How much power does RAM consume?

The current memories use CMOS transistors which have very low power consumption. However, that's not the actual device that stores the data. The data is actually stored in a capacitor in form of charge. The problem here is the leakage current path which causes the capacitor to discharge over time. For this reason, there's control circuitry which keeps refreshing this capacitor.

Now coming to actual question, it will depend on the size of the data you're trying to retain on the RAM. The more is the data, the more will be the refreshing required.

I guess the SSD can be used for this already. SSD contain flash memory and theoretically, if you're using a very low capacity SSD (like 2GB or 4GB), what you've suggested could be achieved as far as am thinking.

Thanks, Prototype. My idea was to synchronise the capacitor charging and discharging cycles so that the RAM, instead of deriving power from the motherboard, keeps its own assembly of power source - effectively keeping it in always 'On' mode. I'm not sure if that's viable but I believe the performance would still be a lot better than using SSDs. I didn't talk of the SSDs in first place because they're meant for longer storages and store data permanently even in absence of power.

I agree that more capacity RAM would need more power; but the question is - can we control the power source to the RAM so that it's always in the 'ON' state. Of course one way to achieve this would be to ensure constant supply from the power points - but for use in regular desktops and laptops; we'll need a power storage system.

The_Big_KThanks, Prototype. My idea was to synchronise the capacitor charging and discharging cycles so that the RAM, instead of deriving power from the motherboard, keeps its own assembly of power source - effectively keeping it in always 'On' mode. I'm not sure if that's viable but I believe the performance would still be a lot better than using SSDs. I didn't talk of the SSDs in first place because they're meant for longer storages and store data permanently even in absence of power.

I agree that more capacity RAM would need more power; but the question is - can we control the power source to the RAM so that it's always in the 'ON' state. Of course one way to achieve this would be to ensure constant supply from the power points - but for use in regular desktops and laptops; we'll need a power storage system.

I didn't understood the "synchronize the capacitor charging and discharging". Can you please elaborate?

It has to derive power from motherboard unless you're providing a dedicated power supply.

About the SSD, they are nothing but parallely connected NAND flash chips. Volatile SSD's are also available in case you're not concerned about the data you're working on to be stored. What these have is nothing but DRAM chips.

I was thinking about the instant booting operating systems and the first thought that popped up in my mind is that given the speed of RAM; what if we store the entire operating system and power it with the use of a battery so that it's alway in the 'on' and 'ready to use' state? That way, we'll have very quick access to all the important system processes and even the files.

Is the system when put on standby is doing the same thing ? Keeping processes on RAM running ... <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_mode#Sleep" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">Sleep Mode Sleep</a>

An important feature of RAM is its volatility. Now if you are thinking of using OS through RAM, there are two factors, size and refreshing as stated above. Windows alone needs 17-19 GB of space just for installation, leave aside the other applications you install. That will also result in increment of cost. Again, if you do find a source to keep it on permanently, i dont think its a feasible solution, as you have to keep it on forever. If it goes down, all data will be lost(volatility), and you will have to re-install the OS.

Well, I'm least interested in commercials. If size is a problem; we can make the RAMs run in parallel. Again, my knowledge in the hardware domain is very limited; but I'm curious to know whether this can work.

The_Big_KWell, I'm least interested in commercials. If size is a problem; we can make the RAMs run in parallel. Again, my knowledge in the hardware domain is very limited; but I'm curious to know whether this can work.

Of course it is. But its not feasible for pracical applications as the power consumption would be very high for maintaining Dram.

Actually what you are trying to deploy is same as ssd concept. Only difference is there its larger capaccity. Ssd as well have a raid of "Ram chips" using nand flash and sata communication + control related circuitary.

If you dont want sata then you have to design another hardware for communication. If you adopt sata then what you have at the end is a ssd itself.

if we need to fast up the process static RAM can be adopt but they may coaster than Dynamic ram,but in an installation of os to boot up and to run os like XP 64mb of ram space and 2GB of space is enough but it wont work with latest os like WIN7 and vista they occupies min of 7 to 10gb.to fast up your applications not only RAM size but also processor speed also considers.according to processor speed we need to select RAM FSB then ur applications runs faster compare to others.one more thing Drams are also have their own FSBS so please select according to ur processor frequency..