Physical memory size

[Stealth_Mode]

Given the relatively new M.2 small form factor for data storage with high capacity, it seems that the physical size of memory (ddr4 and older) is now disproportionately large to other computer components? I have not seen much on the specs for DDR5, but it seems that if there were an update to RAM in the next few years there would be room for significant improvements.

 

What I would like to see would be something like the following:

- Form factor even smaller than SO-DIMM

- Larger individual stick capacity

- Split channel sticks so that you could have the advantage of dual channel memory on one physical stick, or quad channel on 2 sticks, etc. (it seems you always want memory in pairs of 2 anyway)

 

Benefits that I can see for this type of system would be:

- Not having to worry about clearances for CPU coolers

- Either :

         - More room on the MOBO for additional m.2 drives, pcie lanes, usb/fan headers, etc.

         - A smaller form factor MOBO/ size of a mini ITX or micro ATX with the functionality of a full ATX board

- Maintain reasonable upgrade/expansion options (not soldering directly to the MOBO)

 

Cons that I can see would be:

- Potential thermal throttling with less area to distribute the heat

- Slightly less upgrade-ability

- Probably higher costs per GB, both for manufacture and consumer

 

I would be interested to hear your thoughts on this. Thanks!

[Fasauceome]

5 minutes ago, Stealth_Mode said:

- Larger individual stick capacity

- Split channel sticks so that you could have the advantage of dual channel memory on one physical stick, or quad channel on 2 sticks, etc. (it seems you always want memory in pairs of 2 anyway)

This is due from DDR5 anyways, as any ram generation, so look forward to it.

5 minutes ago, Stealth_Mode said:

 - Form factor even smaller than SO-DIMM

When this is required, soldering is used. Otherwise, dimms are just laid flat, parallel to the motherboard, to save space. There's not quite a use case for it yet.

 

5 minutes ago, Stealth_Mode said:

Cons that I can see would be:

- Potential thermal throttling with less area to distribute the heat

Well, ram does get more efficient each generation, hopefully this wouldn't matter so much.

 

5 minutes ago, Stealth_Mode said:

- Probably higher costs per GB, both for manufacture and consumer

I mean, welcome to nand? Each generation costs more $$$

[mariushm]

Memory sticks are wide because they need to have all those contacts, up to 288 pins for the DDR4 sticks.

They interface is 64bit wide, so at least 2x64 traces/wires are needed, plus some control traces, plus voltage traces ...

 

There's HBM2 which stacks up to 8 memory chips on top of a small chip which contains "the brains" but this memory was designed to have a very wide interface, 1024 bit wide ... so if you were to put the chip in a socket it would probabbly have around 2500-3000 pins/contacts ... it would be practically impossible to use them in sockets on motherboards, because you'd need to have thousands of traces between cpu socket and memory socket AND you also need thousands of pins/contacts in the cpu socket for memory alone, instead of a few hundred as it is right now. 

They put these HBM2 memory chips and the silicon die of a processor/gpu chip on top of another silicon chip called "interposer" that has only one purpose - it contains microscopic traces/wires between the chips:

 

 

Besides this, there's also HyperCube memory in the works with similar concepts : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_Memory_Cube

 

Problem with HBM2 memory and similar ideas is that it's very difficult to stack up to 8 memory chips on top of the "logic die" and have a functional stack, you get lots of failed stacks. Also, the memory chips at the bottom will heat more than the chips at the top of the stack so the whole chip heats unevenly which can cause failures (the microscopic connections break or become intermittent)