This is such a retarded idea.

Put the RAM in main-memory banks.

Boot off a CompactFlash card, during the booting process create a RAM disk and run out of it (a la BartPE).

If you need persistent storage add a real hard disk or use shares over the network.

That way your RAM is closer to the processor and runs faster without stupid hacks like this one.

This "device", allows you to use cheaper/GB DDR2 ram modules in combination to create a maximum of 8GB of hard drive storage. (The limitation on the capacity is not the current memory market, but the integrated circuit on the card. They are redesigning a memory controller that works specificly for this application). The SATA II output is the best solution for our cost effective solutions.

The SATA II output connector allows us to just "plug it in" to our SATA port on our motherboard, and our PC will see this RAM Drive as a new hard drive without any special drivers. This means you will be able to select it while installing windows without needing to load a driver disk (Unless using Hardware Raid).

If they were were to "invent" something out of thin air that didn't exist, like say, a PCI-E 16x Raid controller that talked directly to the memory controller on the i-RAM, it would all have to be contained on the same board (signal degregation/vs distance/speed). That makes a big card, and lots and lots of R&D costs which gets handed to us if they can do it.

I honestly think that the only improvement this card could possible have, is to have a hardware switch/jumper on the 5.25" circuit board that allows the output to be selectable from 1xSATAII ports or 4xSATAII ports (Effectively 4x 2GB Sata Drives). I think this method would cost the least amount for R&D to implement with the most gains in performance.

Those of us that have 4+ SATA ports on our motherboard would reap the benefits or we could buy another SATA RAID controller that did have the additional ports (<$120). We would then have the option, out of the box, to output to 1x SATA II port for total bandwidth of 300 MB/s, or flip the switch and use all 4 SATA ports to activate 4 seperate 2GB RAM drives and then, computer savy peoples would then use hardware or software RAID to bring those 4x 2GB drives into 1x 8GB RAID 0 Drive with 1,200MB/s total speed

Just image Gigabyte doing this one addition. We consumers would then be able to rush out and grab us a HighPoint RocketRAID 3520 PCI-E Raid controller + 2 of the iRAM's sucessors with 8GB RAM each.
Specs would look likes this:

Storage Drives:
2x "iRAM successors" 8GB each (16GB Total)
-Functions like 8x 2GB Drives
::Max Bandwidth is 8x SATA II Ports at 300MB/s = 3.2 GB/s

SATA RAID Controller:
1x HighPoint RocketRAID 3520 (8x SATA II Ports) PCI-E 8x Interface
-Utilize all 8 Ports of controller - 2GB RAM Drives each
::Max Bandwidth of PCI-E 8x Interface is 4GB/s
::Max Bandwidth of available SATA II ports is 8x SATA II 300MB/s = 3.2GB/s

End Result = 16GB RAID 0 Array cabable of 3.2 GB/s sustained. Now I know what your thinking.... That's enough to host the bestest badassest SQL Server datafile ever! LOL

I'm thinking website backbone.

Larger picture is this HighPoint RocketRAID controllers can be combined with other RocketRAID controllers (They talk together). Now grab me a new MSI K9A2 Platinum motherboard with 4x PCI-E 8x Ports and 4x HighPoint Controllers.... 64GB RAM Drive transfering data at 12.8GB/s... You'd have to upgrade your NIC card to a 10GB/s NIC just to keep up with this, and it's a silent beauty.

I know what your thinking again, "But what about it loosing power?!" Problem solved.. grab one of those internal 5.25" atx power supplies that have they're own power cord outside the case... then do what any smart person does and buy a UPS!! UPS start at $29 and at the small amount of power these iRAM successors would consume, you'd be able to get at least a half a day's worth of power out of it if your house lost power. Not to mention the constant peeping these UPSs do when they loose power. (Bigger UPSs run upwards of $100+ and they would give these little units power for days I'd image)

Really, only use this if you are planning to host high transaction/sec or low capacity/high bandwidth applications such as SQL Server, Photoshop, Video Editing (1 video at a time), Audio Media Streaming to MANY MANY clients similtaneusly, you get the picture.

Who wants there OS to but up in <8 seconds when they have to install their applications on a different "slower" traditional hard drive anyway. Give this card some time + the lowered cost of 4GB DDR2 modules and the support of 4/8GB DDR2 modules on the iRAM, then workstation applications would interest EVERYONE. Note: Currently 4GB Generic DDR2 533Mhz(PC2-4200) Modules are $65 each.

That's my billion cents on this card. I really want a setup rig with this card for SQL database purposes.

this hardware has unique feature that no HDD will ever have
....the complete silence !

i use the zalman TNN (totaly no noise) tower case which with i dont need anymore fans for my pentium cpu and my nvidia gpu,
unfortunately the HDD still made lot of noise noise
so i replaced it with the i-ram and reached the 0dB nirvana

im a pc user since 1998 and i've damaged my ears because of the use of these fans on my Pc's, it didnt hapen at once but its something that slowly occured at longterm,
so i've decided to find a way to get a noiseless pc and the i-ram helped me completing the noiseless pc project

I've been administrating servers for a good 7 years now, and not once have I seen an event log where ECC memory scrubbed an error/made corrections. Suppose there's always a first time, though...

Well they got some of them right...

The DDR from the last one would saturate a SATA2 port but now DDR2?!?! Jeeze you would think they would try and divey it up somehow better like through two SATA ports in raid or a PCI-E slot or something. It's still on the right track but as was mentioned some posts down adding some more memory slots would be a nice (the card certainly looks big enough), 5.25s are big enough that you could stand the memory modules up too instead of laying them on their side like they needed to do for the PCI version.

Getting better. Maybe Gen3 will be the one. Still very cool.

ECC?

Will this concept be worthwhile until they can get it a few lanes of PCIe, or better yet, on hypertransport?

Nice alternative to store that goddamn Windows' Virtual Memory page file.

Hmmm, I still want to play with one of these. :)

Now all we need is super slow DDR2 with high capacity and a low price.

This would probably make Photoshop editting mighty fast.

Could you use RAID 0 on 2 of these onto 2 Sata ports and get 600mbs?

I think this concept is definitely worth it. If I were to use it (which I'm definitely considering), I would use it for a htpc. I simply would love to have the ability to run a diskless htpc that uses less power (meaning generates less heat and can therefore utilize slower fan speeds) and produces better throughput.

I do not understand the exact appeal of I-RAM drive. It had always been stupid to use DRAM for permanent data storage. I-RAM is even more unreliable then a "Deathstar" RAID 0. I do not know that many people who are willing to keep ghosting/reinstalling the OS after power and battery fails.

I-RAM better have ECC support or it is effectively an alternate solution for a scratch disk.

A single fast HDD is still far a more cost-effective solution then previous and this revision of the I-RAM for fast, permanent data storage. The user must be very impatent to be willing to take a trade-off for 5-10 second boot-up on a unreilable media storage versus 30-40 seconds boot-up on a more stable media.

In my eyes, the simple fact of the matter is this, irrespective of price:

8 gigs of hard drive just isn't enough.

If I was to buy this, I'd want to run my most hard drive intensive applications off it too. Not just the OS.

I'm well aware that 8 gigs is a lot of RAM, but it's not a lot of hard drive.

As soon as this is mentioned though, people make niche applications up for it in defence. "Oh, it's only for an OS drive, run all your games off another, really big drive (or a Raptor RAID 5 array, if you really want), and you're laughing."

Not really pointing any fingers here, just calling it as I see it. For me, that just seems like making excuses.

As tempting as all the google videos are, this would be the real killer for me if I was looking at buying one.
-Mole

well DDR2 400 or 533 is MORE that adequate to saturate the sata channel so i wouldn't worry as much on ram costs.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820141224

$102 for 2GB aftre rebate. even beats ddr 266 through 400 by more than $20.

for 2GB modules - necesary to get 8GB - it's between $230 and $240 on the egg for DDR 266 and ddr2 400. I'd say ddr2 isn't more expensive and has an edge as far as bandwidth goes (up till it maxes the sata lane - moot since even the lowest ddr can do that in single lane.)

It needs a ghosting mechanism for quick copies to the ram from a harddrive in case of power loss.

Bummer about the DDR2 though -- it's not like it uses the extra bandwidth (though the lower power requirements mean it doesn't flatten the battery backup as fast) and there's going to be a lot of cheap used DDR-400 memory floating around for the next few years.

Wait... So this now relies on battery power when the system is turned off? The original i-Ram could at least sustain itself when the system was turned off, so long as it wasn't unplugged.

That seems like a step back in progress.

With ddr2 it should last a little longer when on battery power but still, I would prefer the pci solution or pci-e.

without ECC, this thing is not good enough to store any of your data. I have my doubts about how long an OS would last, too. errors grow exponentially.

That said, it would be cool to have a few of these in raid-0 for a 16gig partition of raw speed, but I wouldn't even have important data on the same machine.

Have to agree with Leor's question.

One of the major shortfalls was a lack of ECC support. Fixed or not?

I agree that it's junk till it hits PCI-e or Hypertransport. It's an insult to slap that expensive RAM (expensive as far as storage goes, anyway) on a SATA bus - even SATA II.

Create a link for the co-processor socket and run it over hypertransport, and break 10GB. Now THAT I would shell out for. Of course, it would probably cost an arm and a leg.

Although now at 8GB you could potentially put Windows on it. As long as you've got it ghosted after every OS patch and a live CD that can read NTFS in a pinch if you lose i-RAM power for too long, you might be able to run this fairly securely to speed up your OS.

Will this thing be using SO-DIMMs for memory? Seems to me that if you're going to make a luxury item, you might as well really go for broke...I figure in the size of this thing, you should be able to fit 16 SO-DIMMs, allowing for 16 GB (32? are there 2GB SO-DIMMs yet?) of storage.

Nice to price out the cheapest DDR2 I can find... well I can dream at least.

Nice, my only problem will be the price of this thing, and that's not even including the cost of RAM. As the last one wasn't cheap.

Can some one tell me what the hell is this device.... i seriously dont have any idea about it.... so probably lay man's term will help ..