Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What do you guys think about ddr4?

Last response: in Memory
Share
November 29, 2012 10:00:25 AM

Just wondering what you guys thought of the upcoming ddr4, i was a bit surprised when i saw the specs of ddr4 in all honesty, performance wise the low - mid range ddr4s are equal to the mid to high end ddr3s. Power efficiency and size aside (ddr4 being both power efficient and capable of 16gb dimms, although i dont think they are dimms anymore), the speed of the ram starts from 2133mhz, however ddr3 has already reached speeds of 2400mhz without overcloking, ontop of that the latency is kept pretty low similar to ddr4. From memory when ddr3 first came out, the lowest performing ddr3 still bet the highest performing ddr2, there was no crossover.

Just wondering your thoughts on the matter.

More about : guys ddr4

a b } Memory
November 29, 2012 10:23:18 AM

Well technically 1600MHz or higher ddr3 is overclocking. I don't think it will make much of a difference for gaming. I do like the higher density sticks though.
November 29, 2012 11:20:58 PM

Thats what i thought too but isnt that just the ram controller ocing, not the actual ram itself? In the x58 platform, the ram support is 800mhz, 1066mhz, while 1333mhz and 1600mhz is oc+. 1155 platform 1333mhz and 1600mhz was just normal clocks while 1866 and 2000mhz was oc.
Related resources
a b } Memory
November 30, 2012 1:00:12 AM

azed3000 said:
Thats what i thought too but isnt that just the ram controller ocing, not the actual ram itself?

The standard memory profiles for PC DIMMs are just that, standards.

If the RAM IC manufacturer bins RAM ICs for 2400MT/s then 2400MT/s is stock speed for that IC on DIMMs or GPU cards using them... the RAM's stock speed is whatever the RAM manufacturer says it is as you said.

But the DDR3 standard itself was not originally intended to scale much beyond 1600MT/s for PC main memory applications.

One thing that may be a problem with DDR4 is signal integrity. At 1600MT/s with DDR3, many combinations of DIMMs fail to run reliably with two double-sided DIMMs per channel. Because signal integrity is not going to get any better with lower voltage DDR4 at 2000-4000MT/s, Broadwell will only support a single DIMM per channel, which also means 32GB maximum system RAM for dual-channel CPUs.
November 30, 2012 2:03:17 AM

InvalidError said:
The standard memory profiles for PC DIMMs are just that, standards.

If the RAM IC manufacturer bins RAM ICs for 2400MT/s then 2400MT/s is stock speed for that IC on DIMMs or GPU cards using them... the RAM's stock speed is whatever the RAM manufacturer says it is as you said.

But the DDR3 standard itself was not originally intended to scale much beyond 1600MT/s for PC main memory applications.

One thing that may be a problem with DDR4 is signal integrity. At 1600MT/s with DDR3, many combinations of DIMMs fail to run reliably with two double-sided DIMMs per channel. Because signal integrity is not going to get any better with lower voltage DDR4 at 2000-4000MT/s, Broadwell will only support a single DIMM per channel, which also means 32GB maximum system RAM for dual-channel CPUs.


Yea thats what i thought, i read up on a few articles that said the exact same thing, ddr3 wasnt intended to go past 1600Mhz, but it well surpassed that.

Yea ill agree with you on signal integrity, i had to jack up the voltage for my ram with stock speeds of 2000mt/s, was running voltage close to the range ddr2 was running. Im not sure how reliable ddr4 will be with such low voltage, however im pretty sure Broadwell will support 64gb of ram in a 2 channel socket since ddr4s will range from 8 to 16 gig dimms(at the moment). I actually thought ddr4 will be released once the haswell line of cpus were released.
a b } Memory
November 30, 2012 3:26:04 AM

azed3000 said:
however im pretty sure Broadwell will support 64gb of ram in a 2 channel socket since ddr4s will range from 8 to 16 gig dimms(at the moment). I actually thought ddr4 will be released once the haswell line of cpus were released.

Haswell will use DDR3.

If Broadwell only supports a single DIMM per channel as the rumors I read about say (not much sense in having dual slots at 2400+MT/s when that setup has already proven to be problematic well under 2000MT/s), you would need 32GB DIMMs to get to 64GB RAM since each channel will only have one DIMM slot. Getting to 32GB DIMMs with 16 chips would require 16Gbits DRAM dies which is a tall order considering that today's 8Gbits DRAMs are actually stacked 4Gbits dies meaning that each package counts as almost double the capacitive load on control lines.

If DDR4 boards end up supporting two DIMMs per channel, enabling it will likely require dropping the memory clock from ~2400MT/s to ~1600MT/s much like how stabilizing a marginally stable quad-DIMM setup today sometimes requires stepping down from 1600MT/s to 1333MT/s or 1066MT/s.
November 30, 2012 8:55:10 AM

InvalidError said:
Haswell will use DDR3.

If Broadwell only supports a single DIMM per channel as the rumors I read about say (not much sense in having dual slots at 2400+MT/s when that setup has already proven to be problematic well under 2000MT/s), you would need 32GB DIMMs to get to 64GB RAM since each channel will only have one DIMM slot. Getting to 32GB DIMMs with 16 chips would require 16Gbits DRAM dies which is a tall order considering that today's 8Gbits DRAMs are actually stacked 4Gbits dies meaning that each package counts as almost double the capacitive load on control lines.

If DDR4 boards end up supporting two DIMMs per channel, enabling it will likely require dropping the memory clock from ~2400MT/s to ~1600MT/s much like how stabilizing a marginally stable quad-DIMM setup today sometimes requires stepping down from 1600MT/s to 1333MT/s or 1066MT/s.


Yea i just found out the servers will only be using ddr4 for the haswell chipset. However what confuses me is the 1150 chipset is used by both haswell and broadwell, so how can broadwell have ddr4 while haswell has ddr3? 1150 motherboards support both architectures just like 1155 and 2011.

Ahh my bad i thought you said 2 sockets per channel, yea that would make more sense then, if it is indeed 32gb, i feel thats taking a step back though, since that would mean less ram, there are a few people needing as much ram as possible for their careers etc, unless they plan on making 32gb dimms like you said.
a b } Memory
November 30, 2012 12:32:28 PM

The memory controller in integrated in the CPU so the chipset is irrelevant as to what type of RAM can be used with a given CPU.

If current rumors turn out to be true, Haswell's LGA1150 will be the last mainstream socketed desktop CPU on Intel's side. Mainstream Broadwell chips will only be available as BGA which means soldered directly to the motherboard, no socket whatsoever.

As for people who need more than 32GB RAM, Intel will most likely have triple/quad-channel Broadwell variants for 48-64GB and Xeons will still be there for people who want more than that badly enough to justify the expense.
November 30, 2012 10:58:46 PM

Yea i just read that as well, wont be happy with soldered cpus that for sure. Thats true, intel will most likley satisfy the whole market just like they've always been doing currently. Quad channel single dimms, looks like a step backwards haha
a b } Memory
December 1, 2012 2:41:44 PM

azed3000 said:
Quad channel single dimms, looks like a step backwards haha

Quad-channel does provide twice as much bandwidth and might be necessary to get the most out of the GT5 (or whatever naming/numbering scheme Intel will have then) IGP Broadwell will have.

The alternative to more single-DIMM channels would be registered DIMMs but that adds 1-2 cycle command latency, 2-3W dissipation and $10 parts/manufacturing cost per module. Considering how much cost, power-efficiency and performance pressure there is in the mainstream PC market from alternative personal computing platforms, going FBDIMM or similar in such a sensitive market would be a bad idea.
!