bit-tech.net

G.Skill squeezes 2GHz out of 49GB of memory

G.Skill squeezes 2GHz out of 49GB of memory

49GB of memory at 2,000MHz. Don't strain your eyes, just click the pic above to enlarge!

Yesterday we dropped into G.Skill HQ here in Taipei and the Product Manager was keen to show us G.Skill's latest achievement - 49,152MB of memory running at 2,000MHz CL8-9-8-24 on EVGA's latest SR-2 motherboard.

The hand-binned 12 DIMM kit in question was already ear marked for an Italian customer who did 3D rendering for a living. We were told it cost a few thousand dollars; even more than the two Intel Xeon X5670s in both sockets!

G.Skill techies claim getting 12 DIMMs of 2,000MHz CL8 takes around 48 work hours, but it's getting both CPUs to run at such a high base-clock that's the real issue. We hope the Italian man has a pair of good CPUs then!

When we previously met with EVGA, overclocker Shamino was working directly with them and was hitting 1,950MHz CL8 on the SR2, but evidently after a few more weeks of trying and testing different Xeons the G.Skill team has cracked 2GHz.

It's technically a '48GB kit', but since it's really 1,024MB per gigabyte this makes it 48 x 1024 = 49,152MB, or 49GB.

For the rest of us that can't afford an SR-2, a pair of expensive Xeons and a $3k memory kit, but still need the MAHOOSIVE memory space, G.Skill - among other memory manufacturers such as Kingston, Corsair, ADATA and OCZ, for example - already offer six DIMM 24GB kits in various levels of performance and cost for standard X58 boards.

Are you planning to buy yourself a big memory kit? Let us know in the forums.

G.Skill squeezes 2GHz out of 49GB of memory G.Skill squeezes 2GHz out of in 49GB of memory
Click to enlarge

G.Skill squeezes 2GHz out of 49GB of memory G.Skill squeezes 2GHz out of in 49GB of memory
Click to enlarge

53 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Omnituens 27th July 2010, 11:57 Quote
Quote:
It's technically a '48GB kit', but since it's really 1,024MB per gigabyte this makes it 48 x 1024 = 49,152MB, or 49GB. Hard drive makers should take note: oversell, not under.

What?

48GB = 49,152MB
49GB = 49 x 1024 = 50176MB

What you said makes no sense.
Bindibadgi 27th July 2010, 12:07 Quote
It's classed and sold as a "48GB kit" - there are 12 x 4GB DIMMs.

But since 1GB is not 1,000MB, it's 1024MB, this actually makes a large difference when we get beyond small numbers. The 4GB DIMMs are actually 4,096MB in size - technically a 4.1GB DIMM if we round up.

So, 12 x 4096MB = 49,152MB or 49GB.
general22 27th July 2010, 12:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omnituens
Quote:
It's technically a '48GB kit', but since it's really 1,024MB per gigabyte this makes it 48 x 1024 = 49,152MB, or 49GB. Hard drive makers should take note: oversell, not under.

What?

48GB = 49,152MB
49GB = 49 x 1024 = 50176MB

What you said makes no sense.

I think he is referring to SI standard metric gigabytes so 49GB would be 49,000,000,000 bytes. But I thought that memory and cache generally assumes a binary gigabyte (or gebibyte or what ever stupid name). The operating system would report this as 48GB.
Tasslehoff 27th July 2010, 12:10 Quote
I think they mean us to take it in the way below

49152/1024=48

=)
bigsharn 27th July 2010, 12:27 Quote
Most people think a Gigabyte is 1000 Megabytes and this is generally accepted (this is the scale that Hard drive manufacturers use) in everyday life

A "true" Gigabyte is 1024 Megabytes, which is the standard that RAM manufactureres use
Paradigm Shifter 27th July 2010, 12:31 Quote
Don't round up, don't try to take a value that is base 2 (2^10) and turn it into base 10 (10^3)... it doesn't work. Just call it a 48GB kit, not "49GB of memory"... only hard drive manufacturers try the base 10 from base 2 trick, and it's annoying. You don't get "6.2GB" of memory from a 6GB setup...
rickysio 27th July 2010, 12:44 Quote
Actually the proper method of representing is 49GB of RAM out of a 48GiB RAM kit.
Meaty Pete 27th July 2010, 13:22 Quote
I'M BUYING 24GB RAM KIT!!!
(I'm not really) I just thought I'd say so as I was looking for someone to say similar yet everyone is quibbling over what is a true gigabyte. ....yawns.
eek 27th July 2010, 14:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
It's classed and sold as a "48GB kit" - there are 12 x 4GB DIMMs.

But since 1GB is not 1,000MB, it's 1024MB, this actually makes a large difference when we get beyond small numbers. The 4GB DIMMs are actually 4,096MB in size - technically a 4.1GB DIMM if we round up.

So, 12 x 4096MB = 49,152MB or 49GB.
You can't mix and match a GB being 1000 or 1024 MBs! Make you're mind up and stick with it!

It's either:
4x1000x12 = 48000 => 48000 / 1000 = 48GB
OR
4x1024x12 = 49152 => 49152 / 1024 = 48GB
NOT
4x1024x12 = 49152 => 49152 / 1000 = 49GB!

Thus, it's always 48GB no matter what measure you use - so long as you're consistent!

:p
NiHiLiST 27th July 2010, 14:28 Quote
If you work it out in bytes, which we all know are 1,024 and/or 1,000 to a KB, then it's actually 51,539,607,552 bytes, which is 51.5GB!!!!!!!!!!!1!one!!onethousandonehundredandeleven

It's 48GB.
borandi 27th July 2010, 14:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickysio
Actually the proper method of representing is 49GB of RAM out of a 48GiB RAM kit.

This is the correct usage of base 2 vs. base 10. Reporters, take note, and use the correct GB or GiB when necessary. However, this article should have stated '48GiB of memory' in the title - you incite a lot of confusion as typically writing '49GB' will garner lots of negative attention. Stick to a normal factor 2 to reduce the backlash, and use the appropriate units.
crazyceo 27th July 2010, 14:42 Quote
Yawn, tittie Yawn, tittie Yawn Yawn YAWN!

Nice article though, shame about the anal posts above!
NiHiLiST 27th July 2010, 14:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by borandi
This is the correct usage of base 2 vs. base 10. Reporters, take note, and use the correct GB or GiB when necessary.

No it isn't, you're mixing units again, or assuming a MB as a base unit rather than a byte. 48GiB = 51.5GB.
Bindibadgi 27th July 2010, 15:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyceo
Yawn, tittie Yawn, tittie Yawn Yawn YAWN!

Nice article though, shame about the anal posts above!

Thank you.
wuyanxu 27th July 2010, 15:39 Quote
wooohoo for bigger memory! it's about time! i had been at stand still with my memory size since 2007.
RichCreedy 27th July 2010, 17:32 Quote
pedants beware bindi will eat your brains, 48GB 49GB, who cares at that amount, its insane
Bauul 27th July 2010, 17:53 Quote
It's 49,152 Megabytes, which equals 48 Gigabytes at the correct 1,024 measurement or 49Gb at the incorrect 1,000 measurement. So stating 49Gb of memory in the title is incorrect imo.

Anyway, epic achievement. I worry to think of the scale of the things the guys creating if he needs that much RAM!

"I'm-a making-a super-er-computer-er!" (Italians all sound like Mario in my mind)
bahgger 27th July 2010, 18:11 Quote
bauul, Gb =/= GB fyi
frontline 27th July 2010, 18:50 Quote
Is 49GB enough for Crysis?
Aracos 27th July 2010, 19:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigsharn
A "true" Gigabyte is 1024 Megabytes, which is the standard that RAM manufactureres use

A "true" Gigabyte is 1000 Megabyte, the Gigabyte you are thinking of a is a Gibibyte (Giga Binary Byte) which is 1024 Mebibytes or MiB. RAM is sold as MiB or GiB not as GB or MB. Hard drives are sold in GB's which would be 1,000,000,000 bytes not as GiB's which would be 1,073,741,824 bytes. Operating systems have always baffled me because they usually count files sizes as GiB's or MiB's but displays them using GB or MB even though they are actually in MiB and GiB. You get the odd program which uses the correct measurements such as GParted for Linux but it's rare to find it actually used properly. And bit-tech of all places I didn't expect to see "49GB" from a blatant 48GiB or 48GB if that's what you like to use.
Bauul 27th July 2010, 19:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahgger
bauul, Gb =/= GB fyi

True, I can just never remember which way round they go!
Aracos 27th July 2010, 20:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bauul
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahgger
bauul, Gb =/= GB fyi

True, I can just never remember which way round they go!

Gb = Gigabit GB = Gigabyte, 8 Gigabit's make 1 Gigabyte :P
I remember them as small b for smaller unit.
cgthomas 27th July 2010, 20:22 Quote
I bet my Atom netbook is faster, I'm quite sure actually. Last week I emailed G.Skill and they said it was true and told me to "go play now, little troll"
cgthomas 27th July 2010, 20:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by storm20200
Gb = Gigabit GB = Gigabyte, 8 Gigabit's make 1 Gigabyte :P
I remember them as small b for smaller unit.

How come 1 GB of RAM is more expensive than 1 GB of HDD?
Still the same GB! :|
Aracos 27th July 2010, 20:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgthomas
Quote:
Originally Posted by storm20200
Gb = Gigabit GB = Gigabyte, 8 Gigabit's make 1 Gigabyte :P
I remember them as small b for smaller unit.

How come 1 GB of RAM is more expensive than 1 GB of HDD?
Still the same GB! :|

I'm not really sure what to make of this but I'm guessing trolling since you think your atom would be faster? No one would seriously question why 1GiB of ram is more expensive than a 1GB HDD.......would they?
cgthomas 27th July 2010, 21:25 Quote
come on, I was in a "I'm just back from work and I'm in a happy mood" mode
general22 28th July 2010, 04:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
Thank you.

Err ok so its technically 49GB and 48GiB. Can we expect to see this sudden change in the way you report memory capacity turn up in future articles? I look forward to the next time bit-tech tests the newest 6.14 GB DDR3 kit.
thehippoz 28th July 2010, 05:20 Quote
how much you wanna bet this is going in a rich boys porn box.. and he owns an ipad
Bindibadgi 28th July 2010, 05:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by general22
Err ok so its technically 49GB and 48GiB. Can we expect to see this sudden change in the way you report memory capacity turn up in future articles? I look forward to the next time bit-tech tests the newest 6.14 GB DDR3 kit.

Jeeez you people are pedantic aren't you. It's meant to be a light hearted news piece about a lot of memory. Maybe the GiB vs GB situation is something a reader hadn't thought about before? It's not a technical document for an IEEE paper. :p;)

No, obviously we're not going to write about 6.14GB kits, just like I didn't write about 49.125GB. :)



I was just pointing out you GET A FREE ~GIGABYTE OF MEMORY when you buy this much. Isn't that nice. Better than buying a "Terabyte" hard drive and only being able to use 931GB of it.
PingCrosby 28th July 2010, 06:40 Quote
Theres a snake in my boot.
Mraedis 28th July 2010, 06:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
Jeeez you people are pedantic aren't you. It's meant to be a light hearted news piece about a lot of memory. Maybe the GiB vs GB situation is something a reader hadn't thought about before? It's not a technical document for an IEEE paper. :p;)

No, obviously we're not going to write about 6.14GB kits, just like I didn't write about 49.125GB. :)



I was just pointing out you GET A FREE ~GIGABYTE OF MEMORY when you buy this much. Isn't that nice. Better than buying a "Terabyte" hard drive and only being able to use 931GB of it.

That's silly, why would only the megabytes have 1024 per to the gigabyte?

It should be 48 x 1024 x 1024 x 1024 / 1000 / 1000 / 1000 = 51.5, you can't just hop from GiB to GB, you have to take it all the way down to the base counter first.

If it was MB to start with, however, it would be silly to count 1024 MB for a GB, as that would be some messing up, like you started with 1000 x 1000 (kilo, mega) then went to 1024... :?


In regards to the article, would that client of theirs happen to have a shitload of high-end GFX cards too? :D And wouldn't a rendering farm be more useful?
Bindibadgi 28th July 2010, 07:08 Quote
How do you explain the CPU-Z count then? http://images.bit-tech.net/news_images/2010/07/g-skill-squeezes-2ghz-out-of-in-49gb-of-mem/48gb-2000c8-sr-2-pi-24.png. I'm just reporting what it says on the tin.
general22 28th July 2010, 08:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
How do you explain the CPU-Z count then? http://images.bit-tech.net/news_images/2010/07/g-skill-squeezes-2ghz-out-of-in-49gb-of-mem/48gb-2000c8-sr-2-pi-24.png. I'm just reporting what it says on the tin.

But that is 49,152 MiB not MB so I guess it would actually be 51.5GB as mentioned by Mraedis so wow look at how much free memory we are getting there, an extra 3.5GB! But its not free, you are getting what you paid for just like you get what you paid for with a hard drive. It's just operating systems use base 2 and HDD manufacturers use base 10.

Anyway I apologise for dragging it off topic or something. I just didn't agree with using metric gigabytes when reporting memory capacity.
Bindibadgi 28th July 2010, 08:52 Quote
OK, I concede it's all confusing and the industry needs to decide on a standard across its products. ;)
general22 28th July 2010, 09:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
OK, I concede it's all confusing and the industry needs to decide on a standard across its products. ;)

Haha agreed!
John_T 28th July 2010, 10:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyceo
Yawn, tittie Yawn, tittie Yawn Yawn YAWN!

Nice article though, shame about the anal posts above!

Yeah, what he said.

The article clearly states that it's a '48GB kit', but as it's so large you effectively get over 49GB. I think everyone here understood perfectly well what that meant, but some people were simply determined to show off their 'superior technical knowledge' - and in the process half of those buggered up and made mistakes of their own.

A little tip: If you're going to be a pedant, make sure you're correct first!

I've always considered myself a bit of a geek, but some of the people here really are hard-core nerds. I bet they get invited to all the best parties....
LeMaltor 28th July 2010, 11:05 Quote
I still don't understand how much ram this guy has, I use a 512MB stick, is this more or less?
Omnituens 28th July 2010, 14:40 Quote
Oops, sorry Bindibadgi, I never expected my comment to cause such a fuss!
cgthomas 28th July 2010, 17:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeMaltor
I still don't understand how much ram this guy has, I use a 512MB stick, is this more or less?
I think 512 MB is better since it's a single stick. It's a well known fact that single Dimms perform better than multiple ones
Chocobollz 28th July 2010, 17:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyceo
Yawn, tittie Yawn, tittie Yawn Yawn YAWN!

Nice article though, shame about the anal posts above!

Thank you.

Someone says "anal" and you quickly say thanks to him. If next time I say "fuks", would you say the same to me? :-)

Well back on topic, to be honest, this is the first time I've seen Bit-Tech do such a mistake as to say that a 49,152 MB memory as a "49 GB" because we all know when they said that it's 49,152 MB, they're referring to the IEC binary units, not the SI unit. I know you probably wants to point out their manufacturer's mistake but I'd say that it's pointless and it just make more peoples got confused. I think a news should be made to clarify something, not to add more confusion like this one. I for one, knows that the first comment here would be a comment about the wrong conversion, even before I clicked the page! I just knew.... ^ ^ d

And as for G.Skill's achievement, I don't think it's that surprising because it's just more hand-picked memory being slabbed together and I'd say most of the other memory companies would probably have done it too if they're being serious. Oh and because I don't need memory that big, yet! ;-)
RichCreedy 28th July 2010, 17:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgthomas
I think 512 MB is better since it's a single stick. It's a well known fact that single Dimms perform better than multiple ones

and now install norton on your 512MB PC with windows Vista on it ;)
cgthomas 28th July 2010, 17:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCreedy
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgthomas
I think 512 MB is better since it's a single stick. It's a well known fact that single Dimms perform better than multiple ones

and now install norton on your 512MB PC with windows Vista on it ;)

Please do what he said and post screens and benchmark results
crazyceo 28th July 2010, 21:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobollz
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyceo
Yawn, tittie Yawn, tittie Yawn Yawn YAWN!

Nice article though, shame about the anal posts above!

Thank you.

Someone says "anal" and you quickly say thanks to him. If next time I say "fuks", would you say the same to me? :-)

The difference being that you clearly have taken it as a sexual reference. Did you see any posts before mine that made any reference to back door shenanigans? Have you never heard it being used as someone being really anal about something, over zealous or too thorough? So now you understand that I meant the other kind and not the "Hey, take a deep breath and lets experiment!" kind.
Aracos 28th July 2010, 21:58 Quote
Bit-tech you have your answer! A while ago you asked what we'd like to see to make your memory reviews more interesting/viewing well now you have it! Buy an 8GiB kit of whatever ram and call it 8.1GB :D

Never thought I'd see so many posts in a RAM article :P
cgthomas 28th July 2010, 22:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by storm20200
Bit-tech you have your answer! A while ago you asked what we'd like to see to make your memory reviews more interesting/viewing well now you have it! Buy an 8GiB kit of whatever ram and call it 8.1GB :D

Never thought I'd see so many posts in a RAM article :P
Is this a counter argument to memory-reviews? Because clearly the article - despite its massiveness - was quite boring and everyone steared off-topic as per the very ...ahm... mature and serious comments
Aracos 28th July 2010, 23:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgthomas
Quote:
Originally Posted by storm20200
Bit-tech you have your answer! A while ago you asked what we'd like to see to make your memory reviews more interesting/viewing well now you have it! Buy an 8GiB kit of whatever ram and call it 8.1GB :D

Never thought I'd see so many posts in a RAM article :P
Is this a counter argument to memory-reviews? Because clearly the article - despite its massiveness - was quite boring and everyone steared off-topic as per the very ...ahm... mature and serious comments

I'm saying that bit-tech asked what they could do to make the memory reviews more interesting and what we'd like to see in them because memory reviews are generally very boring and RAM doesn't have a big impact on life in terms of speed with DDR3 now so I'm saying they'd get more people reading the RAM reviews if they stated that an 8GiB kit was a 8.1GB kit because everyone would complain that they're counting wrong ^_^
Chocobollz 29th July 2010, 02:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyceo
The difference being that you clearly have taken it as a sexual reference. Did you see any posts before mine that made any reference to back door shenanigans? Have you never heard it being used as someone being really anal about something, over zealous or too thorough? So now you understand that I meant the other kind and not the "Hey, take a deep breath and lets experiment!" kind.

Well, first, forgive me if I take it wrong as English isn't my primary language but when I first seen your post, I see you saying others being "anal" out of nowhere. I did read the posts before yours and I haven't found anything "anal" in it, they're just stating the obvious, to avoid confusion, that's it. Because if they're not, next time we could have some ads saying, "The biggest DDR3 mem ever! Check out our 9 GB* memory modules!" with a fine print below it saying "9 GB = 8,192 MB". Would you like another cases of tricks like those used by harddrive manufacturers? ;-)
Anakha 29th July 2010, 08:32 Quote
Okay, 48GiB (12 * 4GiB sticks) = 51,539,607,552 Bytes, which in Hard-Drive Marketing Speak is 52GB ('cause you know they all round up as well)

Computers have always counted their capacity in MiB or GiB (Calling it MB or GB, 'cause the programmers never thought someone would screw around with what a unit is), but HDD manufacturers have always counted in "Million Bytes", followed by "Billion Bytes", and calling that "MB" and "GB". Early on, people never noticed, as the minor losses were attributed to "Formatting overhead", but when drives started getting into the multi-gig range, and the losses were growing exponentially (Rather than linearly as you would expect), people started to raise a stink, and the HDD manufacturers were asked what the hell they were playing at.

They explained it was nothing they hadn't been doing before, and left it there. All the programmers went "A GB is a GB is a GB, is 1024 MB, or 1,073,741,824 Bytes, and that is that", and left it there also, and the statisticians and mathematicians went apesh!t and declared "Someone has to be wrong, and as we're comfortable with SI units being in factors of base 10 numbers, real GBs lose and should be called something else, probably GiB, for Giga(Binary)Bytes". Of course, Giga(Binary)Bites is still wrong as a description, 'cause BIN 1000000000, as any programmer will tell you, is DEC 512.

Of course, the programmers have the last laugh, as they still measure everything in GB (2^30), rather than GB (10*9), as you can see in Windows 7 if you check out the filesize of any file. So, in essence, that 1.5TB drive you just bought is actually 1.36TB.
shadysam 29th July 2010, 11:16 Quote
incredible ...
32M PI calculating takes only 17min. not bad
Chocobollz 29th July 2010, 16:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anakha
(...), probably GiB, for Giga(Binary)Bytes". Of course, Giga(Binary)Bites is still wrong as a description, 'cause BIN 1000000000, as any programmer will tell you, is DEC 512. (...)

OMG is that a unit to measure how many bite(s) does an insect did? (j/k :p)

Other than that, I wholly agree :-)
kenco_uk 29th July 2010, 18:06 Quote
I spy, with my little eye, a parcel with 'around' 49GB of Ram not ending up at its intended destination :)
cgthomas 29th July 2010, 22:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenco_uk
I spy, with my little eye, a parcel with 'around' 49GB of Ram not ending up at its intended destination :)

Isn't 48 GB?
Muahahahaha I like this vicious circle

I think the parcel will say "Polished Turd", that's refering to customer obviously
maverik-sg1 24th November 2010, 18:25 Quote
On the X58 chipset, does filling all 6 ram slots affect the overclocking of the system, I ask as 6x2gb sticks are cheaper (and more overclockable) than 3x4gb sticks.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums