How can the system be bumped-up to the next evolution of RAM-processing..?
Rick Stevens
ricks at nerd.com
Wed Nov 2 18:47:25 UTC 2011
On 11/01/2011 08:08 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 November 2011 01:56:13 Linda McLeod wrote:
> [snip]
>> Why is there RAM..? Why can't the OS
>> run its RAM off'n the hd..?
>
> RAM exists because I/O of a HD is waaay too slow. You can get a feeling just
> how slow it can get when you open too many apps simultaneously, thus
> exhausting available RAM and making the OS use the swap partition for extra
> memory. It's *painfully* slow, the machine becomes practically unusable, and
> it's a complete waste of cycles of today's fast processors.
>
> Even the I/O of RAM itself is fairly slow compared to the typical modern
> processor. That's why processors now have a built-in cache (which is basically
> a smaller amount of RAM on the processor chip itself), in order to speed up
> execution of programs and calculations.
>
> You might then ask "why the processor designers don't put all RAM on the
> chip?" Because it would be too big, geometrically. In order to make the
> processor work on a 2GHz frequency or such, the chip surface must be small
> enough to keep everything in working conditions. Otherwise you run into out-
> of-sync problems, uneven heat and voltage distribution problems, and all sorts
> of stuff that would make the processor fail. So the bulk of RAM must be
> separated, on their own chips, and communitace with the processor via the
> motherboard, which is again quite slow, due to its size and other reasons.
Uhm, Marko, I think Linda was trying to be facetious. Good info from
you, though. :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, C2 Hosting ricks at nerd.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 22643734 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- Is that a buffer overflow or are you just happy to see me? -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the users
mailing list