Is amd finished?

Is amd finished?

Dram/storage merging

>Speed is not a problem: Physics determines what the speed will be, and that’s already well known. The native speed of a 3D XPoint chip is closer to that of a DRAM than to that of NAND flash

>Intel’s current Optane SSD offering is priced at about half the price of DRAM

Attached: 2_678x452.jpg (678x290, 34K)

Optane is such bullshit, laptop manufacturers have been including Optane memory inside RAM counts.
eg 24GB RAM for a 8GB DDR4/16GB Optane system.

AMD can just do NVRAM

No. Intel's claim about the speed turned out to be wildly optimistic - this is well known, have you been under a rock for the last five years? - and the actual speed will be matched or beaten by the next generation of chinkshit SSDs.

Pushing a technology with limited write cycles into use as main memory is being done for one reason and one reason only: planned obsolescence. Intel (and other computer and component makers) want PCs that will reliably wear out and need replacing after a few years.

>Still wanting to buy any thing jewtel shits out...

JUST

Attached: 1545731480288.jpg (745x607, 87K)

Especially now even the new laptops have decent quad core cpus and should last a good 10 years honestly unless something crazy happens. But im sure the Intel(tm) Thermal management(tm) enginge(tm) will fix this issue

Dual core is enough and laptops last already 9+ years.

They've been claiming that XPoint and Optane will replace RAM but it's not there yet, not even close.
You don't even get any significant benefit over NVMe.

Currently available Optane modules aren't anywhere close to RAM speed-wise, and the endurance isn't orders of magnitude higher than NAND despite Intel's claims. So it sits at a weird point where it isn't cost-effective as storage outside of very specific scenarios, and it can't replace RAM either.

It's slower than NVME, but much lower latency.

>Dual core is enough

Attached: 1527629778452.jpg (679x758, 54K)

Intel Optane is fucking dead you intard shitter.

Well, it kinda is. Programming, writing, web browsing - you don't need any powerful CPU for that. Compile times hurt but you can make a server for that. But sure, there are enough use cases for which you need a better CPU. And old CPUs obviously have terrible power efficiency.

right now Optane is too slow to compete with RAM and too expensive to compete with flash memory.

so will we get a chunk of sram teamed with nvram soon to kill off dram once and for all?

Optane has better endurance than SLC

It will kill DRAM, but not they way you think

>using a GPU in 2018

AMD leads in APUs, GPUs are bloat

Arguable with older CPU generations.
An i7-7500U or something is acceptable but upgrading from an i7-2640M to an i7-2720QM netted gains in pretty much all areas.

Most people don't even have a use for NVMe, what are they going to do with Optane?

>Arguable
Quit using bloatware. Running a text editor shouldn't even fully utilize one core.

Ram has better endurance than Optane

They released optane drives for storage/tiered storage first, which is what you're thinking of. They also have a low latency optane that goes into RAM slots and is like 80ns off from DDR4 latency. At significantly cheaper costs it's a great way to bolster RAM but I think it's for data center only

but it's volatile and more expensive

persistance offers optane exactly 0 advantages when used as RAM substitute.

This.
You want faster RAM? Make a big CPU cache

That would increase latency

... things could be ran directly from storage without having to load from storage to ram

It's irrelevant.
Optane locks you with Incel.
Servers or systems handling critical operations will never use memory made of self-destructing cells

Optimistic, yes. Still useful? Also yes. It's slower than ram, but it's an amazing amount faster than even the best nvme as swap setups.

Not exactly. GPUs use SSDs to extend memory pool, but still the persistance is irrelevant the only reason is NAND being cheap. And since NAND is much cheaper than 3dXP optane is still useless.

Yes, dual-core really is enough for my laptop, it's fine. Can I do video editing on that dual-core? No. Can I play games on a dual-core with a iGP? No. But I don't care, I have a desktop so the more interesting questions are.. can I do web browsing, edit documents, spreadsheets, watch videos and everything else I do on my laptop just fine with a dual-core and iGP? Yes. Absolutely. It's fine.