Ever Wondered What 128GB of RAM Looks Like?

Any off topic discussions should go in this forum. Post count is not increased by posting here.
FTP Access status is required to post in this forum. Find out how to get it
Forum rules
Any off topic discussions should go in this forum. Post count is not increased by posting here.
FTP Access status is required to post in this forum. Find out how to get it
Post Reply
Namronia

Ever Wondered What 128GB of RAM Looks Like?

Post by Namronia »

http://www.hiptechblog.com/2007/06/10/e ... ooks-like/

i want to have

m4rkuz
FTP Access
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:21 pm

Post by m4rkuz »

lol^^ nice

I want it too xD

hmm but my 2gb are enough at the moment

Peteski
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 1:49 pm
Location: Halifax, UK
Contact:

Post by Peteski »

wow... just wow
what possible load could be put on a server to require all of that ?

4tified
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 725
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 4:16 am
Location: TeXaS

Post by 4tified »

Forget a hard drive...just run everything off the RAM! Did they mention what speed this RAM was? I didn't see it in the article.
Laptop: Precision M6300 2.4GHz Core 2 T8300 / 4GB RAM / 320GB HD / ATI Quadro FX 3600m
Server: PowerEdge 1950 (Gen III) (x1) 2.5Ghz Xeon E5420 / 24GB FB-DDR2 / 1.5tb 7.2k SAS RAID 0
Desktop: Precision T5500 2.66GHz Xeon X5650 / 24GB DDR3 ECC / 2x 300GB Seagate 15k7

Ludacris
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 601
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:56 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria
Contact:

Post by Ludacris »

What for? what os can handle 128 GB ram? It is possible to get a pc with 1.5 TB ram, but windows cant handle it

m4rkuz
FTP Access
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:21 pm

Post by m4rkuz »

I think Windows Vista Ultimate x64 can handle up to 128 gb RAM ?

iam not sure, but I think I read it somewhere.

yes now iam sure^^ I found it again^^

Ultimate x64

>128 GB

Luckie
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 1115
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 8:03 am
Location: Germany

Post by Luckie »

Wow. This is just amazing
"Theory is when you know something, but it doesn't work. Practice is when something works, but you don't know why. Programmers combine theory and practice: Nothing works and they don't know why."

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

Ludacris wrote:What for? what os can handle 128 GB ram? It is possible to get a pc with 1.5 TB ram, but windows cant handle it
A number of OSes. x64 Windows server variants, IA64 Windows server editions, Linux, BSD...

teriaki 511
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 4:58 pm
Location: The Bermuda Triangle

Post by teriaki 511 »

wow, simply, wow, imagine all of the crap you could do with this! imagine all the stuff you shouldn't do, but will do anyway, with this!
Image

ppc_digger
Donator
Posts: 590
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 1:25 am
Location: Israel

Post by ppc_digger »

Since Linux is only limited by the CPU architecture, it can (theoretically) utilize the full 64 bit address space (allowing for a maximum of 2^64 bytes = 16 EB of RAM ). However, the current x86-64 implementations (both AMD and Intel) only allow the first 40 bits (36 on early EM64T) to be used, allowing "only" 1 TB (64 GB on early EM64T) of physical RAM.

You can quote me in a few years, when 1 TB of RAM is practiaclly nothing (e.g. when 16 TB is the standard, in about 20 years, according to Moore's law) and the above statement seems like a joke.

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

ppc_digger wrote:You can quote me in a few years, when 1 TB of RAM is practiaclly nothing (e.g. when 16 TB is the standard, in about 20 years, according to Moore's law) and the above statement seems like a joke.
Reminds me of the good old days back in 1993 when NT 3.1 had just been released and it required the "infinite" amount of 16 megabytes of RAM to run smoothly. Back then, my machine had 2 megabytes and 16 was just so incredibly much to me.

RentedMule
Donator
Posts: 937
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:26 pm

Post by RentedMule »

empireum wrote: Reminds me of the good old days back in 1993 when NT 3.1 had just been released and it required the "infinite" amount of 16 megabytes of RAM to run smoothly. Back then, my machine had 2 megabytes and 16 was just so incredibly much to me.
I don't believe it. NT 4 ran on 8 megs just fine... only you needed 11 megs to install it, but wasnt a big deal for those who used an image.

empireum
Donator
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 5:00 pm

Post by empireum »

RentedMule wrote:
empireum wrote: Reminds me of the good old days back in 1993 when NT 3.1 had just been released and it required the "infinite" amount of 16 megabytes of RAM to run smoothly. Back then, my machine had 2 megabytes and 16 was just so incredibly much to me.
I don't believe it. NT 4 ran on 8 megs just fine... only you needed 11 megs to install it, but wasnt a big deal for those who used an image.
It did run on 8MB but needed ~12MB to install IIRC. But it wouldn't run smoothly... For me, NT 3.x's performance became substantially better when upgrading from 12MB of RAM to 24MB and I've read 16MB was the sweet spot.

Super6mix
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:41 am

Post by Super6mix »

OMG!!! that's a monster

Kenneth
Donator
Posts: 2407
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 12:42 am

Post by Kenneth »

From FireWare's posts
Old Topics
5. Try not bring up old topics (this includes bumping). Old topics are considered to be one month old or more from the last post made. Only reply with comments or questions worth mentioning. Do not reply to old topics if the reply is pointless, eg "lol thats funny" or any other pointless comment that could just bump up post count. People consistently posting in old topics with pointless comments risk being banned.
Read the Rules!

callumh
User avatar
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:15 pm
Location: teen4m.net
Contact:

Post by callumh »

Hell yeah! I want it, for my server
Actually no, that would be silly. But I still want it!

Post Reply