Comments on: Putting terabytes of memory into servers, the cheap way

MetaRam has a chip that lets you put more memory into your server. And it's got a cavalcade of server celebrities behind it.

[rklrkl]

Benchmark results would have been nice...

An interesting idea, but what effect does it have on memory performance? If it is noticeably slower (e.g. more than a few percent), then I could see people avoiding this. Would have been nice to have either seen some benchmark figures or at least a statement that it won't noticeably degrade memory performance.

[cary1]

Typo

In the following sentence:

"Thus, if the limit for an eight-processor server climbs to 512MB because memory chips can hold more data, a MetaRam-enabled computer could conceivable hold 2 terabytes. "

It should be 512GB not 512MB.

[Below Meigh]

Sounds vaguely familiar...

RAMBUS? Is that you re-incarnate?

What about thermal issues? With that density, we'll need more cooling. And thus one cost savings changes to another cost factor. So much for efficiency...

[Engineer65]

Less heat, not more.

There are other articles about this on the net. The manufacturer says that it reduces power use, too, by more efficiently using the memory. And the reduction more than compensates for the increased density. So they say, anyway.

[MadLyb]

Peformance vs. Capacity

Don't get wrong, having additional capcity is great, but without similar improvements in memory performance, the value will fall off quickly.

In fact, the addition of an intermediate step can negatively impact performance if used in situations where large memory needs do not exist.

[alegr]

Again?

RamDoubler? Snake oil anyone?

[fred dunn]

So 2 or 3 bit more of address decoding...

added on the DIMM. This is a big technology boost?
By adding the additional address decoding on the DIMMs themselves they would know when they are active or when they are tri-stated, big whoop.

I'll bet they've already filed for a patent on this technology as old as logic itself.