Why not use SSD space as RAM?
I am new to the hardware side of things. I run a few machines which have 400GB+ SSD’s and 32GB RAM. I have been thinking about going up to 64GB RAM, however, I was thinking, since SSD’s are solid-state like RAM, can’t my extra space be used as RAM?
If I do this, will the extra RAM (from disk space) be significantly less efficient than DDR3 RAM?
Firstly ram is still significantly faster than both your regular 6gb/s SATA or even the newer pci-e based solutions. Ram’s also designed to be written and erased repeatedly, at the cost of volatility. Ram generally dosen’t wear out due to use regular use – tho, of course, it can fail like any component.
While the lifespans of SSDs have gotten much better, SSDs do wear out. They’re absolutely brilliant for non volatile use, but if you wrote and overwrote NAND (which SSDs contain) like you do ram, it would wear out.
Both are really optimised for different things, and you’re better off having enough ram (and using SSDs or spinny hard drives for paging out) than compromising on enough ram for the task.
Yes, it will be significantly less efficient than DDR3 RAM.
- SSD will wear off quickly if used as RAM (frequent writes). So it will only be effective for 2 months or so, after that it will surely die. (So instead of 10 years of life … it will live for about 10 weeks.)
- SSD is a disk device. CPUs can ONLY pre-LOAD data into its cache from RAM.If it will be on an SSD, it must be first LOADED into RAM… Accessing the disk (even very-fast SSD) is around 100 times slower than accessing RAM. See benchmarks of HDD, SSD and RAMDISK (ramdisks on DDR3 have more than 3000 MB / sec , and less than 0.1 milisecond wait time for access. So, clearly: SSD cannot compete with speed of RAM).
As grawity suggested you already have the swap/page file performing this task. Now even an SSD is much more slower compared to DDR3. SSDs can deliver up to about 654MB/s while 1333MHz DDR3 in dual-channel mode can deliver up to 21.3GB/s (21 332MB/s).