In other words: business as usual.
Historically, the fastest memory on a new standard comes at the expense of increased latency and you are better off using reasonably fast low-latency previous-gen stuff for most workloads. It has always been that way as far as I can remember so I would never buy first-gen memory or first-gen CPUs on new memory, too many things need to get tweaked on both sides before next-gen memory gets a mostly clean benchmark suite sweep for a palatable markup over premium but still cheaper previous-gen stuff.
95 ns seems a lot, previous migrations were in their 80's, in 3->4 and then they fell each iteration. Still ddr2 -3 and 3-4 were less drastic changes, so I assume they were a lot easier to make.
I don't find it wired that young product vs mature one have such differences. It's literally the first kit you could get at that speed, I am sure they relaxed the screws a lot, just for the sake of getting enough of the sticks out there. Being first on the market means more than starting with good product when all early adopters are already riding someone else product.
I am quite sure 6M from start, there will be "enthusiast kit" available with ~20% lower latency.
I might be one of the early adopters, as extra ram AND performance gains will be enough for me. I will be moving mobile workstation from 8'th intel, so it's still a lot more than I have in this frying pan.