this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2026
848 points (98.2% liked)

Technology

81705 readers
3665 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] null@lemmy.org 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

32GB of RAM from old hardware might as well be trash compared to 32GB of RAM made today.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] null@lemmy.org 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

What good is all that (slow) RAM if you're stuck with an equally slow CPU?

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Its not an equally slow CPU. These boards support Xeon CPUs that first launched 11 years after DDR3.

The implication is that there are users needing large RAM footprints that aren't CPU bound. The hit in performance on the RAM isn't significant enough to justify spending orders of magnitude more for modern DDR5 which is in short supply.

In computing history there's precedent for this. Amiga computers had a small amount of "Fast RAM" which was extremely expensive, but the CPU could address a second bank of "Chip RAM" which was significantly slower but much much cheaper.

We could see this idea return in modern computers.