41–50 of 128 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah the biggest jump in performance by far was SSDs. It was a huge step so software had no chance to "catch up" initially.
It's happening, Windows gets slower every year to adapt to SSDs.
I think Microsoft is making windows slow to prepare people for when they move everything on your computer to their cloud.
tinfoil hat off.
"8K video recording" - does anyone really need this? Seems like for negligible gain in quality people are pushed to sacrifice their storage & battery, and so upgrade their hardware sooner...
For commercial purposes it's another story and it makes sense to consider shooting in 8K if possible, thus the option should exist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that's the case, why haven't we switched to SRAM? Isn't it only about 4x the price at any given process node?
That 4x the price does also explain why it has not happened.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How so?
8GB -> 32GB doesn't really give you a whole lot more than opening more browser tabs or whatnot. Cache some more filesystem into memory I suppose. 8MB -> 32MB enabled entirely new categories of (consumer-level) software. It would be a game changer for performance as you were no longer swapping to (exceedingly slow) disk. They simply are not comparable, imo. 8MB to 32MB was night and day difference and you would drool…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am confused by this comment. You said "RAM" (contrast to "DRAM" in the article title) but I think you are talking about DRAM sticks? But those have not gone away (other than with some laptops where it's soldered on and not upgradable). Going from 8MB to 32MB in the 90s is still comparable to going from 8GB to 32GB today. One difference is just that the price isn't dropping at the same rate anymore [1], so it doesn'…
> Going from 8MB to 32MB in the 90s is still comparable to going from 8GB to 32GB today. This statement makes it difficult to believe you were there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That 4x the price does also explain why it has not happened.
Yeah but why don't we have like 500MB of SRAM per 8GB of RAM. Certain addresses could be faster, in the same way /dev/shm/ is faster.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am confused by this comment. You said "RAM" (contrast to "DRAM" in the article title) but I think you are talking about DRAM sticks? But those have not gone away (other than with some laptops where it's soldered on and not upgradable). Going from 8MB to 32MB in the 90s is still comparable to going from 8GB to 32GB today. One difference is just that the price isn't dropping at the same rate anymore [1], so it doesn'…
Most RAM found in consumer PC's during the 90s was still DRAM, including SDRAM, EDO, and Rambus. I believe OP is just being nostalgic over the period of time when RAM upgrades were very a exciting thing, as hardware was changing very quickly in that era and each year felt considerably more capable than the prior.
The article doesn't properly explain how DRAM is different from SRAM. DRAM has to constantly refresh itself in order not to 'forget' its contents.
In fact it took a bit of time for the CPUs or memory controllers to do it automatically, i.e. without the programmer having to explicitly code the refresh.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah but why don't we have like 500MB of SRAM per 8GB of RAM. Certain addresses could be faster, in the same way /dev/shm/ is faster.
This is sort of the role that L3 cache plays already. Your proposal would be effectively an upgradable L4 cache. No idea if the economics on that are worth it vs bigger DRAM so you have less pressure on the nvme disk.