http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101115090802.htm
Well, the first letdown was that "computer memory" from the title is apparently hard disk. Though 100,000x faster than RAM would be like fractions of CPU cycles, so ok...
I'm not very clear if they believe it should replace not just hard drives, but RAM too. Most of the article is about advantages against hard drives, except for the last paragraph which compares power consumption against RAM. 100,000x faster than HDD is right about the RAM domain in speed. Can anyone shed some light? It'd be cool to not have RAM+HDD, just one huge disk that can double as RAM. You wouldn't really need to boot at all most of the times. Anyway, still 5+ years away...
Well, the first letdown was that "computer memory" from the title is apparently hard disk. Though 100,000x faster than RAM would be like fractions of CPU cycles, so ok...
I'm not very clear if they believe it should replace not just hard drives, but RAM too. Most of the article is about advantages against hard drives, except for the last paragraph which compares power consumption against RAM. 100,000x faster than HDD is right about the RAM domain in speed. Can anyone shed some light? It'd be cool to not have RAM+HDD, just one huge disk that can double as RAM. You wouldn't really need to boot at all most of the times. Anyway, still 5+ years away...