digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

This is What 128 Gigabyes of RAM Looks Like (Pics)

forums.somethingawful.com — There are 8 dual-core Opterons in there somewhere, running at 2.8GHz each (as I recall) ... but they're hard to see as they are tucked away under 128 Gigabytes of RAM.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • notorious., on 10/11/2007, -25/+864Ah jesus I misspelled Gigabytes. Goddamnit
    • cquinnd, on 10/11/2007, -8/+618Forgiven. If I had that much ram in one machine, I would probably stutter too.
    • jiggelo, on 10/11/2007, -115/+11*awaits comment on how much porn you could get*
    • birkoph, on 10/11/2007, -145/+11Mirror to pics Bitches, mirror!!
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/11/2007, -133/+18You misspelled goddammit too..
    • swordedge, on 10/11/2007, -11/+40an insane amount of ram. Where can I get something that can do that for a reasonable price?
    • Dumbledorito, on 10/11/2007, -3/+132@brkoph: Sorry dude. Not enough RAM.
    • jiggelo, on 10/11/2007, -14/+65You misspelled "..."!
    • jtdgrz, on 10/11/2007, -33/+4nvm < dumbass
    • Snowknight26, on 10/11/2007, -3/+173Just glad it doesn't say AMAZING anywhere. ;D
    • CompIsMyRx, on 10/11/2007, -13/+4whoops, the comment I was commenting on vanished. Oh well.
      The pic isn't loading, anyone find a good mirror of it?
    • pogfreak, on 10/11/2007, -26/+4BREAKING: Nerd makes lesser nerds feel inadequate on forum you have to pay for!
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/11/2007, -42/+3For everyone impulse burying me: http://www.bartleby.com/68/8/1608.html
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/11/2007, -8/+85Sometimes I just want to extend my fist through my screen and reach the faces of diggers on the other side of the internet.
    • unitedstatians, on 10/11/2007, -3/+21Oh baby Jesus!, The people not wanting to put a few of these in their desktop computer, are akin to those that said, "We will never need any more than 16 kb ram."

      Never say never!
    • dustinhoffman, on 10/11/2007, -14/+8rebopper... that was hilarious... but I had to digg you down.... you had my hopes up for a real mirror
    • l33tsauce, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1Where the hell are the pics?
    • mseneschal, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2That's OJ... I mean OK
    • telair, on 10/11/2007, -7/+219Mirror
      http://imagespar.com/view.php?img=13391703656fdd845cb12a16b59c6783
      http://imagespar.com/view.php?img=959935c46608ef1d5d5e98d94271c15b
      http://imagespar.com/view.php?img=eefc0d1eb14707db076c61da90f54068
      http://imagespar.com/view.php?img=161bd0d691cf9c13851e76e4c627c968
      http://imagespar.com/view.php?img=4e19e94550edb6e683436e092e21c08d
    • skyshock21, on 10/11/2007, -26/+7Uck. Hynix RAM? That'll be pretty ugly when that thing starts throwing multi-bit errors.

      Also, if those Dimms will accept 2 GB sticks, you could feasibly upgrade to 256 GB.
    • RJNavarrete, on 10/11/2007, -7/+15@ skyshock21
      I think you mean theoretically. Not quite sure how feasible 256GBs of RAM are.
    • brianary, on 10/11/2007, -20/+2I'll say it's misspelled. Try "Gibibytes".
    • speaker219, on 10/11/2007, -5/+18Don't know if it's just me, but the ImageSpar mirror is Verrry slow...
      MIRROR-
      http://charlie460.awardspace.biz/ram/
    • n1pz, on 10/11/2007, -15/+7@RJNavarrete

      Yeah, as far as I know 128GB is the maximum you can address in a 64bit OS. I'm sure more is possible right now, but I doubt it's a mainstream possibility.

      EDIT: (changed "use" to "address")
    • Jo9100, on 10/11/2007, -2/+166"What's funny is that in 10 years or so, we'll probably have that much ram in a single stick, and it'd be the minimum required to run Windows Galactica or whatever." - Yossarko
    • TheOneGreatX, on 10/11/2007, -2/+25imagine if one of the sticks dies. have fun figuring out which one it is!
      also, anyone have any idea how much one of these things would cost a company?
    • CompIsMyRx, on 10/11/2007, -2/+48Theoretical maximum addressable RAM in a 64-bit OS is 17,179,869,184 gigabytes. This is 2^64 bytes.
    • NikoKun, on 10/11/2007, -21/+3I wonder what you'd do with that much ram... lol... O_o? Math stuff? Calculate Pie?
    • MetalUnderShock, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2@notorious - 1.21 Jigawatts? (You're not the first to screwup something with 'Giga' in it)
    • HarryHunt, on 10/11/2007, -5/+100What a waste! Everybody knows that no one will ever use more than 640k RAM.
    • speaker219, on 10/11/2007, -12/+77@NikoKun (#7102137)
      Adobe Acrobat
    • Renton, on 10/11/2007, -10/+1@skyshock21

      I counted 32 sticks, so each one of them must be 4GB each.
    • HarryHunt, on 10/11/2007, -2/+68By the way, If I had 128 gigs of ram, I'd create a 126 gb ram disk, install all my stuff on it and well...pray that my system won't crash.
    • Wickedboss, on 10/11/2007, -3/+55It's like porn for geek...
    • Szandor, on 10/11/2007, -13/+9Is it wrong that I feel a stirring in my loins when I look at those pictures?
    • revenge7, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18@speaker

      I see PDF files so much, I thought I was the only one that ***** hate them.
    • the_snitch, on 10/11/2007, -4/+25@Harryhunt - and then i'd kick out the powercord, and laugh as your 126gb volatile ram disk is wiped, along with all your data.
    • arbiterxero, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13PDF files suck when you're stuck with Adobe's PDF reader.

      Try KPDF, works great.
    • xShad0w, on 10/11/2007, -5/+67I think this is the computer that Mozilla uses to test firefox 3, no wonder they dont care about RAM consumption
    • Lavarock, on 10/11/2007, -43/+3Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye.

      I'm working in your 128 Gigabyes.
    • crushfan, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2Okay.. That was lame.
    • florin, on 10/11/2007, -6/+15@ notorious

      You're excited over 128 GB of RAM?
      Heh, look what 128 TB of RAM looks like:

      http://www.sgi.com/products/servers/

      OK, it's just the outer box, but click around, they got more pictures on their website.
    • rpgmaker, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4"640K ought to be enough for anybody."
    • Stevethegreat, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1IF I HAD THAT MUCH RAM I WOULD SAV ALL MY pr0n TO IT




      ...ZOMG
    • cjswerve, on 10/11/2007, -8/+1@swordedge (#7101527)
      reasonable price.... heheheeheee
    • santa7, on 10/11/2007, -10/+6Hey, I think that system MIGHT just have enough to run Vista at full speed!
    • gllopc, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14If you need this much RAM, remember:

      1. Leave wool socks at home
      2. Buy memory tester
    • jimbo100, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7would it not eventually get to a theoretical maximum when the length of the circuit board wiring outweighed the time it takes for the RAM to process the data?
    • edzz, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3WTF are they rendering toy story as their watching it or somthing?
    • chingy1788, on 10/11/2007, -1/+29Looks like 128MB of RAM 20 years ago
    • latova, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7It takes 40 terabytes to get into mordor.
    • MauiMac, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16Will this run Vista?... : )
    • ungus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6This should be labeled as adult material. After looking at it, my pants got a little wet...
    • Xavier1012, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2"What's funny is that in 10 years or so, we'll probably have that much ram in a single stick, and it'd be the minimum required to run Windows Galactica or whatever."
  • ajrahim, on 10/11/2007, -30/+8I want one so I can play games on it!
    • unitedstatians, on 10/11/2007, -22/+11I want one to simulate the universe and your mom.

      steady, steady, yes goal!
    • subxero37, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2Sadly, most servers at my high school carry crappy 8 or 16 MB-equipped ATI Rage 128 chips -- I'd assume graphics is not a top priority in serverland, so I'm also assuming that most servers follow suit.
    • motheroats, on 10/11/2007, -0/+21who plays games on "high school" servers? Those computers are all busy blocking porn, file sharing, and gmail.
    • jimbo100, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4@motheroats.
      nah, not any more. The only things we can get on in school is geography at the movies (site like youtube but with only geography on it)
      and the bbc website, and half of those pages are blocked due to having words like game or violence in them. Man i hate the education system in this country
  • Claw787, on 10/11/2007, -12/+162In 5 years, it all will fit in your pocket.
    • carpespasm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+109maybe not that quick, but today's handhelds have processors and different specs that would have been pretty on par with a high end working machine in 1997
    • asspants, on 10/11/2007, -33/+4yes, it will be quicker than that. why in the hell did he get dug down?
    • gmprunner, on 10/11/2007, -4/+172More like in 20 years, that'll be a system requirement for Photoshop CS 9.
    • kenvsryu, on 10/11/2007, -2/+123No, I'm just happy to see you.
    • controltheweb, on 10/11/2007, -10/+25.12 years ...
    • Synchro, on 10/11/2007, -2/+35And be the minimum specs needed to run Duke Nukem Forever.
    • SLIPSTR3AM, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I was about to comment about seeing this post 5 years from now and how we'll shake our heads in amazement that we ran stuff like this so slow.

      Pretty box though. Me want.
      /salivate
  • dkokkos, on 10/11/2007, -3/+42any mirrors? i can see the post and all that but the picture is dead...
  • F4u5t, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3that picture is mind boggling
  • r3dk9, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2Pic is lost...
  • xerus, on 10/11/2007, -3/+122My God... 128 gigs of ram look like 5 broken images.
  • Beatmiser, on 10/11/2007, -40/+3Moore's Law has to hit a brick wall sometime, doesn't it?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law
  • TKn00b, on 10/11/2007, -3/+236from the topic replies:

    "But seriously I can't imagine what can possibly utilize that amount of ram."

    "Adobe Acrobat"
    • thekms, on 10/11/2007, -31/+9Considering the acquisition, its:

      Any Adobe product
    • Snowknight26, on 10/11/2007, -3/+18@thekms
      Whoosh
    • Lakestud290, on 10/11/2007, -20/+3After Effects CS3 would be AMAZING!!
    • Sigurdhsson, on 10/11/2007, -67/+5Considering reality, it's:
      Any Microsoft product
    • crazybrit, on 10/11/2007, -7/+91It's cute when people bash Microsoft to get diggs.
    • outsid3rNo17, on 10/11/2007, -4/+37Microsoft products are extremely RAM conscious. .NET programs uses way less RAM than those made in Java. Office 2003 works great on 128MB (!) RAM. My Visual Studio 2005 has never used more than 350MB, even after staying 1 week opened on a Pocket PC (!) project with about 10.000 lines of code, and that includes the emulator.
    • gfnw, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2Microsoft apps have to be RAM conscious, there isn't much left for them to use after Vista has ingrained itself.
    • Rooster99, on 10/11/2007, -7/+13Firefox after running non-stop for a few days?
    • merreborn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11"But seriously I can't imagine what can possibly utilize that amount of ram"

      Because the only things people ever use PCs for are WoW and word processing.

      *I* don't need 128 gig of ram, so obviously no one else does! Because, you know, nobody needs to run billion row databases, or complex physical simulations or anything.
    • merreborn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10".NET programs uses way less RAM than those made in Java. Office 2003 works great on 128MB (!) RAM."

      You might be surprised to learn that we once had office applications that ran in 128 kB of ram. The only reason it takes 1,000 times as much ram to write a letter to your mother today, is feature creep and bloat.
    • cesclaveria, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3"Firefox after running non-stop for a few days?"

      actually it takes about two weeks, that long it took firefox to crash on me this time.
  • cowsgoquack101, on 10/11/2007, -14/+2That RAM is as big as my computer!
    • unitedstatians, on 10/11/2007, -12/+3....... but can Pixar render my cawk on it?
    • CptZap, on 10/11/2007, -0/+21@unitedstatians

      Yes, and it only takes one bit... 1
  • Subterfug, on 10/11/2007, -4/+30That's a lot of RAM, but I find the 8 dual core Opterons at 2.8 GHz more interesting. That's some processing power right there!
    • skyshock21, on 10/11/2007, -12/+3Not really all that interesting when you consider most programmers know ***** all about how to utilize parallel processing. Seems like a lot of wasted CPU cycles.
    • Devrdander, on 10/11/2007, -21/+10Meh, our database server at work is a 8way system with 64gigs of ram, and its 1.5 years old. And with our recent acquisitions we have about 500gigs of data to merge into our databases, meaning the system will be upgraded soon. When your company is measured in the billions, (ours with the acquisition just topped 3), this sort of thing becomes common. I can only imagine the size of the servers that some larger corporations would use. This isn't digg worthy, its just a beefy server. Whats next, someone going to post an article on Cisco GSR hardware? ooo big router! what could you ever do with one of those??? Christ we have 1TB hard drives now...
    • gharding, on 10/11/2007, -22/+2That's lightweight. My company has servers that can handle 72 processors and a terabyte of RAM.
    • posneg, on 10/11/2007, -7/+39@gharding

      Oh yeah? Well I eat terabytes of RAM for breakfast!
    • eggo, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4@skyshock
      I hear that said all the time, but isn't CPU allocation the job of the operating system? The detriment to power that comes with too many processors has to do with jobs that can't be paralellized (encoding video for example, each frame depends on the previous one for input), but even with those drawbacks, this system is still badass.
    • revenge7, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14@posneg

      You eat terabytes for breakfast?
    • MacGyver2210, on 10/11/2007, -3/+37I just took a terabyte of my sandwich...


      Oh ***** it, just bury me.
    • windwaker, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2You might as well use Xserver.
  • tmcpheeters, on 10/11/2007, -8/+29This post would be much more meaningful if there was actually an image...
  • Kingster, on 10/11/2007, -28/+12Buried as lame, since no caches caught the pics or the dude's crappy webserver could handle the pounding.
    • crazybrit, on 10/11/2007, -7/+7Dude, it's SomethingAwful.
    • Netrilix, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17I doubt SA is hosting the pics though. I think they're linked from the guy's server.
    • MacGyver2210, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Because you didn't have to scroll through a trough of useful mirrors from your Digg companions to get to this point and post your whiny bitching?
  • Pic0, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2+1 bye
  • Lakestud290, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2ok so any real mirror offers?
  • speaker219, on 10/11/2007, -10/+5Can someone who has it in their cache upload it somewhere?
  • number5, on 10/11/2007, -6/+12damn goons
    • GrendelT, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9Do you have stairs in your house?
    • f201, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Do you have catchphrases in your catchphrase, good catchphrase?
  • ruley, on 10/11/2007, -8/+15this post is useless without pics
  • Lakestud290, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2bueler.... bueler...
  • LValentino, on 10/11/2007, -21/+0www.duggmirror.com
  • CMiYC, on 10/11/2007, -13/+5That's a mind boggling amount of ram.
  • haloevo, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4no pics. ***** deal.
  • TenebrousX, on 10/11/2007, -37/+13Firefox might run smoothly on that machine
    • sinkhead, on 10/11/2007, -3/+24Well Firefox runs fine on my machine, I don't know how many decades old yours is? I don't think it works on DOS.
  • supermanred, on 10/11/2007, -1/+75Dugg for the pseudo-future name for a future windows build (in the post's comments section) ... Windows Galactica.

    I would switch back from OS X for something called Windows Galactica.
    • JasonCox, on 10/11/2007, -4/+36Windows Galactica... So could does that mean I can start calling virueses 'cylons' and spyware 'skinjobs'?
    • suprchunk, on 10/11/2007, -16/+3@JasonCox

      What?
    • unitedstatians, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Yeah, throw the Galaxy on there and watch the fireworks show really begin!
    • digitalarcanum, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5Windows Galactica Requirements:

      1 Plane of existence for installation files..
    • revenge7, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3Prostitution is a skinjob.

      I AM SO FUNNY!
    • unitedstatians, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Hey, save the galaxy and say hi for me to your mom. That would be cool.
    • andrewpmk, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Windows Vista is enough of a RAM hog. Everyone will be using Linux by the time Windows Galatica comes out.
    • unitedstatians, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The current MacPro Intel Xeon models allow you to use 16 GB of RAM:

      http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html
  • mupet0000, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2I cant see the picture of it! Please can someone upload it somewhere else for me?
  • JasonCox, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4For the love of god, someone mirror the pictures!
    :-P
  • scabbers, on 10/11/2007, -16/+27Buried as inaccurate, title claims pics.
    • speaker219, on 10/11/2007, -9/+5The pics were there, the guy just edited his post and removed the images, and the server that hosted those pics is down.
  • crazybrit, on 10/11/2007, -16/+11lol, from the thread:

    Powercrazy posted:

    But seriously I can't imagine what can possibly utilize that amount of ram.

    Adobe Acrobat
  • kodos1, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4I'm surprised no one has said it yet (or did I miss it?) but, they should have used that computer for the server - I want to see the pics too
  • mrwoody, on 10/11/2007, -46/+4Mirror :
    http://www.homeannex.com/prodView.asp?idproduct=116519&srccode=cii_5784816&cpncode=08-26972806-2
  • Slick36, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1Sucks.

    Picture link broken.
  • missingnoh4x, on 10/11/2007, -12/+2I got me a hundred gigabytes of RAM / I never feed trolls and I don't read spam / Installed a T1 line in my house / Always at my PC / double-clickin' on my miz-ouse
    It's all about the Pentiums! / It's all about the Pentiums!
  • missingnoh4x, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1For so much RAM, that server sure went down quickly...
  • lookoutforchris, on 10/11/2007, -2/+37This guy has 17TB of RAM:

    http://www.sgi.com/global/de/newsroom/2006/0607-images-lrz-1.html

    But it maxes out at 128TB, if you have the cash ...
  • newdigger, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15From the forum aswell, lol:

    necrobobsledder: After seeing supercomputers of all shapes and sizes, clusters, and working on a $1 million rack for a while, I still (splooge) at stuff like this. I don't know why! I say it's comparable to the insatiable desire for men to look at breasts.

    hendzen: You need to get laid.



    ^^word
  • ozid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9In the thread someone mentions the standards in 1997 vs today and what he thought the future would be. Most new smartphones have better specs than that. So I decided my next smartphone has to be dual core.
    • ShaunO, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Careful. it's probably closer than you imagine. the current video ipod has a dual-core ARM. they're out there ..
    • Xenoxi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3@ShaunO

      Not dual-core ARM I believe, but one ARM processor and also a PortalPlayer processor of some sort. Correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't checked!
    • inio, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6the DS has two ARMs in it too.
    • MeltedUFO, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6i have two arms


      /ahahahahahhahahaha
    • specialK16, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Dual-arms... now that's harcore.
  • carl201167, on 10/11/2007, -0/+96Digg front page story, June 2017:

    "HILARIOUS - people in 2007 thought 128 Gigabytes of RAM was impressive
    - Title says it all"
    • titlesaysitall, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18And even still, in the future, the title will never say it all
    • blackjack75, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3In 2057 Sky-Digg will have a title saying "Back when humans owned the computers they only had 128 GB or Ram. LOLz. Rebooting.".
  • dsforsaken, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10picture links here: not the greatest tho
    http://www.turbocafe.com/play-5751-128GB_ram.html
    http://www.turbocafe.com/play-5752-128gbram!.html
  • digitallysick, on 10/11/2007, -10/+5Just enough Ram to run vista! haha, i see from the notes they run cent os on it, nice.
  • DGRP, on 10/11/2007, -7/+3Hope u got 10bux to comment in that thread.
  • Leomarth, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4Would be better if it weren't on the SA website.
  • pacokorn77, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Apparently there's so much RAM in that picture, it killed my browser...
  • ThinkGFX, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1The pictures ARE there. The guy never removed the images. The server where the pics are hosted apparently couldn't handle the traffic.
    We need a mirror.

    P.S. if you don't believe me, look at the source.
  • geoffrey, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9Here is a screen shot of task manager showing the numbers.
    http://extended64.com/photos/article_screenshots/picture577.aspx
    • strictnein, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9Wow... that must instill confidence, having your processor listed as "AMD Engineering Sample".
    • ToddFFW, on 10/11/2007, -6/+7Why would you waste such great hardware on Windows?
    • specialK16, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Didn't even know Server 2003 could handle that much RAM

      edit: oh wait, it's x64 edition.

      Didn't know 64 bit editions can handle 128GBs of ram...
    • superal1394, on 10/11/2007, -1/+464 bit can theoretically adress 32 terabytes of ram if I am not mistaken
  • DeskFlyer, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Now I can finally run FSX.
  • Devroush, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1it seems like we're hammering the SA servers. Slow as hell
    • apoc06, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3how ironic, maybe they should install more RAM...
  • dsforsaken, on 10/11/2007, -0/+64 More close up pics:

    http://www.turbocafe.com/play-5757-Ram4.html
    http://www.turbocafe.com/play-5756-Ram3.html
    http://www.turbocafe.com/play-5755-Ram2.html
    http://www.turbocafe.com/play-5754-Ram1.html
  • TacticalPenguin, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/6782/01systemsrq4.jpg

    ^^mirror pic.
  • iconnor, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11IBM calls that a mid-range server:
    http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/p/hardware/express_midrange.html
  • Pingspike, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3I'll take one from the top. one from the bottom and any other 3 please Carrol..

    /cheesy uk gameshow
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 142 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.