Gigabyte shows off i-RAM successor

[Jimmy 2004]

For the average user and even most enthusiasts iram2 will be expensive and unreliable however its commendable for a mixed group of early adopters and people with performance requirements who won’t mind decreased reliability.

That's just it, they're not aiming it at average users, more people who need a fast paging file.

 

[Alec§taar]

Tarry, I hear you, & why I leaned to THIS particular unit rather than GC-Ramdisk

I hear you Tarry, & why I mentioned THIS particular unit last page (got a tip from its makers here in "pm" when we were going on about this thread: Details of that are on last page):

it seems that the way to optimize a RAM drive design to make fuller use of its bandwidth would be to design a controller card that instead of being connected by cable to a HDD, used RAM sticks on its card board, in a similar form factor to the original I-RAM card (without the SATA cable). It would be bootable and visible to the mainboard BIOS at system start up and would connect to the system 'bus' via a PCI Express x16 slot which has a 3GByte/s bandwidth. This would resolve the speed issue but not RAM error rate.
Use of fully buffered RAM (FB-DIMM) would reduce unrecoverable bit storage error rates to near that of HDDs.

* That's PCI-Express x1 slot designed, higher bandwidth possible than with SATA1 or SATA 2 even, by a GOOD amount no less (iirc, I posted a "common bus types & bandwidths possible on them" chart last page)... reposting it again, for all of your references:

==================================================

Common Buses & their Max Bandwidth

PCI 132 MB/s (type current CENATEK SSD I have uses)
AGP 8X 2,100 MB/s
PCI Express 1x 250 [500]* MB/s (type this DDRdrive will use)
PCI Express 2x 500 [1000]* MB/s
PCI Express 4x 1000 [2000]* MB/s
PCI Express 8x 2000 [4000]* MB/s
PCI Express 16x 4000 [8000]* MB/s
PCI Express 32x 8000 [16000]* MB/s
IDE (ATA100) 100 MB/s
IDE (ATA133) 133 MB/s
SATA 1 150 MB/s (type the GC-Ramdisk by Gigabyte uses)
SATA 2 300 MB/s
Gigabit Ethernet 125 MB/s
IEEE1394B [firewire] 100 MB/s

--------------------------------------------------

Ram types involved bandwidth comparison table:

PC-133 SDRAM Rambandwidth (cenatek rocketdrive uses this) = 133 MHz x 8 Bytes = 1.064 GB/s & matches bustype used in PCI 2.2 for it.

DDR 1 Ram bandwidth (DDRdrive uses this iirc) = DDR-400: 200 MHz max type + 2.1 GB/s (here I think that this one could be faster if it used it to "max-it-out")...

DDR 2 Ram bandwidth (new Gigabyte uses this) = PC2-6400: 400 MHz using DDR2-800 chips, 6.400 GB/s bandwidth max type

==================================================

Tarry:

IF YOU WANT ABSOLUTELY RELIABILITY WITH UNITS LIKE THESE? YOU HAVE TO SHELL OUT FOR A BACKUP POWERSUPPLY/UPS, absolutely.

(Noted that years ago in an article on their website that I did for EEC Systems (now, SuperSpeed.com) that got featured in Windows NT mag (reviewed by John Enck their tech editor) & also CENATEK ("An independent users review" on their homepage http://www.cenatek.com ), in reviews of their software &/or hardware based ramdrive solutions).

I don't use UPS here anymore (costs more to replace the battery on them, than it is to buy a NEW one believe it or not), so I don't place anything "CRUCIAL" onto mine here (mostly, if you note below? Paging ops, logging, & temp ops for OS + apps, & webbrowser caches)...

That's just it, they're not aiming it at average users, more people who need a fast paging file.

There's quite a bit more you can send to them to get "more" out of your system (by unburdening hdd's, mainly your OS & programs housing one) than moving the pagefile.sys location (good move in & of itself using these)... see my signature below for some ideas!

APK

P.S.=> I use these beasts (see my signature as to HOW/WHEN/WHY in part @ least), & they make a diff., but the unit I have is older (PCI 2.2 slot & PC-133 SDRAM) & "slower", @ least in burst due to bus type used imo, but seek/access times are excellent as opposed to std. HDD's... apk

 

[OneCool]

2.) Then he made an example with a 2500+, which if that is really what he meant would not even have a 2T command rate issue because there was no 1T and 2T with Athlon XPs.

Yes there was.

 

[Mussels]

Yes there was.

There was 1T/2T on the AthlonXP generation, it was known as CPC. Read up on the Abit NF7-S, where there was BIOS mods for that specific purpose to increase overclock.

On another note, who would go into a local store to buy that much ram? ripoff prices ahoy, captain. These drives may be 2.5-5x faster in BANDWIDTH, but in LATENCY its a huge difference. Even Alecs SD-RAM based one would be in nanoseconds, not milliseconds like hard drives. See those movies? XP booted in less than half the time it normally takes.

More bandwidth, MUCH faster latencies = good.

It's not meant for gaming/storage, but for things like a page file, or if you were video editing as a drive to be working on, and copy it off when you are done.

the PCI-E one is the one i'm waiting for, i'm out of 5 1/4 bays already.

 

[Alec§taar]

These drives may be 2.5-5x faster in BANDWIDTH, but in LATENCY its a huge difference. Even Alecs SD-RAM based one would be in nanoseconds, not milliseconds like hard drives. See those movies? XP booted in less than half the time it normally takes.

The unit I have in the CENATEK "RocketDrive" won't boot up an OS... it is much older technology (3++ years old now) & slower bus + RAM types - but it still has its merits by all means, & you hit on 1 directly - access/seek times!

Now, it would be NICE to be able to do OS booting, just for the OS speed possible, but I compensate in other ways (see signature, CENATEK section) with "safe data" (temp stuff) to put onto it only really, along with the pagefile.sys...

More bandwidth, MUCH faster latencies = good.

The DDRDrive x1 PCI-Express model above?

It (imo) "fits" the best "mix" of RAM type used, & bus type used (closest match other than the CENATEK RocketDrive (133mb/sec memory & 133mb/sec PCI 2.2 bus), for the BEST possible bandwidth (2.1gb/sec memory & 500mb/sec bi-directional-synchronous bus speeds)

I really HAVE to lean towards it, as I have a PCI-e x1 slot here, open... it also seems to be "THE ONE" out of our 'contestants' here (GigaByte GC-Ramdisk IRAM, vs. DDRDrive x1)...

It's not meant for gaming/storage, but for things like a page file, or if you were video editing as a drive to be working on, and copy it off when you are done.

It can be, IF you have a "UPS" (uninterruptible power supply) - I used to have one, but to replace their battery, believe-it-or-not, costs MORE than buying a NEW ONE!

If I had a "UPS" working there, though? I'd put my database devices onto one of these - SUPERFAST! I'd probably implement mirroring or backup on it though, just in case.

(I do run apps from it too - SETI@Home was one I did for years on it, & now Folding@Home for the team here... should help SOME, whenever the program "hits disk" & seeking data from it as well).

There are also OTHER "performance enhancing tricks" you can do using these, again: See my signature, in the CENATEK section below, & see what I mean... it all works, & well!

the PCI-E one is the one i'm waiting for, i'm out of 5 1/4 bays already.

As am I: Looking forward to the "DDRDrive x1" by ALL means here... to put it into the "mixture" that is the system in my signature, & to place the CENATEK "rocketdrive" back into the system it came from (my SQLServer 2005/IIS6.x rig - a development server here)... so it too, can be "all it can be" & what it once was using this unit.

The DDRDrive x1? Heh, you KNOW it is a better match for the system in my signature, just based on technologies available on the mobo I use (ASUS A8N-Premium), in PCI-e x1 slot open still... better bus & memory speeds possible, than in my CENATEK unit.

It WILL be the "icing on the cake" of this system imo + a better match for it than the CENATEK is (which is a better match for my other 2nd server rig here).

Plus, if anything, this upcoming model from DDRDrive will be faster in "BURST" read/write modes, because of the higher bandwidth memory & bus type used - again, very much looking forward to its release!

APK

P.S.=> It's a somewhat 'expensive' game to buy into, but once you do? You appreciate it for what these types of units can do for overall system performance (it is noticeable) depending on HOW you apply them... apk

 

[Mussels]

Huge post there alec

Just to say, you've interpreted some of what i said a little wrong. When i said even your old cenatek had low access, i didnt mean that it was a good boot drive, just that even old SD-RAM based tech is STILL tons faster than any hard drive, if you werent held back by its connection interface.

As for the rest, you pretty much agreed i think the PCI-E one has a better chance becase it can still get some standby current to it i think, so it wont rely on battery as much.
And yes, i run this system and my router/switch off a 1200VA UPS nothing takes my gaming away from me.

 

[Alec§taar]

Huge post there alec

Details, details, details - I'm "big" on that, so I don't give anybody a "bum steer" by missing steps, etc.

Just to say, you've interpreted some of what i said a little wrong. When i said even your old cenatek had low access, i didnt mean that it was a good boot drive,

The PCI 2.2/PC-133 SDRAM utilizing CENATEK "rocketdrive" doesn't boot up as an OS bearing disk @ all - I just wanted to make that clear.

This is 1 "disadvantage" it has vs. the newer SATA GigaByte IRAM/Gc-Ramdisk, & PCI-Express x1 DDRDrive...

just that even old SD-RAM based tech is STILL tons faster than any hard drive, if you werent held back by its connection interface.

For "burst" speeds? The bus/connection interface AND imo, RAM type used, matters & I think you hit that dead-on right...

Access/seek should be comparable though between ALL the RAM types used imo, but I could be wrong here... but, no questions asked - they BLOW AWAY std. mechanical HDD's for access/seek speeds.

As for the rest, you pretty much agreed i think the PCI-E one has a better chance becase it can still get some standby current to it i think, so it wont rely on battery as much.

Well, the CENATEK has an "external powersupply" to it, others may use batteries & such (CMOS type, or watch batteries, just enough to "hold state" on them between reboots).

And yes, i run this system and my router/switch off a 1200VA UPS nothing takes my gaming away from me.

Aha, lol!



* Man's dedicated to his gaming!

APK

 

[Steevo]

This whole thread got blown up!!!!!


I only have a few questions.

1) Why would you waste the space on a solid state drive housing a OS? Really? A RAID 5 array on a controller is almost as fast, more reliable and easier to setup.
2) Who is a real hardcore gamer-system man that DOESN'T have a true Sine Wave UPS-Battery backup for their whole system? You wanna put dirty power-square wave into your $$$$ uber system and expect it to live for very long?
3) Is the error rate on RAM so high that you need to have ECC memory? I think not.


Really these in a gaming system are for one thing.

Nada.

If you have enough RAM in your system nothing in a game that would have to be read off a disk, wouldn't have been in the first place. And as windows has the first in first out approach to RAM useage, and will continue to run untill the RAM is maxed out before it tries to overwrite any existing data that is no longer being called upon, again first in first out.

 

[Alec§taar]

This whole thread got blown up!!!!!

Actually, it's been good discussion (depends on your "pov" imo)...

E.G.-> I don't use any system SOLELY for gaming (gaming is what it is, just fun I fit in when I can) though. My 'point-of-view' isn't skewed to that only with any particular machine (well, to my fastest it is - it is the one I want to play on lol).

I only have a few questions.

I will try to answer!

(However, I think you answered yourself already in point #1):

1) Why would you waste the space on a solid state drive housing a OS? Really? A RAID 5 array on a controller is almost as fast

"Almost as fast"... not as fast. There is a difference, & in some cases - quite a lot!

E.G.-> INSTG8R ran some tests on his "perpendicular technology" SATA 2 drive, & I ran my RAID 0 setup (see signature below) vs. it, AND then my older tech CENATEK SSD, see here:

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=13650

You'll see diff.'s on a variety of scales in that thread, for example, with 3 very diff. technologies compared.

, more reliable and easier to setup.

IMO, & EXPERIENCE? Both are as simple to setup as the other... but, that's just "MY" opinion & experience, from having actually done & used both types of equipment many times since the early 1990's...

2) Who is a real hardcore gamer-system man that DOESN'T have a true Sine Wave UPS-Battery backup for their whole system? You wanna put dirty power-square wave into your $$$$ uber system and expect it to live for very long?

Well, you've just explained another one you said was a "problem" above (reliability): Put a UPS on these, they are as reliable as anything else in your rig... after all, it's ALL electric powered & subject to powerouts.

3) Is the error rate on RAM so high that you need to have ECC memory? I think not.

This I agree with, depending on how/what you intend to use these types of devices for...

For instance - I run an SSD & don't require EEC memory on it (I only store paging file & temp ops (app temp ops, OS %TEMP% environmental vars) & webpage caches, or logs on it, none of which I absolutely MUST have in pristine state))...

They access & perform I/O (if needed) faster on it, no questions asked.

Really these in a gaming system are for one thing.

Nada.

Oh, I dunno about that... remember: this is a SYSTEM & subject to 'synergy' improvements or detriments during multitasking operations!

(And, it's always going @ doing something, visible to you or not - paging too, especially if given time...)

So, EVEN IF YOU HAVE A SYSTEM DEDICATED TO GAMING?

It's still subject to things like %TEMP% (all programs are, unless you use SET statements in a batch while launching your game, & override the OS-wide & user-specific %TEMP/TMP% variables that way), & also paging on the disk when it loads (very possibly) OR when it pages data (this can occur DURING the game while in a level, OR during level switches)...

On a SSD? Those things WILL occur faster (far better seek/access times & usually less CPU use than most std. HDD disks as well).

If you have enough RAM in your system nothing in a game that would have to be read off a disk, wouldn't have been in the first place.

Hmmm, in the FIRST place, it would have to come up off the disk, & then caching might help (up until it gets FIFO flushed).

And as windows has the first in first out approach to RAM useage, and will continue to run untill the RAM is maxed out before it tries to overwrite any existing data that is no longer being called upon, again first in first out.

Right, but you have to page data in & out off a HDD (typically this is where it is, C:\pagefile.sys) & your games reside there as well - think those paging ops don't interfere with game loads, or game data paging in/out of RAM too (games are paged like anything else, their code AND data (often huge, forcing reloads, like in between levels & init. loadtime))?

They do - putting them on slower media than SSD's are (& HDD's are, by many orders of magnitude on many/most/more levels)? Those ops perform more slowly, since they are diskfile bound.

APK

P.S.=> Put %TEMP% & %TMP% ops & pagefile.sys off onto an SSD, even gaming (SOLELY gaming rigs) can gain, because they are just as subject to the performance detriments of keeping them on the same disk as a game as any program... you can use 2nd HDD's for this (mechanical std. types) & I did too, before I got a faster mechanism (especially for seeks/accesses, & this helps on I/O initializing (mostly imo, for webpage caching it's best))... apk

 

[Mussels]

Alec says it a million times longer, but as said earlier for those who dont read his posts...


Any type of system ram is hundreds of times faster in access latency. NOT just bandwidth. latency matters far more for this kind of thing.
Comparing milliseconds to nanoseconds, there is no way a hard drive can keep up.

As alec said, Windows runs a lot of things off your drive(s) simultaneously. Page files, temp dirs, log files, and so on. None of these matter if they are lost, and putting them onto a ram-drive means that..

*your hard drive has less access, and therefore more time to spend on the OS/games
*it doesnt matter if you lose it, as its all mostly temp stuff anyway

In a gaming system these would be used for those temporary things to reduce hard drive load.
Your facts have logic in them, but you dont understand how some of it works. "I load a game and it goes into ram and never comes out" good for you. Unless its a DOS game, windows is still there in the background chugging away, using the other parts of your system.

Nanosecond pauses as windows decides its time to erase files from the page file compared to millisecond ones coupled with a load delay from any files on that drive, mean that the ram drive is going to give you a performance boost. It may be small, but i'm pretty sure you've done 'small' things before to improve your system.