Pill MonsterYou don't seem to understand how cache works, or what caching is. RAM IS cache. It's cache for the HDD. Don't you get it?
Caching is simply a matter of preloading data so it can be accessed faster.



If you believe the only type of cache is on the CPU, it isn't.
I said this yesterday why database servers have so much RAM, the files are cached from the HDD into RAM. That is caching. Man talking to you is like talking to a wall.

AquinusThat's why I tried to be careful of my statement. I completely agree which is why I said it should almost be treated as a level of cache. In reality a small enough application will end up completely residing in L2 cache. I would see something like this working no differently by simply using another level of memory should it be available. It's just something that's between you're run of the mill SRAM cache and system memory so you kind of want a little bit of both in terms of functionality to be present at that level, if that makes any sense.

If you consider memory in general, it tends to be virtualized and pages handled by the either the OS and hardware depending on the level. From a logical level, I would want it to be in the same domain as RAM but in the case of using more than what's on the CPU I would want it to act like a cache if there is external memory. I guess that's what I mean by kind of like system memory but kind of like cache.

Pill MonsterYou don't seem to understand how cache works, or what caching is. RAM IS cache. It's cache for the HDD. Don't you get it?
Caching is simply a matter of preloading data so it can be accessed faster.



If you believe the only type of cache is on the CPU, it isn't.
I said this yesterday why database servers have so much RAM, the files are cached from the HDD into RAM. That is caching. Man talking to you is like talking to a wall.

AquinusProblem with your logic is that I was talking about actual cache memory and was specific in my wording.


I think I was 100% clear that I was talking about cache stores not caching algorithms. This is just a continuation of the last thread that was closed. I highly suggest your drop the matter because before you know it a mod might be intervening for going off topic and continuing a discussion that they stopped.

I can drop a matter, how about you learn to do the same and get over it.

AquinusProblem with your logic is that I was talking about actual cache memory and was specific in my wording.


I think I was 100% clear that I was talking about cache stores not caching algorithms. This is just a continuation of the last thread that was closed. I highly suggest your drop the matter because before you know it a mod might be intervening for going off topic and continuing a discussion that they stopped.

I can drop a matter, how about you learn to do the same and get over it.

Pill MonsterMaybe a mod can close this or something?

FxYes, it will still take some time, but I am excited primarily about HDDs finally being overcome in capacity. This is a BIG hurdle finally cleared. Now it is just a matter of time, and I think that time will drive the prices down faster than we can estimate. There are other entities coming out with 8 and 10TB SSDs so its game on between all of them to be competitive, thus bringing down prices. Samsung, with its V-NAND, is leaps and bounds ahead of everybody and they have an excellent history of offering value in SSDs in both price and performance.

I am absolutely excited over this news. They just put all other SSD vendors on notice.

AsRockI still remember the sound of them haha.

Then there was your 3 1/2 drives