I originally installed Windows 95 on a 386 PC. A terrible decision.
Also, don't sleep on WfWG 3.11. Solid OS for its day.
I originally installed Windows 95 on a 386 PC. A terrible decision.Couldn't afford a Pentium? I think a 486 was too slow for Windows 95. Unless you ran internet on Win3.1, which would've been very, very early on.
Since you have a 3D chip, you could try dropping down to DDR5-5200 to see if it needs less training time. The huge cache helps to mask the higher RAM latency.My PC spec: 7800X3D / ASUS TUF GAMING B650-PLUS / 32GB DDR5-6000 (DOCP) - takes about 30 seconds from power-on to POST. It's weird to think that my old Haswell build could present me with the desktop way faster than this PC.
You should be able to fix that with correct BIOS/board settings. ASUS seems to do a horrible job out of the box with their motherboards and this issue and is definitely an offender in this problem, but they are not the only motherboard manufacturer with this problem. You need to set "Memory Context Restore" to "enabled" and possibly set "DRAM Power Down Mode" to "Enabled" as well. Both of these can cause some instability, so you do have to test (I think that is why ASUS has them set this way by default, but they certainly don't make life easy to find and change the behavior which is my biggest complaint).I have 64GB of system memory, and it takes my computer much longer to boot probably due to the memory training going on. 32GB would probably boot up a lot faster, but I'm in no hurry. Note I don't actually think I'll ever need that much. I'd also buy a PCIE 5.0 NVME SSD if the price came down, just because. Because.
Maybe for OEM office PCs. Don't see this happening in the DIY sector. If it does, we are screwed.if it arrives on desktop
That's one way of looking at it. Or rather, throwing out the old CPU would be like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. That soldered RAM would be unusable for anyone who only wants a RAM upgrade but not a CPU upgrade. Modular upgradability is the reason the DIY industry is still thriving. The moment you start requiring people to buy an entire non-upgradable system, you are limiting their options, increasing output of trash in landfills, making it impossible for someone smart but financially poor to do something interesting.So if the memory is on the CPU, you could just buy a new processor, and upgrade the system RAM at the same time?
It does? Why? There's plenty of 2-4 year old systems out there still playing games with 16GB of RAM. Not that that's optimal mind you, since some video cards have more than that now. But still, 32GB should be overkill for most people. 48GB is over overkill.And if you game, the minimum goes up to 48GB.
There are games that are consuming over 20GB of system RAM. With each passing year, that number will only increase, especially with open world games and higher resolution textures. Much faster to read frequently used assets from RAM than NVMe since there's no guarantee how fast a user's NVMe drive is gonna be. More certainty that a user will have at least DDR4-3200 or DDR5-4800.But still, 32GB should be overkill for most people. 48GB is over overkill.
That's different than you saying 48GB is the minimum yesterday.
Far Cry 5
Elden Ring
MSFS 2020
COD Warzone
Any game with mods
Plenty of 16GB people in that thread saying how 32GB reduced or eliminated stuttering during gameplay. So I would still recommend anyone to go with 32GB minimum if they are interested in serious PC gaming.
I like to have available RAM. Lets me do fun stuff that I otherwise wouldn't be able to, like RAM drives. <<< very relevant to people wanting to play games with hyper loading speeds. Doom 3 or Quake 4 would fit on a RAM drive. Even Crysis. So for gamers, I would say 48GB is minimum. Unless they like buying barely sufficient RAM and then chucking out the old sticks and upgrading to larger RAM kits later on. Which to me just sounds wasteful.That's different than you saying 48GB is the minimum yesterday.
I hope something like that happens, rather than the industry moving to Apple's scummy way of doing things. But there would be more engineering work involved. I hope AMD does it first (two tiered DRAM). Intel will have no choice but to follow. Otherwise, they'll get boo-booed by enthusiasts.I haven't "done my own research" but it should also be possible to have 2-tiered DRAM. Fast on-package RAM (let's say Apple's favorite number, 8GB) and you can still add modules on the side.
That's fine and I mainly agree that extra RAM (within reason) is a good thing. I'm even okay with calling 32GB a "minimum" but there's just not a lot of evidence to apply that language to 48GB, even for gamers.I like to have available RAM. Lets me do fun stuff that I otherwise wouldn't be able to, like RAM drives. <<< very relevant to people wanting to play games with hyper loading speeds. Doom 3 or Quake 4 would fit on a RAM drive. Even Crysis. So for gamers, I would say 48GB is minimum. Unless they like buying barely sufficient RAM and then chucking out the old sticks and upgrading to larger RAM kits later on. Which to me just sounds wasteful.
On the Amiga, some software is incompatible with Fast RAM. So you need to switch that off and only have Chip RAM then.
Not sure if @CakeMonster responded to @StefanR5R, but: Amiga's Chip RAM is memory which is shared between CPU and the Custom Chips, e.g. the Agnus chip with its blitter and Denise as the video processor. Chip RAM is not on-chip RAM, it's normal DRAM on the mainboard or can partially reside on an expansion card.On chip RAM looks like it might become a thing for Intel soon.
it should also be possible to have 2-tiered DRAM. Fast on-package RAM (let's say Apple's favorite number, 8GB) and you can still add modules on the side.
Operating system and, to some extent, application software need to be NUMA-aware then. The popular operating systems in the x86 world should already have most of the necesary mechanisms and policies readily implemented, but some adaptations to tiered memory, especially in client computer usage scenarios, may still be needed.I hope something like that happens, rather than the industry moving to Apple's scummy way of doing things. But there would be more engineering work involved.