Solved

DDR3 vs. DDR4

Hey Guys!

I'm wondering if the features of DDR4 will really beat DDR3. I understand that a 3000MHz+ speed kills DDR3 RAM, but I was wondering if it's really going to make a difference. I hear that 1600MHz is the point where any faster the difference is unnoticeable... I want to know if DDR4 is gonna make that big of a difference, what changes other than clock speed it might bring, and what will it be compatible with (also when's it coming?).

Thanks!
24 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about ddr3 ddr4
  1. DDR4 eventually will beat out DDR3, but for now DDR3 is king, and probably a year after DDR4 is released.

    This happened when DDR3 was released as well.
  2. For gamers out there, I really don't think it will make any difference at all. Games aren't necessarily CPU based, although we want them to be shared with the cpu and gpu like pascal is proposed to offer in 2016. I recently built an i7 4770k beast, with 8 gb (although its a low amount) of 1600 mhz ram. This is light years faster than hp laptop I was using prior. The difference was dramatic going from ddr2 memory to ddr3. But that is simply because processes were taking tens of seconds, and are now only taking a second, on my new machine. I'm aware a comparison between a laptop and desktop is unfair, but from my gaming and browsing perspective, i doubt I'd notice enough of a difference in speed and smoothness to jump on the ddr4 bandwagon in the first few years. Simply assess your needs, in the computer technology world, you will always be behind, even when you're ahead. So if you're looking to upgrade your computer, then sure, go with ddr4, but don't simply upgrade because of ddr4. Unless you're excreting money, and in that case, I'll take some too :)
  3. And the part that kills me is the latency as far as I was aware latency(timing) effected pc responsiveness much more than speed
  4. Best answer
    If you look at the 3000 sticks that are available - in DDR4 they typically have a CL of 15, the 3000 sticks in DDR3 are typically CL12 which is much faster - current DDR4 is to JEDEC specs which use high (slower CLs), so right now DDR4 is nothing that will make a big improvement performance wise. Once the DRAM manufacturers start tightening things down on the timings, then DDR4 will catch up to DDR3 performance wise
  5. angelice said:
    And the part that kills me is the latency as far as I was aware latency(timing) effected pc responsiveness much more than speed


    It does not. You'd be very, very hard pressed to find a benchmark that manages to show otherwise while using good statistical methodologies. There are many benchmarks out there that claim to show that low latency = better, but they are all incredibly flawed.
  6. A good reading on the topic from Corsair:
    http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/download-files/manuals/dram/DDR4-White-Paper.pdf
  7. I believe that in a year, when programs are taking more advantage of ddr4 is when ddr4 will shine and will be noticeably faster than ddr3.
  8. M4DCRUSH3R said:
    I believe that in a year, when programs are taking more advantage of ddr4 is when ddr4 will shine and will be noticeably faster than ddr3.


    This doesn't really make since to me, this isn't some truly new thing this is just faster ram, It's just a matter of whether it will actually produce any noticable changes. Which I doubt that in anywhere except things like video production, Etc. That it will, I know that I myself have had Ram with Very High Speeds, 2800 vs 1600 and in normal operations including gaming there is very little to no benfit at all. This is not a change like adding more cores vs speed where you must actually rewrite programming to use it, or where using much larger volumes of ram vs lower where the program must be taught to utilized the changes.

    It seems to me that the only way that this will ever make a difference is if other components exponentially grow faster. because with current setups it seems to offer very little difference to move from slower ram to faster beyond E-Peen.

    This is just my personal opinion if my logic is flawed I would love to understand how.
  9. angelice said:
    M4DCRUSH3R said:
    I believe that in a year, when programs are taking more advantage of ddr4 is when ddr4 will shine and will be noticeably faster than ddr3.


    This doesn't really make since to me, this isn't some truly new thing this is just faster ram, It's just a matter of whether it will actually produce any noticable changes. Which I doubt that in anywhere except things like video production, Etc. That it will, I know that I myself have had Ram with Very High Speeds, 2800 vs 1600 and in normal operations including gaming there is very little to no benfit at all. This is not a change like adding more cores vs speed where you must actually rewrite programming to use it, or where using much larger volumes of ram vs lower where the program must be taught to utilized the changes.

    It seems to me that the only way that this will ever make a difference is if other components exponentially grow faster. because with current setups it seems to offer very little difference to move from slower ram to faster beyond E-Peen.

    This is just my personal opinion if my logic is flawed I would love to understand how.

    It is quite obvious that it will not make a difference in games but this is the same thing as said before that happened when ddr3 came out and it did not make a difference but as time went on it became a standard. I would not get ddr4 yet but look into it.
  10. I'm wondering if you can mix different brands or different production dates of the same ram type in DDR4. With DDR3 it could wreak havoc on your system if your RAM didn't all belong to the same kit. With DDR2 it didn't seem to matter at all. I wonder if this has been addressed in DDR4?
  11. I think the mixing of ram is kind of a crap shoot, I've had no troubles mixing ddr2 or ddr3 but others have had issues. It's likely not just about frequency speed potential at the upper ranges favoring ddr4, it's about the wider transfer bus which allows for up to twice the transfers per second than ddr3. In agreement with others, doubt it will translate to increased performance in games and most tasks. My system now (since just upgrading to ddr3) seems snappier, but I think that's the chipset and new cpu, when I added ddr3 to an older lga775 motherboard it didn't make any difference I picked up on. I was happy with my ddr2 and wouldn't have upgraded had it not been forced by hardware compatibility.

    I've got a feeling most of the 'big deal' about ddr4 is going to be for the larger server environments. Deeper sleep states, lower power consumption from 1.5 to 1.2v etc don't mean much in a desktop. Multiply that by a huge server room with hundreds or more sticks of ram in a setting where the wider transfer buses can be fully utilized and power savings stack up exponentially and it makes a huge difference.
  12. synphul said:
    I think the mixing of ram is kind of a crap shoot, I've had no troubles mixing ddr2 or ddr3 but others have had issues. It's likely not just about frequency speed potential at the upper ranges favoring ddr4, it's about the wider transfer bus which allows for up to twice the transfers per second than ddr3. In agreement with others, doubt it will translate to increased performance in games and most tasks. My system now (since just upgrading to ddr3) seems snappier, but I think that's the chipset and new cpu, when I added ddr3 to an older lga775 motherboard it didn't make any difference I picked up on. I was happy with my ddr2 and wouldn't have upgraded had it not been forced by hardware compatibility.

    I've got a feeling most of the 'big deal' about ddr4 is going to be for the larger server environments. Deeper sleep states, lower power consumption from 1.5 to 1.2v etc don't mean much in a desktop. Multiply that by a huge server room with hundreds or more sticks of ram in a setting where the wider transfer buses can be fully utilized and power savings stack up exponentially and it makes a huge difference.



    Your experience of mixing ram types in the same motherboard is very unlikely. No motherboards I am aware of support more than one type of ram. Your motherboard ram slots actually have notches that prevent you from putting the wrong RAM in you motherboard. Perhaps you were thinking of different speeds of the same type of DDR?
  13. Actually, there are such boards: http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P5G41CM_LX/specifications/
    but...
    DDR3 and DDR2 memory can not be used simultaneously
    or
    http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P5QC/specifications/
  14. Yes, in the transition from DDR2 to DDR3 there were a number of Hybrid mobos (typically socket 775) that typically came with two slots each for DDR3 or DDR2 to let people use existing DDR2 and then transition to DDR3 if so desired. As Alexoiu stated they can't be used at the same time...might see the same when Broadwell is released on the 1150 socket
  15. Sorry, I may have been mistaken or may have not been clear when I referred to mixing ram. I didn't mean mixing ddr2 with ddr3, I meant ddr 2 800 with 2 sticks of one brand, 2 sticks of another with slightly different timings - but they were both ddr2. Same thing with ddr3, the system I mixed ram on has dual channel, 4 sticks at 4gb each (16gb total) - two are ddr3 1333 and two are ddr3 1600 (when I got the 1600, it wasn't to increase performance it was just a good sale and I knew it would downclock to match the 1333).

    You're right, it would be impossible to use ddr2 or ddr3 in the wrong dimm (can't shove ddr3 into a ddr2 dimm). That would be a physical fit issue. When people typically say they have issues mixing ram, they're talking the same family whether it's ddr2, ddr3 and instead having issues with one being ddr3 1600 and another being ddr3 2100 or something along those lines.

    That's what cpufan was referring to, mixing brands and different dates of ram in the same type - issues running say a stick of kingston ram alongside a stick of corsair vengeance bought at a later date (but both being ddr2, ddr3, ddr4). I've heard of this causing people trouble and it was such an issue that it caused companies to sell ram 'kits' - the reason being the sticks were manufactured together at the same time with the same specs and of the same brand so as to overcome any compatibility issues. It was said that even if both sticks were say corsair and they both had the same timings and speed rating, just buying them a year apart off the assembly line could be enough to make them refuse to work with one another.

    My response was to that, in that in both ddr2 and ddr3 motherboards, I've never had that issue. Maybe I was just fortunate, but I've mixed geil with patriot (different timings, same speed, both ddr2) and I've mixed 4 sticks (2ea) of geil and team ram (different speed, different timings, both ddr3). Looking back to things prior to dual channel, back when I used plain ddr and even edo ram I never even thought about it. If I had 256mb of ram and came across another 256 or 128mb stick, I just shoved it in and increased my ram no issue. That was back when it was boring old ram, usually made by hynix or one of those and no fancy heatspreaders. Just plain old green pcb sticks with exposed memory chips (and if you were rocking 384mb of ram, you had a real performer).
  16. synphul said:
    Sorry, I may have been mistaken or may have not been clear when I referred to mixing ram. I didn't mean mixing ddr2 with ddr3, I meant ddr 2 800 with 2 sticks of one brand, 2 sticks of another with slightly different timings - but they were both ddr2. Same thing with ddr3, the system I mixed ram on has dual channel, 4 sticks at 4gb each (16gb total) - two are ddr3 1333 and two are ddr3 1600 (when I got the 1600, it wasn't to increase performance it was just a good sale and I knew it would downclock to match the 1333).

    You're right, it would be impossible to use ddr2 or ddr3 in the wrong dimm (can't shove ddr3 into a ddr2 dimm). That would be a physical fit issue. When people typically say they have issues mixing ram, they're talking the same family whether it's ddr2, ddr3 and instead having issues with one being ddr3 1600 and another being ddr3 2100 or something along those lines.

    That's what cpufan was referring to, mixing brands and different dates of ram in the same type - issues running say a stick of kingston ram alongside a stick of corsair vengeance bought at a later date (but both being ddr2, ddr3, ddr4). I've heard of this causing people trouble and it was such an issue that it caused companies to sell ram 'kits' - the reason being the sticks were manufactured together at the same time with the same specs and of the same brand so as to overcome any compatibility issues. It was said that even if both sticks were say corsair and they both had the same timings and speed rating, just buying them a year apart off the assembly line could be enough to make them refuse to work with one another.

    My response was to that, in that in both ddr2 and ddr3 motherboards, I've never had that issue. Maybe I was just fortunate, but I've mixed geil with patriot (different timings, same speed, both ddr2) and I've mixed 4 sticks (2ea) of geil and team ram (different speed, different timings, both ddr3). Looking back to things prior to dual channel, back when I used plain ddr and even edo ram I never even thought about it. If I had 256mb of ram and came across another 256 or 128mb stick, I just shoved it in and increased my ram no issue. That was back when it was boring old ram, usually made by hynix or one of those and no fancy heatspreaders. Just plain old green pcb sticks with exposed memory chips (and if you were rocking 384mb of ram, you had a real performer).


    I knew what you were talking about and that you were answering my question.
  17. Tradesman1 said:
    If you look at the 3000 sticks that are available - in DDR4 they typically have a CL of 15, the 3000 sticks in DDR3 are typically CL12 which is much faster - current DDR4 is to JEDEC specs which use high (slower CLs), so right now DDR4 is nothing that will make a big improvement performance wise. Once the DRAM manufacturers start tightening things down on the timings, then DDR4 will catch up to DDR3 performance wise


    Look, DDR4 LRDIMM is much faster than DDR3
  18. Christopher Gonzalez said:

    I hear that 1600MHz is the point where any faster the difference is unnoticeable.


    You are kidding right?

    No, 1.6Ghz is NOT some kind of fundamental law of physics where things stop becoming faster.

    I guarantee you at 9.0Ghz, you could tell a MONSTER difference.

    So maybe if you mean, is it worth spending $4,000 dollars for a new computer to get a bump of 200mhz in memory speed. Your answer to that is No. But to say that increased speeds won't make a difference.... you must be new here.
  19. Christopher Gonzalez said:
    Hey Guys!

    I'm wondering if the features of DDR4 will really beat DDR3. I understand that a 3000MHz+ speed kills DDR3 RAM, but I was wondering if it's really going to make a difference. I hear that 1600MHz is the point where any faster the difference is unnoticeable... I want to know if DDR4 is gonna make that big of a difference, what changes other than clock speed it might bring, and what will it be compatible with (also when's it coming?).

    Thanks!


    The real question one should ask one's self is whether they want a computer that uses the most modern components for now and the future or do they just want the cheapest components for now? DDR3 is one of the cheapest components for now. DDR4 is for now and the future - 6600K, 6700K, 5820K, 5930K, 5960X and cpus beyond.

    Budget will usually dictate what most go with. Those with limited funds will be forced to choose DDR3 and a Z97 or earlier motherboard. Those not so limited will go DDR4 with either a Z170 (for 6600K or 6700K processor) or X99 (for 5820K, 5930K or 5960X) motherboard.

    DDR4 will become the new standard.
  20. FartSandwich12 said:
    Christopher Gonzalez said:

    I hear that 1600MHz is the point where any faster the difference is unnoticeable.


    You are kidding right?

    No, 1.6Ghz is NOT some kind of fundamental law of physics where things stop becoming faster.

    I guarantee you at 9.0Ghz, you could tell a MONSTER difference.

    So maybe if you mean, is it worth spending $4,000 dollars for a new computer to get a bump of 200mhz in memory speed. Your answer to that is No. But to say that increased speeds won't make a difference.... you must be new here.


    My interpretation was that Christopher Gonzalez was referring to a humans ability to discern/perceive the difference. Sort of like how we physically can not see more than about 30-35 frames per second (i can't remember the exact number it has been a while). So sure you can crank a TV or monitor up to 60 frames per second but if all you are doing is using Internet Explorer to type out a reply to a blog, you and I are not going to be able to perceive the difference in 1600 and 9000.

    I am NOT saying that there is not a difference (and of course on more demanding tasks etc it would be more apparent i.e. video etc). All i am saying is that we can't tell the difference with the naked eye.

    4k TVs are another GREAT example;. the point where you would need to have a 4k tv is something like if you were looking at your normal 1080 TV and were sitting less than 3 feet (36 inches) away from from something like a 80-90 inch TV. The reason for this is because until you are looking at a 80-90 inch 1080 TV from 3 feet or less, you can not perceive the pixels. Again the hard numbers are out there and i can't remember them exact,
  21. Tradesman1 said:
    If you look at the 3000 sticks that are available - in DDR4 they typically have a CL of 15, the 3000 sticks in DDR3 are typically CL12 which is much faster - current DDR4 is to JEDEC specs which use high (slower CLs), so right now DDR4 is nothing that will make a big improvement performance wise. Once the DRAM manufacturers start tightening things down on the timings, then DDR4 will catch up to DDR3 performance wise


    Although, from what I understand, DDR4 not only is becoming the standard for pc RAM but is more energy efficient as well. I think anyone building a new, current system will not have much choice but to use DDR4, unless they want to delay their options with one of those new Z170 motherboards that will use the old DDR3 RAM. The end user, however, will probably notice no difference between DDR4 and DDR3 when it comes to performance.
  22. tea urchin said:
    One aspect that is not mentioned is ram usage. Comparing 3000 ram to 1600 ram, whilst running the 3000 ram you would notice you are using considerably less memory per running application-it would behave as though you had more physical memory compared to the 1600 ram.
    So you could do more with the same amount. 8 gig of 3000 ram would run a lot more than 1600 ram.
    If you want a demonstration, go into bios and turn your ram speed down to the minimum,then run your usual applications and look at memory use in task manager.


    This is not true at all
  23. John Bauer said:
    DDR4 eventually will beat out DDR3, but for now DDR3 is king, and probably a year after DDR4 is released.

    This happened when DDR3 was released as well.

    It all depends for what you using it ... if you just playing games whit
    a: dedicated GPU you whont feal it (benchmark will show difrently when you compering chep memory whit fast and expensiv but as user whit gaming ,browsing,office ... trust me you whont feal difrents betwen 40$ 8gb kit and 80$ 8gb kit actualy if you planing spend 80$ for ram better take 16bg kit ;) )
    b: if you using integred graphic which using your ram as memory more mhz will impre performance alot ... like ther video on youtube guy was benchmarking BF4 whit integred graphic and he was scaling memory from 1333mhz up to 2400 mhz the faster he was using memory more fps he was geting and difrenc was huge here if i good remember avrage fps whit BF4 on medium seting whit 133mhz was around 27 whill on 2400mhz he was geting 45 fps +
    if you using for video editing then you sudnt care for latency at all ... just buy memoray as much you can and as fast you can.

    about pure ddr3 vs ddr4 performance thay are about same in some test is ddr3 faster in others ddr4 here is link http://www.anandtech.com/show/8959/ddr4-haswell-e-scaling-review-2133-to-3200-with-gskill-corsair-adata-and-crucial/8
  24. Nothing is as simple till one remembers ALL of the evidence. Thanks for the additional info :-)


    Pinhedd said:
    angelice said:
    And the part that kills me is the latency as far as I was aware latency(timing) effected pc responsiveness much more than speed


    It does not. You'd be very, very hard pressed to find a benchmark that manages to show otherwise while using good statistical methodologies. There are many benchmarks out there that claim to show that low latency = better, but they are all incredibly flawed.
  25. Thanks for the link. Helped immensely.
    Tim


    alexoiu said:
    A good reading on the topic from Corsair:
    http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/download-files/manuals/dram/DDR4-White-Paper.pdf
  26. You're welcome.
Ask a new question

Read More

DDR3 Speed Memory