If HDs were fast enough, would we still need RAM?

[ytoledano]

If hard disks were at the speeds of modern RAM (that day might come) would there still be a need to install RAM? I know that a system can't work without RAM no matter how fast the HD is but I'm asking about a system arranged differently, where the storage device is connected via a large bandwidth pipe to the CPU. Today stuff is stored in the memory usualy raw, uncompressed and ready for quick access, if data was arranged this way on the disk would there still be a need for RAM?

I had a much better usertitle but was caught trying to hack me a better one so I got my current title as a punishment

 

[Flinx]

Sure it's possible, why not. Humans write the OS. Don't see why virtual memory can't be used.

You could also ask if we had fast and cheaper than disk non-destructive memory would we need disk. Again the answer is no.

If we had some other non-destructive media faster than ram and cheaper than disk would we need ram or disk?
=======================================================
Right now, ram and disk, are concepts assigned by humans to describe their respective behaviors. Look at what's happening with Flash Memory.

Once upon a time people used vacuum tubes for computers. Once upon a time people programmed computers throwing switches and pressing buttons.

Once upon a time printers were modified electric typewriters.

Once upon a time computers were abbaci (abucusses!) LOL.


The loving are the daring!

 

[bum_jcrules]

Why have HDDs or Main System Memory?

All Cache.




Live near Toronto and like to game but you can't make it to Quakecon?
<A HREF="http://www.lanmash.com" target="_new"><b>LANMash2 is the same weekend 200+ gamers!</b></A>

 

[Guest]

I think it would theoretically be possible if you have enough money. It most likely aint gonna be cheap though.....

 

[jmecor]

The would be very expensive. Imagine a cpu with more than 100gb of cache.

<font color=red><b>-----< < < NEXT POST PLEASE > > >-----</b></font color=red>

 

[lunitic]

You're assuming HDD's can be just as fast as RAM, which is not the case:
HDDs have an access time of about 8 milliseconds, RAM has about 8 nanoseconds, which is a million times faster. In order for a HDD to be as fast as RAM the head would have to move at about 10% of the speed of light (and accelerate and decelerate in 4 nanosecs to this speed!), furthermore the disk would have to spin at 125 million RPM (it would have to complete 1 revolution in 8 ns); the edge of the disk would move at twice the speed of light!
If manufacturers are able to keep up the performance improvements of the last decade, it would take them another 60 years to reach these speeds. I wonder how fast RAM will be by then.

Now, these limitations can of course be overcome. Smaller disks for example, although the bit-density would have to increase dramatically. Maybe another technology, without moving heads or rotating disks. But then not HDDs would replace RAM, but something else...

 

[Jake_Barnes]

I'd rather have a "ton" of (quiet)RAM than a fast (and noisy) HD. Good RAM is less likely to suffer mechanical failures.


<b><font color=red>I did NOT have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky ... - Bill "Cigar Man" Clinton</font color=red><b>

 

[Guest]

YA it would be good if everything could be loaded in memory instead(cache memory would be the best =)). Or solid state disk, that would improve performance like crazy.

 

[pIII_Man]

i don't think in the future hard drives will be spinning...with the big boom lately of flash media i think in the future solid state hard drives will be in use...

If i put my k6 in a Ferrari it would be faster than your your pentium 4 or Athlon XP :tongue:

 

[JP5]

I think it is more likely to have all solid state storage. We already have 1GB CF cards and RAM modules. It may be a technology that hasn't developed yet like chemical matrices or even biological.