Talk:Random-access memory

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Random-access memory article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as High-importance).

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 120 days are automatically archived 2 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

Semi-protected edit request on 11 September 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Fix spelling mistake 'Ofte,n' to 'Often' in the third paragraph under the 'Addressing' heading. 167.103.80.178 (talk) 06:44, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Done Seercat3160 (talk) 08:49, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Should we update this sentence about RAM v HDDs ?

This section could be made more relevant by including how it compares with SSDs, which are now as or more common that HDDs.

Excessive use of this mechanism results in thrashing and generally hampers overall system performance, mainly because hard drives are far slower than RAM.

One source that could be useful is the speed declared in the Memory Hierarchy table https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_hierarchy

~2025-34893-89 (talk) 23:42, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

It can be a simple update because hard drives and SSDs are far slower than RAM. And sure, use that cite (0.2 ms). ~Kvng (talk) 23:32, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Recent RAM shortage

As of now, due to some companies heavily investing in RAM for their data centers and other related projects, there is a shortage of RAM, with RAM prices going up on the market due to the law of supply and demand, even during Black Friday. I feel like this is worthy of note in the article, or at least in a related article. Maddox121 ForgotHisPassword (talk) 00:05, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

I've created a draft, which is Draft:2025 RAM shortage.FSlolhehe (talk) 06:01, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2026

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the history section there is a mention of one mebibyte. Please hyperlink "mebibyte" to a definition and add "(approximately one megabyte)" to the sentence to aid comprehension. ~2026-11610-92 (talk) 11:23, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Partly done: Added a link to Byte#Multiple-byte units. Day Creature (talk) 16:08, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

It would be better to merely change it to "megabyte". Since it's not describing a strict, specific value, but a comparator, it makes way more sense to use the widely known 'megabyte', for the benefit of the average reader. It will have the same meaning. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 19:16, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

"...for the benefit of the average reader." That ship sailed long ago. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:01, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

In what regard, specifically? Do you mean the average reader for this article in its entirety is simply too dense/too beyond their understanding, or do you mean mebibyte vs megabyte itself would be beyond the average reader?

'Average reader' pretty much has to be a term of art when it comes to an encyclopedia; for example, get much beyond the 'history sections of Chlorine and I think only a working chemist would understand it all; contrarily, the entirety of the Sofia Vergara article is within reach of the average reader, I would say... cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 19:16, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Per WP:COMPUNITS; the use of 'mebi', 'kibi' etc. prefixes should not be used in Wikipedia as they are not universally recognised. If the precise size of (say) a megabyte is important, then this can put in parentheses. ~2026-79084-3 (talk) 12:48, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles