Intel And ITRI Plan Super Efficient And Fast Memory

[phantomferrari]

Currently, data is moved from the processor to the memory and back when performing tasks, which takes a lot of energy.
The new project means to stack the memory directly on top of the CPU, which would be a sure way to cut on the energy requirements.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Intel...y-238744.shtml

[iboomalot]

wow lets save that .0001 watt of power that will make a difference **rolls eyes**

I like the fast part much better.

Replace your lightbulbs with CFLs if you want to save on electricity

I was being scarcastic by the way.

for cell phones this would help alot

[Shadowmage]

wow lets save that .0001 watt of power that will make a difference **rolls eyes**

I like the fast part much better.

Replace your lightbulbs with CFLs if you want to save on electricity

I was being scarcastic by the way.

for cell phones this would help alot

....

DRAM sticks use 5-10W of power. A server generally has a 65W TDP processor and 100W+ of DRAM. Also keep in mind that the DRAM does not have the advanced power saving features found in processors.

[kuroikenshi]

ahh I thought that the hybrid memory cube would be slightly better than this...

[JaD]

What you are overlooking is the fact that all this dispersed energy is what's keeping memory<>cpu transfers from being multiple times faster. Just think about what huge difference there is between RAM/external CPU cache and external/internal CPU cache.
That's not just about "saving that .0001 Watts".

[mattkosem]

....

DRAM sticks use 5-10W of power. A server generally has a 65W TDP processor and 100W+ of DRAM. Also keep in mind that the DRAM does not have the advanced power saving features found in processors.

Isn't that per-module range a bit on the high side for modern equipment? I thought DDR3 dimms use 3-4w, no?

--Matt

[Shadowmage]

Isn't that per-module range a bit on the high side for modern equipment? I thought DDR3 dimms use 3-4w, no?

--Matt

You're forgetting ECC, registered memory, and dual-rank DIMMs

Regardless, even 3W DIMMs are too expensive.

3W * 3 channels *2 sticks per channel = 18W. Now remember that this 18W doesn't scale with server utilization and that server CPUs average closer to 30W instead of 65W (which is only when you're running something like Prime95)

If you want dual-rank DIMMs (for double capacity), it's 18W*2 = 36W

If you have quad channels, then it's 24W or 48W with dual-rank DIMMs


Remember, this is all best-case scenario assuming 3W DIMMs.

[mattkosem]

You're forgetting ECC, registered memory, and dual-rank DIMMs

Regardless, even 3W DIMMs are too expensive.

3W * 3 channels *2 sticks per channel = 18W. Now remember that this 18W doesn't scale with server utilization and that server CPUs average closer to 30W instead of 65W (which is only when you're running something like Prime95)

If you want dual-rank DIMMs (for double capacity), it's 18W*2 = 36W

If you have quad channels, then it's 24W or 48W with dual-rank DIMMs


Remember, this is all best-case scenario assuming 3W DIMMs.

That's much closer to what I was expecting, except I was thinking twice as many single rank installed for 2 sockets. Registered dimms only use ~1W more than non-registered. If we had a server with two sockets, each with 4 channels and 2 single rank dimms per channel, it'd be a much more reasonable 64W (16 modules x (3w+1w)) for 128GB if they were 8GB modules. Most servers won't run more than DDR3-800 or DDR3-1066 with that many modules installed anyways, which also keeps power down. I'm not sure what types of servers you work with, but not much of what I come across has only a single cpu.

--Matt

[Shadowmage]

That's much closer to what I was expecting, except I was thinking twice as many single rank installed for 2 sockets. Registered dimms only use ~1W more than non-registered. If we had a server with two sockets, each with 4 channels and 2 single rank dimms per channel, it'd be a much more reasonable 64W (16 modules x (3w+1w)) for 128GB if they were 8GB modules. Most servers won't run more than DDR3-800 or DDR3-1066 with that many modules installed anyways, which also keeps power down. I'm not sure what types of servers you work with, but not much of what I come across has only a single cpu.

--Matt

I was assuming 5W for single-rank and 10W for double rank, which is close to your numbers (4W for single-rank and 8W for double rank). I think a lot of server customers like using double-rank parts, especially with single-socket boards, which jacks the power numbers up.

Regardless, 64W is still extremely high when compared to actual CPU power usage, which was my original point 160W (10W dual rank DIMM * 16 slots) is kind of an upper-bound on something like a Jaketown 2-socket part. But yeah my 100W+ original number was a bit of an exaggeration lol