lillsjon

Question about RAM channels

6 posts in this topic

I believe the answer is both yes and no. I'm not 100% sure but I believe your MB/s transfer will go up, but IOPSs won't, due to pathing loop/folds with the extra channel. I'm not 100% tho.

Like it matters, as my quad channel does somewhere in 500k - 1.5M IOPS, which is sick as my mech HD does like 20 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the answer is both yes and no. I'm not 100% sure but I believe your MB/s transfer will go up, but IOPSs won't, due to pathing loop/folds with the extra channel. I'm not 100% tho.

Like it matters, as my quad channel does somewhere in 500k - 1.5M IOPS, which is sick as my mech HD does like 20 :)

 

I believe this is incorrect.

The Ramdisk has no way to know on which channel the memory it is using is, therefore it can't split its write/read across the channels as this would require it to be able to map itself in RAM so that it is spread across those memory channel and it would also require that it keeps track of that memory (which would require a memory controller and I'm not aware of any memory controller implemented in software).

 

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but as you can see in the other threads there are 2 things which will limit the performance of the Ramdisk.

The first is the memory frequency.

http://forums.dimmdrive.com/index.php?/topic/1063-my-rig-and-just-bought-dimmdrive/

In this thread Levest28 is limited by his 1600MHz memory which tops out at 12800 MB/s

 

The second is processor speed as is the case in pretty much all the other treads.

More precisely, sequential reads/writes only use 1 core, but random read/write can use as many threads as the programs and Ramdisk support.

 

Hope I cleared some misconceptions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong broken storm, but generally with higher frequency memory you also have longer clock times. As an example my 9-9-9-27 is faster than 10-10-10-30 at the same frequency of 1600. At higher clock rates I'd expect it to sort of balance out, or have effects of the ratio of IOPS vs "speed" sort of thing. I've just found 1600mhz to be a good balanced ratio for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now