Any thoughts on Dell CAMM?

By: Paul A. Clayton (paaronclayton.delete@this.gmail.com), December 7, 2022 9:25 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Kevin G (kevin.delete@this.cubitdesigns.com) on December 6, 2022 12:14 pm wrote:
> Paul A. Clayton (paaronclayton.delete@this.gmail.com) on December 5, 2022 9:49 am wrote:
[snip]
>> This seems to benefit Dell in system assembly speed, adding a single component that
>> is likely more machine-insertion-friendly than clip-based SODIMM might well be faster
>> than inserting two to four SODIMMs. Thinness is, of course, marketable.
>
> I would consider assembly speed a minor benefit. The economies of scale should sway the cost savings
> in commodity SO-DIMM DDR5 vs. the savings in assembly time with a proprietary product.

It seems I was not thinking clearly about any actual benefit from faster assembly. Increasing the fraction of assembly that is automated could be helpful for high-labor-cost locations like the U.S. (and machines do not mind working at odd hours, possibly even exploiting variable pricing on electricity), but reducing the system assembly pipeline delay by perhaps a minute seems likely to not be very useful — inventory (counted from time of part arrival to time of system shipping) might be slightly smaller and fewer assembly stations might be needed but these effects seem very likely to be miniscule.

>> A single largish memory module might provide more flexibility in design than DIMMs. Two-level
>> memory (e.g., exploiting on-module flash) might not be inconceivable. Similarly, processing
>> near memory might be easier than with a DIMM. With DDR5 having a burst length of 16, this might
>> also facilitate an odd number of channels where DDR5 DIMMs have two channels per DIMM.
>
> CAMM doesn't expand out what is currently available on two DDR5 SO-DIMM slots. If anything, it
> reduces things as there is only a single SPD chip needed to drive the entire CAMM module.

A single module, however complex, should only need one source for configuration/identification information.

I am guessing, then, that the interface is DDRn-centric, that it would be difficult to attach, e.g., I/O devices through that interface (though, of course, such could still share the module, e.g., if there was some advantage to having more circuit board area or cooling above the module would be useful).
< Previous Post in Thread 
TopicPosted ByDate
Any thoughts on Dell CAMM?Paul A. Clayton2022/12/05 09:49 AM
  Any thoughts on Dell CAMM?RichardC2022/12/05 12:06 PM
    Any thoughts on Dell CAMM?Paul A. Clayton2022/12/07 09:25 AM
  Any thoughts on Dell CAMM?Kevin G2022/12/06 12:14 PM
    Any thoughts on Dell CAMM?Adrian2022/12/06 11:56 PM
    Any thoughts on Dell CAMM?Paul A. Clayton2022/12/07 09:25 AM
Reply to this Topic
Name:
Email:
Topic:
Body: No Text
How do you spell tangerine? 🍊