▲ 638 ▼ Memory prices climb 500% in 12 months, up to 10x the lowest ever tracked prices — 128GB of DDR5 now $3,399 (www.tomshardware.com) submitted 1 month ago* by inari@piefed.zip to c/technology@lemmy.world 124 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] DeLancre@piefed.social 32 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (24 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source hideshow 24 child comments replies: [–] pool_spray_098@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago (7 children) Yeah, I splurged on some hardware upgrades with great shame almost 2 years ago because I was preparing for the idiotic tariffs, expecting modest price increases. I did not expect a 5x. So glad that I did it. It would no longer be an option. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children) I did not ever think PC prices would go as crazy as they are now. but I thank my fucking asscheeks every day that I upgraded my CPU, GPU and RAM right before the shit hit the fan just by pure luck and coincidence. I still wish I had a better GPU, I had to settle for the one I got cause finances.. but I sure as fuck aint getting anything better for a reasonable price at this rate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] DeLancre@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) I'm rockin a 6700xt for my gpu :\ I really shouldnt complain, its a great card, it just doesnt have the horse power to chug through the bullshit lack of optimization in Unreal5 based games. especially ones that force some form of raytracing to be on with no toggle. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Jeffool@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago I kick myself every day for putting off replacing this 2017 build of mine.. My 1080 weeps. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) I built a new PC around that time for the same reason. I am kicking myself for not getting more ram. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pool_spray_098@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Same! I got 64 GB but wish I got 96 or 128 GB (it's a server). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago I stupidly only got 32GB and figured I would get more later because I spent more to get a good GPU. 32GB is feeling pretty limiting at the moment, but I'll just have to deal with it given the current prices. permalink fedilink source parent [–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago sell 64gb of it today and pay for your entire PC build, plus a new (used) car. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 1 point 1 month ago I have 64gb of DDR5 and all my family said I was being wasteful. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 month ago (12 children) Only if you actually use that much. You almost certainly don’t. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (6 children) I do. I wish I had 192GB, to be honest. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] DeLancre@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* Depends what you are going for. 7000/9000 series have way more per-thread performance than threadripper. Another quirk with single CCD 7000 chips (which I have as well) is that the infinity fabric limits effective bandwidth to the CPU cores. Even with two channels, you hit diminishing returns with higher speeds, especially if you aren't using the IGP. You can get around it overclocking the IF, but it gets complicated and its much easier to do with 9000 series CPUs. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 1 point 1 month ago (3 children) What is the need of 192GB? I often execute calculations on a cluster where I'll need some 500-1000 GB of ram. But I have 32 GB in my workstation and I never felt I needed more. Everything I need to do I can do: I can be having many browser tabs open, several IDEs, compiling and have a game engine open at the same time. Only times I fill the ram is when I stress test my software for ram usage, but that is to be expected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Machine learning/data science stuff. Local LLMs is half of it. But that aside, I found myself working with huge files that swapped like crazy on my 32GB of RAM, or were completely infeasible to work with. Janky local experiments I wouldn’t want to run on a cloud instance billed by the minute. 128GB has been a godsend, but I could completely fill 192GB and still swap some if I had it. But I found there are happy side effects to having so much disk cache, too. For instance, game modding/tinkering has sped up immensely over 32GB. So has hashing for transfers, or other scenarios where it’s useful to already have a file cached in RAM. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Fair, I guess I'd also want some ram if I did not have access to a compute cluster. But to be fair, for what I do I don't really think you can fit that much ram on a consumer motherboard. In machine learning I don't generally find memory to be the bottleneck, as long as the GPU can handle it. But sure, opening huge files can be big trouble. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago I can rent cloud stuff, but it's just not worth it for casual/experimental use. Like keeping Deepseek V4 loaded and hitting it rarely, but I want it to be in my control... it's just easier to do it locally. Or experiments I launch like 30 times before it works. I'd waste hours moving all my stuff to a cloud instance, configuring it, tinkering with the experiment to get it to launch; the thing would be idle the vast majority of the time. And yeah, I know I can containerize stuff, but some projects I can't even test without a sizable memory pool. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago* (4 children) introducing: zram toss 32 or 64gb at that and call it a day permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (3 children) YMMV. Big ZRAM absolutely tanks performance for me because it "steals" space that could be used for normal memory. But if its for squirrling away a bunch of idle processes when multitasking like crazy, yeah, it can be wonderful. Just depends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago ah fair enough, worst case scenario if they dont know what to do with that much ram (I would build a homelab) they could also have a ramdisk permalink fedilink source parent [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child) If you're able to have swap, Zswap is supposed to be better. Zram is intended for devices with no swap permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago ...This appears to be amazing advice. https://linuxblog.io/zswap-better-than-zram/ That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! permalink fedilink source parent [–] lapping6596@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago I paid $350 for a similar kit back in October. Same kit selling at the same place is 4k... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pool_spray_098@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago (7 children) Yeah, I splurged on some hardware upgrades with great shame almost 2 years ago because I was preparing for the idiotic tariffs, expecting modest price increases. I did not expect a 5x. So glad that I did it. It would no longer be an option. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children) I did not ever think PC prices would go as crazy as they are now. but I thank my fucking asscheeks every day that I upgraded my CPU, GPU and RAM right before the shit hit the fan just by pure luck and coincidence. I still wish I had a better GPU, I had to settle for the one I got cause finances.. but I sure as fuck aint getting anything better for a reasonable price at this rate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] DeLancre@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) I'm rockin a 6700xt for my gpu :\ I really shouldnt complain, its a great card, it just doesnt have the horse power to chug through the bullshit lack of optimization in Unreal5 based games. especially ones that force some form of raytracing to be on with no toggle. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Jeffool@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago I kick myself every day for putting off replacing this 2017 build of mine.. My 1080 weeps. permalink fedilink source parent [–] zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) I built a new PC around that time for the same reason. I am kicking myself for not getting more ram. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pool_spray_098@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Same! I got 64 GB but wish I got 96 or 128 GB (it's a server). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago I stupidly only got 32GB and figured I would get more later because I spent more to get a good GPU. 32GB is feeling pretty limiting at the moment, but I'll just have to deal with it given the current prices. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children) I did not ever think PC prices would go as crazy as they are now. but I thank my fucking asscheeks every day that I upgraded my CPU, GPU and RAM right before the shit hit the fan just by pure luck and coincidence. I still wish I had a better GPU, I had to settle for the one I got cause finances.. but I sure as fuck aint getting anything better for a reasonable price at this rate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] DeLancre@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) I'm rockin a 6700xt for my gpu :\ I really shouldnt complain, its a great card, it just doesnt have the horse power to chug through the bullshit lack of optimization in Unreal5 based games. especially ones that force some form of raytracing to be on with no toggle. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] DeLancre@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) I'm rockin a 6700xt for my gpu :\ I really shouldnt complain, its a great card, it just doesnt have the horse power to chug through the bullshit lack of optimization in Unreal5 based games. especially ones that force some form of raytracing to be on with no toggle. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) I'm rockin a 6700xt for my gpu :\ I really shouldnt complain, its a great card, it just doesnt have the horse power to chug through the bullshit lack of optimization in Unreal5 based games. especially ones that force some form of raytracing to be on with no toggle. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Jeffool@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago I kick myself every day for putting off replacing this 2017 build of mine.. My 1080 weeps. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) I built a new PC around that time for the same reason. I am kicking myself for not getting more ram. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pool_spray_098@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Same! I got 64 GB but wish I got 96 or 128 GB (it's a server). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago I stupidly only got 32GB and figured I would get more later because I spent more to get a good GPU. 32GB is feeling pretty limiting at the moment, but I'll just have to deal with it given the current prices. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pool_spray_098@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Same! I got 64 GB but wish I got 96 or 128 GB (it's a server). permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago I stupidly only got 32GB and figured I would get more later because I spent more to get a good GPU. 32GB is feeling pretty limiting at the moment, but I'll just have to deal with it given the current prices. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago I stupidly only got 32GB and figured I would get more later because I spent more to get a good GPU. 32GB is feeling pretty limiting at the moment, but I'll just have to deal with it given the current prices. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago sell 64gb of it today and pay for your entire PC build, plus a new (used) car. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 1 point 1 month ago I have 64gb of DDR5 and all my family said I was being wasteful. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 month ago (12 children) Only if you actually use that much. You almost certainly don’t. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (6 children) I do. I wish I had 192GB, to be honest. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] DeLancre@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* Depends what you are going for. 7000/9000 series have way more per-thread performance than threadripper. Another quirk with single CCD 7000 chips (which I have as well) is that the infinity fabric limits effective bandwidth to the CPU cores. Even with two channels, you hit diminishing returns with higher speeds, especially if you aren't using the IGP. You can get around it overclocking the IF, but it gets complicated and its much easier to do with 9000 series CPUs. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 1 point 1 month ago (3 children) What is the need of 192GB? I often execute calculations on a cluster where I'll need some 500-1000 GB of ram. But I have 32 GB in my workstation and I never felt I needed more. Everything I need to do I can do: I can be having many browser tabs open, several IDEs, compiling and have a game engine open at the same time. Only times I fill the ram is when I stress test my software for ram usage, but that is to be expected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Machine learning/data science stuff. Local LLMs is half of it. But that aside, I found myself working with huge files that swapped like crazy on my 32GB of RAM, or were completely infeasible to work with. Janky local experiments I wouldn’t want to run on a cloud instance billed by the minute. 128GB has been a godsend, but I could completely fill 192GB and still swap some if I had it. But I found there are happy side effects to having so much disk cache, too. For instance, game modding/tinkering has sped up immensely over 32GB. So has hashing for transfers, or other scenarios where it’s useful to already have a file cached in RAM. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Fair, I guess I'd also want some ram if I did not have access to a compute cluster. But to be fair, for what I do I don't really think you can fit that much ram on a consumer motherboard. In machine learning I don't generally find memory to be the bottleneck, as long as the GPU can handle it. But sure, opening huge files can be big trouble. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago I can rent cloud stuff, but it's just not worth it for casual/experimental use. Like keeping Deepseek V4 loaded and hitting it rarely, but I want it to be in my control... it's just easier to do it locally. Or experiments I launch like 30 times before it works. I'd waste hours moving all my stuff to a cloud instance, configuring it, tinkering with the experiment to get it to launch; the thing would be idle the vast majority of the time. And yeah, I know I can containerize stuff, but some projects I can't even test without a sizable memory pool. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago* (4 children) introducing: zram toss 32 or 64gb at that and call it a day permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (3 children) YMMV. Big ZRAM absolutely tanks performance for me because it "steals" space that could be used for normal memory. But if its for squirrling away a bunch of idle processes when multitasking like crazy, yeah, it can be wonderful. Just depends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago ah fair enough, worst case scenario if they dont know what to do with that much ram (I would build a homelab) they could also have a ramdisk permalink fedilink source parent [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child) If you're able to have swap, Zswap is supposed to be better. Zram is intended for devices with no swap permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago ...This appears to be amazing advice. https://linuxblog.io/zswap-better-than-zram/ That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (6 children) I do. I wish I had 192GB, to be honest. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] DeLancre@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* Depends what you are going for. 7000/9000 series have way more per-thread performance than threadripper. Another quirk with single CCD 7000 chips (which I have as well) is that the infinity fabric limits effective bandwidth to the CPU cores. Even with two channels, you hit diminishing returns with higher speeds, especially if you aren't using the IGP. You can get around it overclocking the IF, but it gets complicated and its much easier to do with 9000 series CPUs. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 1 point 1 month ago (3 children) What is the need of 192GB? I often execute calculations on a cluster where I'll need some 500-1000 GB of ram. But I have 32 GB in my workstation and I never felt I needed more. Everything I need to do I can do: I can be having many browser tabs open, several IDEs, compiling and have a game engine open at the same time. Only times I fill the ram is when I stress test my software for ram usage, but that is to be expected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Machine learning/data science stuff. Local LLMs is half of it. But that aside, I found myself working with huge files that swapped like crazy on my 32GB of RAM, or were completely infeasible to work with. Janky local experiments I wouldn’t want to run on a cloud instance billed by the minute. 128GB has been a godsend, but I could completely fill 192GB and still swap some if I had it. But I found there are happy side effects to having so much disk cache, too. For instance, game modding/tinkering has sped up immensely over 32GB. So has hashing for transfers, or other scenarios where it’s useful to already have a file cached in RAM. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Fair, I guess I'd also want some ram if I did not have access to a compute cluster. But to be fair, for what I do I don't really think you can fit that much ram on a consumer motherboard. In machine learning I don't generally find memory to be the bottleneck, as long as the GPU can handle it. But sure, opening huge files can be big trouble. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago I can rent cloud stuff, but it's just not worth it for casual/experimental use. Like keeping Deepseek V4 loaded and hitting it rarely, but I want it to be in my control... it's just easier to do it locally. Or experiments I launch like 30 times before it works. I'd waste hours moving all my stuff to a cloud instance, configuring it, tinkering with the experiment to get it to launch; the thing would be idle the vast majority of the time. And yeah, I know I can containerize stuff, but some projects I can't even test without a sizable memory pool. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] DeLancre@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* Depends what you are going for. 7000/9000 series have way more per-thread performance than threadripper. Another quirk with single CCD 7000 chips (which I have as well) is that the infinity fabric limits effective bandwidth to the CPU cores. Even with two channels, you hit diminishing returns with higher speeds, especially if you aren't using the IGP. You can get around it overclocking the IF, but it gets complicated and its much easier to do with 9000 series CPUs. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* Depends what you are going for. 7000/9000 series have way more per-thread performance than threadripper. Another quirk with single CCD 7000 chips (which I have as well) is that the infinity fabric limits effective bandwidth to the CPU cores. Even with two channels, you hit diminishing returns with higher speeds, especially if you aren't using the IGP. You can get around it overclocking the IF, but it gets complicated and its much easier to do with 9000 series CPUs. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 1 point 1 month ago (3 children) What is the need of 192GB? I often execute calculations on a cluster where I'll need some 500-1000 GB of ram. But I have 32 GB in my workstation and I never felt I needed more. Everything I need to do I can do: I can be having many browser tabs open, several IDEs, compiling and have a game engine open at the same time. Only times I fill the ram is when I stress test my software for ram usage, but that is to be expected. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Machine learning/data science stuff. Local LLMs is half of it. But that aside, I found myself working with huge files that swapped like crazy on my 32GB of RAM, or were completely infeasible to work with. Janky local experiments I wouldn’t want to run on a cloud instance billed by the minute. 128GB has been a godsend, but I could completely fill 192GB and still swap some if I had it. But I found there are happy side effects to having so much disk cache, too. For instance, game modding/tinkering has sped up immensely over 32GB. So has hashing for transfers, or other scenarios where it’s useful to already have a file cached in RAM. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Fair, I guess I'd also want some ram if I did not have access to a compute cluster. But to be fair, for what I do I don't really think you can fit that much ram on a consumer motherboard. In machine learning I don't generally find memory to be the bottleneck, as long as the GPU can handle it. But sure, opening huge files can be big trouble. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago I can rent cloud stuff, but it's just not worth it for casual/experimental use. Like keeping Deepseek V4 loaded and hitting it rarely, but I want it to be in my control... it's just easier to do it locally. Or experiments I launch like 30 times before it works. I'd waste hours moving all my stuff to a cloud instance, configuring it, tinkering with the experiment to get it to launch; the thing would be idle the vast majority of the time. And yeah, I know I can containerize stuff, but some projects I can't even test without a sizable memory pool. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Machine learning/data science stuff. Local LLMs is half of it. But that aside, I found myself working with huge files that swapped like crazy on my 32GB of RAM, or were completely infeasible to work with. Janky local experiments I wouldn’t want to run on a cloud instance billed by the minute. 128GB has been a godsend, but I could completely fill 192GB and still swap some if I had it. But I found there are happy side effects to having so much disk cache, too. For instance, game modding/tinkering has sped up immensely over 32GB. So has hashing for transfers, or other scenarios where it’s useful to already have a file cached in RAM. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Fair, I guess I'd also want some ram if I did not have access to a compute cluster. But to be fair, for what I do I don't really think you can fit that much ram on a consumer motherboard. In machine learning I don't generally find memory to be the bottleneck, as long as the GPU can handle it. But sure, opening huge files can be big trouble. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago I can rent cloud stuff, but it's just not worth it for casual/experimental use. Like keeping Deepseek V4 loaded and hitting it rarely, but I want it to be in my control... it's just easier to do it locally. Or experiments I launch like 30 times before it works. I'd waste hours moving all my stuff to a cloud instance, configuring it, tinkering with the experiment to get it to launch; the thing would be idle the vast majority of the time. And yeah, I know I can containerize stuff, but some projects I can't even test without a sizable memory pool. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ranzispa@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Fair, I guess I'd also want some ram if I did not have access to a compute cluster. But to be fair, for what I do I don't really think you can fit that much ram on a consumer motherboard. In machine learning I don't generally find memory to be the bottleneck, as long as the GPU can handle it. But sure, opening huge files can be big trouble. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago I can rent cloud stuff, but it's just not worth it for casual/experimental use. Like keeping Deepseek V4 loaded and hitting it rarely, but I want it to be in my control... it's just easier to do it locally. Or experiments I launch like 30 times before it works. I'd waste hours moving all my stuff to a cloud instance, configuring it, tinkering with the experiment to get it to launch; the thing would be idle the vast majority of the time. And yeah, I know I can containerize stuff, but some projects I can't even test without a sizable memory pool. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago I can rent cloud stuff, but it's just not worth it for casual/experimental use. Like keeping Deepseek V4 loaded and hitting it rarely, but I want it to be in my control... it's just easier to do it locally. Or experiments I launch like 30 times before it works. I'd waste hours moving all my stuff to a cloud instance, configuring it, tinkering with the experiment to get it to launch; the thing would be idle the vast majority of the time. And yeah, I know I can containerize stuff, but some projects I can't even test without a sizable memory pool. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago* (4 children) introducing: zram toss 32 or 64gb at that and call it a day permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (3 children) YMMV. Big ZRAM absolutely tanks performance for me because it "steals" space that could be used for normal memory. But if its for squirrling away a bunch of idle processes when multitasking like crazy, yeah, it can be wonderful. Just depends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago ah fair enough, worst case scenario if they dont know what to do with that much ram (I would build a homelab) they could also have a ramdisk permalink fedilink source parent [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child) If you're able to have swap, Zswap is supposed to be better. Zram is intended for devices with no swap permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago ...This appears to be amazing advice. https://linuxblog.io/zswap-better-than-zram/ That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (3 children) YMMV. Big ZRAM absolutely tanks performance for me because it "steals" space that could be used for normal memory. But if its for squirrling away a bunch of idle processes when multitasking like crazy, yeah, it can be wonderful. Just depends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago ah fair enough, worst case scenario if they dont know what to do with that much ram (I would build a homelab) they could also have a ramdisk permalink fedilink source parent [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child) If you're able to have swap, Zswap is supposed to be better. Zram is intended for devices with no swap permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago ...This appears to be amazing advice. https://linuxblog.io/zswap-better-than-zram/ That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 month ago ah fair enough, worst case scenario if they dont know what to do with that much ram (I would build a homelab) they could also have a ramdisk permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child) If you're able to have swap, Zswap is supposed to be better. Zram is intended for devices with no swap permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago ...This appears to be amazing advice. https://linuxblog.io/zswap-better-than-zram/ That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago ...This appears to be amazing advice. https://linuxblog.io/zswap-better-than-zram/ That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lapping6596@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago I paid $350 for a similar kit back in October. Same kit selling at the same place is 4k... permalink fedilink source parent