Printable View
yes !
after iram, and iram box
acard is born
with up to 32 gb of ddr2, the ramdrive reborns from its ashes
stay ready , crysis, supcom and all the new games have their drive !
http://bp0.blogger.com/_lG0QNE1Uc8E/...teram00002.jpg
links :
http://7r09d0r.blogspot.com/
http://chinese.engadget.com/2008/06/...abyte-ramdisk/
http://mediajam.info/topic/122705
Do Crysis and Supcom need more than 4gbs of ram 0_oQuote:
Originally Posted by lionel57000
Perkam
yes
to be installed !
it s not memory for your computer, it s your new high end drive !!
this is a hard disk aka ssd not a ram extention. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
but it is volatile, so na thx im staying with flash drives. Even when they have limited wirte cycles. :p:
plus your still limited by the sata 300 interface.
This looks suspiciously similar to the HyperDrive, which is hideously expensive just for an empty box (no RAM). I'd want to see a confirmed price before getting in any way excited...
Waaaaaaaay to late.
Price?
that s the next question !!
Realistically at this point, it's good for 16GB. Most "affordable" RAM are 2GB sticks. 4GB sticks would be cost-prohibitive for another year likely. That would make a 32GB SSD a better value.:rolleyes:
Im waiting for the pricetag to be revealed :)
Same thing, I want to see price! If that is on sweet spot then I just have to get one :D
I guess I'll hop on the boat too - Price! with tumbling DDR2 prices this is a good idea - especially in the i-ram type device category if it allows 4gb modules in all the slots...
so Raid a must then...I guess..???Quote:
ACARD uses two SATA2 ports
Looks exciting.
Hopes it will be at a much better price than the I-RAM drive, so that ordinary people can buy them.
If sub 100$, I would consider to buy one or two, and throw them in RAID.
From the pics there is two SATA ports, so there might be 600MB/s available read/write bandwidth.
Looks promising
If those 2 ports have an internal RAID controller (as opposed to you doing yourself in software RAID), expect prices to be higher
Other features I'd like to see (like Hyperdrive4): bootable, battery backup, autobackup to 2.5 HDD
Eagerly awaiting benchmarks & pricing info
awaiting price info (y)
crysis = 7.30GB, SupCom uses 10.36 GB. So i would say yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
What is the benching program they are using in this link ?
http://www.acard.com/english/newstabpop.jsp?idno=81
It has a CF slot, looks like it can back things up to the CF card when power goes out.
...or when you shut down. really, this is what all of us iRAM lovers have been waiting for and it looks like a very well thought out setup. the site says there is power on board through battery which will allow backup to CF for un-expected power outs as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Coolest
quite interested to see the price but my initial hunch is that it will be more than expected.
price and PCM05 performance please! :p:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckeye
IOMeter
-----------
Since a Hyperdrive4 unit is ~$2200, I seriously doubt each unit (without the ram) will be under $1000 for the introductory price - just guessing here
this is your drive,impressive i must say.VERY.still cant find a price?were did u grab this?
http://www.acard.com/english/fb01-pr...&type1_idno=13
Features
-Supports up to 48GB amount of memory --wow
-Supports ECC/DDRII 400/533/667/800
-Automatic data backup/restore between DDRII memory and CF disk
-Built-in Lithium Battery
-LED indicators for DIMM failure, battery capacity, power status, SATA ports activity, backup status
-Driver less: need no driver no host side
-IOPS 20,000 per SATA port
-Data transfer rate up to 200MB/sec
****the price i figured(below) on paper is for the older gigabyte i ram modules,i know yours is different*****
i was VERY interested the iram modules when they first came and have the numbers still clearly in my head and what they were going for when they were avaible everywere($150 each).tho the ddr2 iram empty moduules are not to be found\bought anywere now(out of stock\discontinued).so $150 each capable of holding 4 empty dimms at $150 each x2 =$300.now with each empty slot capable of holding 4 gig max per slot(might be 2gig max each slot,i forget?).add iram module($150) at will and ram amount which your budget allows so....
gigabyte older ddr2 i ram modules that could be ran in raid 0 were mind blowing and VERY pricey last year.its basically same thing u got there i guess.yet yours in 1 unit.im thinking 2 older gigabyte i rams in raid 0 would be faster then what u have there?.my friend who has 2 of em in raid with 4 gig sticks in each(8gig total)and was ALWAYS first in servers.he used to tell me he would have to wait for the actual server to load the map sometimes(1-2 seconds...wow)
2 modules = $300
4 gig 2x2 gig kits cost about $70
so basically just starting to add up the numbers to your needs,no real mystery here.
i still think a 16\32 gig solid state drive would be more price effective yielding very close results.i mean there both on sata interfaces and in theory should be yield same results.im curiuos how this goes and like to see YOUR "official price" of completion and test bandwidth results.
i love to watch fellow gamers going to the EXTREME to have fast server map loading times etc.killer job period.i %100 applaud and commend your project.its killer seeing stuff like this being its actually being used in "REAL WORLD" usable apps,GAMING!!!and lets not forget record xp\vista start\boot times.
IOMeter + hdtach should show me what i wanna see.i know that they were(gigabyte) working a ddr3 modules that was supposed to be released and the better bandwidth mabye??but i imagine speeds should be close??not sure...with 1 unit real solid state drives released recently kinda killed my intrest in a purchase.i wanted to buy a 8gig setup for quake4.i ALWAYS ran raptor drives(36,74gig)and now a single 150-x gets me were i need to be and could not really justify.tho the NEW velicraptor-300gig hd is %34 faster then the 150-x...decesions.
another cool store for ssd freaks
http://www.superssd.com/?gclid=CIaEt...FQOjFQodTS20kA
This is awesome :) Hopefully it will be sub $200. With the price of DDR2 now, this definitely should make a better stand than the iram did.
I agree have with lowfatQuote:
Originally Posted by lowfat
Whats faster, iram or iodrive ?
This thing is sweet !
EDIT: nevermind, no comparison between this and iodrive
Damn. I use a swap a lot, maya is a biotch about it.. This would make my life so much better.. I'd pay anything under $350
If this is $200 I'll most likely buy one. It would be positively sick for PCMark activities or for reviewing. Would be sick to be able to stream my OS images from my server to this sucker at ~180MB/s, re-install Vista in a minute :D
Well, according to the person from blogspot:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonucci
So the drive will probably be bogged down by the SATA2 interface and achieve <300MB/s. On the other hand, iodrive uses PCI-E (8 lanes or more for full performance) so it can go well over that limit (700MB read/600MB write, according to its website).Quote:
In ANS-9010 model, it states upto 400MB/sec transfer rate. Since SATA2 support up to 300MB/sec, ACARD uses two SATA2 ports in RAID to achieve 400MB/sec (I'm just guessing here.)
guys only 20k iops per sata port. Nothing to see here... Iodrive is much faster and cheaper per GB of storage.
cost of the iodrive? And there is no where that lists the cost of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
I wonder if ram speeds and timings will make a performance difference here
this was announced nearly a year ago
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=152513
nice to have lots of new info and pics though :) this is something I could go for if the price is right...
Nox
Iodrive is cheaper/ GB?
32 GB = $2400.
This one is $150 for a flash card + $1600 for RAM + ?? for the box itself.
Or 2x$70 + 2x$320 +2x ?? + $700 for areca 1221
Also here you don't have PCIe x4 limitation, you can make a RAID of them with (maybe..we'll see) better performance per $.
But this low IOPS is strange..has over 1/2 of Iodrive bandwidth and should have better access time.
I love the idea but wouldn't it be cheaper if you just added more ram to the system and partition it as a RAM drive?
The only caveat is the loading of the OS onto the RAM drive on bootup, but once its up, any reboots would near instantaneous, no? Can set the system to low power mode (turn off hd, throttle cpu and gpu, LCD) to sleep.
I would think a 2 GB stick would rock as a swap file or setup the system as a dedicated file server.
so now I can buy this, stick in my old DDR2 memory and use it as page file, while I use 3*512mb sticks for nehalem and still be pretty well off as far as performance goes but not loose all the money I had in DDR2 and not have to pat $$$ for DDR3.
Depends. If you want a mobo with more than 4 slots, you pay premium. If you want 8GB sticks...go and buy another mobo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neova
No. RAM drives boot after system startup...so obviously you cannot start OS from them. Also, they usually need a lot of time to startup and shutdown (for reading and writing all contents from hdd, smart ones read on demand and write as soon as they can w/out waiting for system shutdown). Power loss or system crash = data loss.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neova
In this case getting more RAM is better idea. If you got enough RAM, you don't need a swap file. And swap file even on such drive would be WAY slower than system RAM anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neova
Additionally, this drive should be OS agnostic, while ram drives aren't.
Read properly people quoting Perkam. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
Amas
:confused: - I'm quite sure the $2400 figure ur quoting there is for the 80GB iodrive :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by m^2
A-DATA is on the boat too here so there will be competition :X
SSD should be theoretically worser than this in performance terms since it has crappy writes...
16gigs should be enough for Windows/Vista and a game which is all I need.
Not necessarily. RAM drives are quite simply the fastest things you can ever get your hands on. They trounce SSD's by .. I don't know, a LOT.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Tanker
I remembered when these were announced a year ago. They had a 3.5" version that took laptop sticks of RAM, and I cammed myself. I hope they finally release these things, I have a bead on some cheap memory to be had. :)
This had better be well under $100 for me to even consider it. Ram may be cheap, but a 4gb stick of DDR2 isnt as cheap as a 2gb stick if your planning on filling this up to max. Your still looking at $1000+ easy for this sucker just for a measly 32gb.
Yep... $30/gb, $2400 for 80GB. Cheaper than ram itself to begin with so it doesnt even matter what the box costs. Once again, nothing to see here -more expensive per gb and a lot slower.Quote:
Originally Posted by tiro_uspsss
Yep, RAM drive > SSD :)Quote:
Originally Posted by cegras
just 2 details about iodrive
* not bootable
* not supported by windows now ....
Too bad it wouldn't fit in my case :(
Assuming the box was $200.
You can get DDR2 667 2gb sticks from 1st Choice Memory for 23.51 shipped.
Sooo, if you add $200 + ($23.51 * 8 sticks) = $388 for a 16Gb ramdrive.
It has a battery so you don't lose the data when powered off ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
The RAMdrive fad has passed. We've got SSD now, so you can have an uber fast storage device. Though the cost is still ridiculously high, but it will come down eventually.
RAM chips are faster..an always will be. If IODrive was made to use RAM chips, it would saturate PIE 2.0 x8..if only they made a controller which could handle that much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan
Storagereview expects RAM / Flash hybrids to rule in the near future. This site is enterprise oriented, but possibly we'll see this in top end desktops too.
Is 5% faster what you are calling "uber fast"? Flash drives are the "fad". Not ramdrives. Battery backed and possibly non-volatile backed ramdrives are the future. Flash drives are nice for cameras though. That's where they should remain.Quote:
We've got SSD now, so you can have an uber fast storage device.
SSD's right now are slow, good seek times but throughput is still something to be desired. A good ram drive will be considerably faster for quite some time yet.
if this thing is anything like the old Iram, I would definatly take this over ANY SSD I seen so far.
SSD's always have jittery performance, while the IRam is just one straight line, never dips.
a updated Iram like device that supports Sata2, DDR2, and 48-64 gigs of DDR2.
hell yeah I want one.
The CF backup is freaking genius.
I agree... but with enough DIMM's to hold 32GB or more... with 2GB sticks. 4GB sticks are just too damm expensive for most of us. :censored:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunaak
pagefile FTW
Why does all these great ideas always have to cost a fortune!
Damn it would be nice to have for "main stream" owners with 8*2GB, and then let the enthusiasts have the extreme RAID setups of them with 8*8GB sticks.
8GB sticks ain't worth it, for anyone, it's cheaper and better to get more of the drives ;)
looks cool, but i wouldnt be surprised if it was $1k+
This reminded me of this topic:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/23/t...gly-fast-rams/
So, who's going to be the first one to sell their house and buy one :up:
Damn if that thing would be Windows compatible I am sure it would RUN CRYSIS!!!
http://www.acard.com/upload/20080806...%20150x150.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by XS2K
http://www.ocztechnology.com/product..._16gb_quad_kit
with something like that, must be nice
i asked the sales dept, available at the end of this month
and no problem, like iram ... no drivers needed
Bigger drives perform worse just because they are bigger? Yes, I'm sure that it's a great metric for a company that has storage devices up to 16GB, but generally - it's useless.
HDDs are storage. Storage means there should be capacity to hold the stuff. No RAM-based drive can offer that.
http://largon.wippiespace.com/smilies/lol.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by supremelaw.org
It's all about the speed, there is back-up for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
fyi, it is not that expensive to fill up this box to its peak capacity with ddr2-800mhz ram assuming that is you can mix and match brands and different latencies.
most ddr2 kits now a days are sold free after rebates.... ddr2 just isnt what it used cost....
have you looked up 4-8GB DDR2 Sticks which is what is what is required to achieve peak capacity?Quote:
Originally Posted by hecktic
Quintuple posting FTW.
ROFLQuote:
Originally Posted by largon
Mr. SupremeLaw, I investigated using system ram as a ramdisk a while back, (SuperSpeed, Qsoft, Cenatek)
The biggest drawback is enormous cpu usage ~40%-70% depending on setup and overclock
Maybe Nehalem architecture will make it feasible?
You can measure CPU usage with the common throughput HD benchmarking programs, HDTune, HDTach - they give you CPU usage #'s. Of course this usage pattern is STR, not opening an application which takes a fraction of a second. But my point is regular HD and SSD's (both NAND and DRAM) don't act like this.
Also open up task manager when your doing some tests - the CPU usage number is correct, not some artifact. You can verify these yourself by copying some big files, or lots of little ones...
It might have to do with coding, but I can say with certainty the high CPU usage is common to all these kinds of system ramdisks (I tested Qsoft, Superspeed - which is Ramdisk plus that you speak of but I have version 8, not 9, Gavotte, Cenatek...). CPU usage goes down a bit with high overclocks, but not enough to make it worth while. I haven't tested it on a dual socket server mobo, but even a quad@3.6 has this high CPU usage...
higher cpu usage might be related to higher IOPs
SQL with low IOPs disk = low cpu useage
migrated to high IOPs SQL can see much higher CPU useage but much better performance
Might it be much more simple than that?
If you have a processor making a request for data from a hard drive, it has to sit around waiting for the disk to return the data before it can begin processing it. If you have that data in a RAM disk, then the results get returned almost immediately, and processing on the data block can begin immediately. So there is far less System Idle - of course the processor usage is going up because it's not sitting doing nothing just waiting for data to arrive! High processor usage means the thing is actually doing the work you paid for that expensive quad-core to do!
Acard don't support windows boot ...
DAM !
I was hoping to do a 128Go Ram disk for my system !!!
And the whole of my data would be on my Terrabox ( A PC used as a nas and for Torrent downloading ) with my 4 To HDD. ( 2 for moment waiting for the 2 other ^^ )
you mean the super speed ram disk, right? (its software)
the acard ramdisk is a physical piece of hardware that makes ram act like a hdd.
where have you seen that ?Quote:
Originally Posted by madcho
sorry i was thining you talked about acard.Quote:
Originally Posted by lionel57000
I need one :shocked:
:ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by madcho
ok
but iodrive will be bootable before the end of the year ...
we have a *very* helpful employee from ACARD, with more details etc etc... http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=201723
:up:
Damn you beat me to it. ;)