Intel’s 12900K is Going to CRUSH the Competition!
- Thread starter Gav
- Start date
clshades
Well-known member
Imagine intel having to chase AMD pricing heh. My times have changed.
rjbarker
Well-known member
I'l be curious to see pricing of the DDR5......iirc....when DDR4 made its debut it was pretty pricey....also what kind of latency for say 4800 - 5000 Mhz...
belgolas
Well-known member
Judging by history DDR5 will start off as having bad latency and then a couple years later will have great latency.
crazyea
Well-known member
It's subjective though. Will we notice the higher latency in normal computing? Probably not. It's most likely still one of the quickest links in our pc. It may be noticeable in some benchmarks because it's written there, so some people may suffer internally because of that.
Latency isnt the only factor. If the speed goes up comparative to the latency, and the ratio is the same, then it really doesnt matter, they're the same speed. We already know they're saying initial release speed is between 3200-6400mhz based on news reports.
Current gen 3200 ram 'averages' 16 CL. If 6400 mhz ram had anything less than 32CL it'll be faster comparatively. Crucial says their initial batch of DDR5 will be 4800mhz, so we should see latencies of approximately CL24-28 I'm going to guess.
This is also not taking in to account overall bandwidth, power savings, or other factors that may contribute to 'better' ram.
Edit: Woof. Was curious if any was on the market and yeah...Teamgroup released 4800mhz CL40. Thats really terrible. Its the same as 3200 CL26 ddr4.
www.techradar.com
Current gen 3200 ram 'averages' 16 CL. If 6400 mhz ram had anything less than 32CL it'll be faster comparatively. Crucial says their initial batch of DDR5 will be 4800mhz, so we should see latencies of approximately CL24-28 I'm going to guess.
This is also not taking in to account overall bandwidth, power savings, or other factors that may contribute to 'better' ram.
Edit: Woof. Was curious if any was on the market and yeah...Teamgroup released 4800mhz CL40. Thats really terrible. Its the same as 3200 CL26 ddr4.
DDR5 RAM has officially hit the shelves, but you shouldn't buy them
Not yet anyway
www.techradar.com
Last edited:
Bond007
Well-known member
Yup…everything I have come across so far as ddr5 latencies as terrible at best.Latency isnt the only factor. If the speed goes up comparative to the latency, and the ratio is the same, then it really doesnt matter, they're the same speed. We already know they're saying initial release speed is between 3200-6400mhz based on news reports.
Current gen 3200 ram 'averages' 16 CL. If 6400 mhz ram had anything less than 32CL it'll be faster comparatively. Crucial says their initial batch of DDR5 will be 4800mhz, so we should see latencies of approximately CL24-28 I'm going to guess.
This is also not taking in to account overall bandwidth, power savings, or other factors that may contribute to 'better' ram.
Edit: Woof. Was curious if any was on the market and yeah...Teamgroup released 4800mhz CL40. Thats really terrible. Its the same as 3200 CL26 ddr4.
DDR5 RAM has officially hit the shelves, but you shouldn't buy them
Not yet anyway
belgolas
Well-known member
Yup I remember every launch of new ram generation and the initial release was always worse. I remember people saying how bad DDR2 was compared to DDR1. Same for DDR3 vs 2 along with DDR4 vs 3.
It is only natural when DDR4 is so refined with very tight timings especially with high end ram. You have DDR4 4000 with CL14. I doubt DDR5 will beat that at launch.
It is only natural when DDR4 is so refined with very tight timings especially with high end ram. You have DDR4 4000 with CL14. I doubt DDR5 will beat that at launch.
FreeKnight
Well-known member
Sheesh the clickbait titles on boot sequence kill me.
Bond007
Well-known member
Yup…I actively avoid it. Though I do still watch some HWC videos
