel have twice as much throughput as a single 2gb stick at the same speed. The 2gb sticks are more expensive than 2x1gb sticks because they are a premium item, that is all. Also, there is no such thing as "dual channel ram". Basically any two sticks of ram should run in dual channel. Selling them in pairs is mostly just a gimmick.

 

[Track]

I cant wait for MS to put out an OS that recommends 2x8gb of ram. AWESOME.

By then 8GB will cost 100$, so no worry.

However i doubt that M$ will release many more Operating Systems, since each one takes that much longer to make than the last since they all have to be compatible with all of their predecessors, so its like they have to re-build XP and 2000 aswell when they build Vista.

 

[thently]

I have a Gigabyte GA-M59SLI-S5 Mobo thats says it supports 16 gigs of ram now how many on you out there have seen 4 gig unbuffered sticks floating around cuz i want 4 LOL

 

[CompTIA_Rep]

Well actually, aside from the DRM shit, I like MS and would not want to use Apple or LInux (though I have access to both).


Im sure once SP 1 for vista comes out, More people will adopt, and after two years most people will prefer it over XP.

The major difference this time around is the F$* DRM, but that is hardly just a MS thing.

 

[miecz]

DDR2-800 1gb modules will be mainstream by next summer with DDR3 starting to show up around the end of this year. Beyond that I don't know.

Not sure what you mean by "output". 2x1gb sticks in dual channel have twice as much throughput as a single 2gb stick at the same speed. The 2gb sticks are more expensive than 2x1gb sticks because they are a premium item, that is all. Also, there is no such thing as "dual channel ram". Basically any two sticks of ram should run in dual channel. Selling them in pairs is mostly just a gimmick.

Let me just make sure I understand you. If computer A has 2 sticks of 1gig dual channel ram, and computer B has 1 stick of 2gig ram, then computer A has more RAM?

 

[flasher702]

no... Computer a has more memory BANDWIDTH. They both have the same 2g of ram but computer A can access more of it at once.

 

[darious00777]

DDR3 will be released soon. We'll probably be seeing DDR4 and DDR5 before ODR (octuple data rate over double data rate) fairly soon.

 

[bullaRh]

We already have 2gb per stick....

As for RAM, DDR3, faster, lower latencies, more capacity also.

Mainstream mobos probably won't use more than 4 slots.

DDR3 = slooowy latencies at the moment.. probably gonna take some time before we get faster latencies but they will have high mhz

 

[jordanwise]

anyone heard of this phase change memory all the big research labs are working on?

 

[zenmaster]

You think they would. But remember there was a time when 64 was a ton of memory (more then most people). Then 128, then 192, then 256, then 1gb, then 2gb, now 4gb.


Like 16 will be a big deal when each 2/4 gb stick is $100.


It is inevitable.

Heck, my 286 was the bomb because I had 2 Meg of Memory.

My 486 rocked the world with 8meg of ream.

I oversaw a massive deployment of corporate desktops recently with 512mb.

My current PC has 2000x more memory than my 1st PC, 500x more than my 2nd, and 8x more than many entry level systems now.

So yeah, give it about 3 years and I think 8-16gb of Ram will be the norm.
The only reason it will take that long is that there are so few people on 64-Bit OSes right now to justify creating enough bloatware to make it needed for that much memory.

Even most of the Vista copies now shipping are most likely 32-bit.
I don't have any figures, but that is what I would guess.
If nothing else just to maintain 16-bit app support which is lost in the 64-bit OS and limit complaints from folks with little IT knowledge who are buying these sytems.

 

[michiganteddybear]

history has shown, that as RAM and storage prices decrease, the amount of memory (ram or mass storage) has increased, not in any small part due to the fact that programs have gotten larger.

now they are not really required to write small, precise code anymore. instead of 1k for a routine, they now are free to use as much as they want (because now storage is cheap).

I for one do not expect to see this trend change any time soon.

 

[flasher702]

DDR3 will be released soon. We'll probably be seeing DDR4 and DDR5 before ODR (octuple data rate over double data rate) fairly soon.

DDR3 isn't supposed to be mainstream until 2009 at the earliest IIRC. Much like the DDR to DDR2 transition there will be little to no performance advantage for at least some period of time while costing more. Only place it would be really be worthwhile to be an early DDR3 adopter would be in a laptop or some sort of large deployment (corporate or datacenter) to save electricity. If you really really wanted I think you could build a DDR3 rig right now but it would be a waste of money and will continue to be a waste of money for another year or two.

The phase change memory is to replace NAND Flash, not DDR or other fast volatile rams.

 

[CompTIA_Rep]

Screw memory. I am plugging in my old hard drive directly into my DDR2 slot. I may have 9.3ms (ms, not ns) seek times, but I will have 500gb of ram.



/very nice.

 

[flasher702]

...or you could just partition off a bigger swap drive.

 

[melarcky]

i just finally got to 1GB yesterday and im happy for now but still couldnt they just make things go fine on 2gbs for another maybe year before going any further?

 

[CompTIA_Rep]

If you are happy with the software you are using now, then 1gb will always be fine.


IF you were happy with windows 98, then 128mb of ram and that generation of software (office 97,...) will always work great.


If you were happy with Dos, then 2mb will be fine.


If you want to run the latest version of windows, the latest software, the latest gadgets... you will have to move with the times and upgrade.

 

[Track]

Screw memory. I am plugging in my old hard drive directly into my DDR2 slot. I may have 9.3ms (ms, not ns) seek times, but I will have 500gb of ram.



/very nice.

I like you.

/Praise.