DDR4 Memory Prototypes Demostrated at ISSCC

Status
Not open for further replies.

garyshome

Distinguished
Aug 31, 2009
104
0
18,680
0
If the old stuff holds out, seems like I just might wait. Supposed to get a new laptop from cyberpower today for the DJ business[for a great price].
 

supall

Distinguished
Jun 17, 2011
103
0
18,680
0
So we're to expect DDR4 between 2-3 years? Please, if you're holding out for DDR4, do yourself a favor and build the machine now. You'll be building another machine 2-4 years from now anyhow, if you're reading Tom's.
 
"are you going to make the jump to DDR4 or wait until it becomes mainstream much like many users did with the switch from DDR2 to DDR3?"

Well, it's pretty much up to the price TBH... Unless they prove to be a major performance booster, I'd say most people can wait. Maybe AMD's APUs might/should speed up their adoption.

Cheers!
 

drwho1

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2010
1,272
0
19,310
15
I will wait, my PC's I just built them just about a year ago...
I know that I will still upgrade them both at some point with both more RAM and SSD's,
and that should be enough for them for another 4-5 years.

By then DDR4 will be mainstream anyway, and prices would have come down from their initial price.

The only question is: How much DDR4 RAM to buy when the time is right?
Like I mentioned, I will upgrade my ram, on my main PC it will go from 4GB (what it has now) to 16GB
(my motherboard limit) since I have always at least double the amount of RAM on each PC...

Then I can safely guess that I will "need" or get a minimum of 32GB but expandable to 64GB or 128GB.
Then again the motherboards that will be compatible with this memory will also include other features... and we need to know more about them.

Anyways, this are exciting news indeed.
 

demonhorde665

Distinguished
Jul 13, 2008
1,492
0
19,280
0
they quote a lot of figures while saying nothing about expected latency . keep in mind ddr3 was slow to adopt for several reasons

1. many peopel had jsut shelled out money of ddr2 based systems before ddr3 was annouced or available .

2. DRR3 did and still does cost drastically more than ddr 2

3. ddr3 has drastically higher latency compared to ddr 2 , if you take a lower speed ddr 3 module and match it to the same speed ddr2 the ddr 2 will perform better because it has lower latency


number 3 being the Biggest reasons budget minded enthusiast were not enthusiastic about ddr3.

we need latency figures along side the speed figures .
 

drwho1

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2010
1,272
0
19,310
15
[citation][nom]john_4[/nom][citation][nom]drwho1[/nom] Then I can safely guess that I will "need" or get a minimum of 32GB but expandable to 64GB or 128GB.Not so sure about that. Windows 8 is to have lower overhead than 7 does. Then you have all the the tools out there happy playing Farmvile or some other lame game on their phones, then you have the kiddie consoles.[/citation]


"farmville" or any other "make believe I"m a game" has not infested my computer.

As for windows 8... same as "farmville" ... or vista, windows Me...

Plus we all know that the "minimum requirements" are never the optimal specs.
 

demonhorde665

Distinguished
Jul 13, 2008
1,492
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]bawchicawawa[/nom]Fully matured APU's in 2014 + ddr4, I smell something beautiful.[/citation]


i wouldnt hold my breath , at most i expect matured apu's to provide mid end performance in gaming task at most , current apu's only throw up entry level power and the cpu power has been less than entry level really because amd is using weak cores to accomadate the gpu being higher end.

though the thought of a single chip runing xbox 720 (or what ever it will be called ) level graphics at 60 fps is a sweet idea , i just don't see it happening atleast not cheaply.

at most i'd expect xbox 360 level graphics with 4x AA running 60 fps.
 

nocteratus

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2007
362
0
18,810
5
I still have a Q6600 + 8GB DDR2, it's working great and when I'll be ready to upgrade my PC I'll see if DDR4 is available. But for now I think I can wait for DDR4. My current rig do the job and I'm low on $$$ so the next PC will have to wait a few years.
 

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0
[citation][nom]supall[/nom]So we're to expect DDR4 between 2-3 years? Please, if you're holding out for DDR4, do yourself a favor and build the machine now. You'll be building another machine 2-4 years from now anyhow, if you're reading Tom's.[/citation]

lol, i have a quad core, granted its on ddr2, but its still a quad core, it can handle damn near everything i throw at it, so yea, why build a new system now, even if its a bit over 2 years old,

by the time ddr4 hits the 16gb for 80$ range id defiantly consider a new pc possible.
 

TeraMedia

Distinguished
Jan 26, 2006
904
1
18,990
3
I think one of the problems causing AMD's CPUs and APUs to be slower than Intel's is memory bandwidth. If you look at some of the recent articles, you can see that AMD's bandwidth tends to be lower for same-class chips. Furthermore, Intel appears to be less impacted by slower RAM either because of their prefetch technology or cache size.

If AMD can take advantage of the throughput benefits of DDR4, this could help level the playing fields a bit.
 

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0
[citation][nom]demonhorde665[/nom]they quote a lot of figures while saying nothing about expected latency . keep in mind ddr3 was slow to adopt for several reasons 1. many peopel had jsut shelled out money of ddr2 based systems before ddr3 was annouced or available . 2. DRR3 did and still does cost drastically more than ddr 23. ddr3 has drastically higher latency compared to ddr 2 , if you take a lower speed ddr 3 module and match it to the same speed ddr2 the ddr 2 will perform better because it has lower latency number 3 being the Biggest reasons budget minded enthusiast were not enthusiastic about ddr3. we need latency figures along side the speed figures .[/citation]

16gb ddr2 would cost me 2-400$
16gb ddr3 would cost me 80 at most

 
G

Guest

Guest
No way in hell Haswell supports this. They will start volumne production at the end of the year of Haswell. That means DDR4 would have to have been ready by LAST year. Remember, the memory controller is in the CPU die now. I don't know what is after Haswell, but it is likely that Intel has already designed that one as well. I doubt it has been taped out yet so there is still time to put DDR4 on it since that chip is at 14nm and likely won't be taped out until some time in 2013 or late 2012. DDR4 will have to be ready to roll by the beginning of next year for Intel to put it in their 2014 products 14nm products.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Whatever benefits AMD would get from DDR4 Intel would get also so nothing changes on the bandwidth front. Not sure why someone would think this only helps AMD. Bandwidth isn't the only thing slowing down AMD CPUs by the way. In fact, it is probably last on their list of things to fix as it has the least amount of impact. Intel's SandyBridge-E has twice the bandwidth of the regular i7 2600/2700, yet the 2600/2700 beats it on several benchmarks. Only specific apps will benefit from the increased bandwidth.
 

computerfarmer

Distinguished
Aug 6, 2008
20
0
18,510
0
Why DDR4 instead of DDR5. DDR5 has been produced for years for video cards. Video cards were first to use DDR3 then computer systems followed in their footsteps. If video card companies saw no used for DDR4 then why is it being looked at it at all. I am confused a the thought process here.
 

drwho1

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2010
1,272
0
19,310
15
[citation][nom]computerfarmer[/nom]Why DDR4 instead of DDR5. DDR5 has been produced for years for video cards. Video cards were first to use DDR3 then computer systems followed in their footsteps. If video card companies saw no used for DDR4 then why is it being looked at it at all. I am confused a the thought process here.[/citation]

you made a good observation.
 

shin0bi272

Distinguished
Nov 20, 2007
1,103
0
19,310
12
Will I upgrade immediately? no. Why? A few reasons.

1. would have to upgrade my cpu and motherboard (I have a socket 1366) as well which ups the cost of getting new ram to several hundred dollars.

2. It will be very expensive to start with

and

3. Till I see any benchmarks of ddr4 systems vs ddr3 systems in game being a huge performance increase Im not shelling out the cash for new mobo/cpu/ram when I could just buy a new video card.
 

descendency

Distinguished
Jul 20, 2008
582
0
18,990
1
[citation][nom]SAPMAN2[/nom]Whatever benefits AMD would get from DDR4 Intel would get also so nothing changes on the bandwidth front. Not sure why someone would think this only helps AMD. Bandwidth isn't the only thing slowing down AMD CPUs by the way. In fact, it is probably last on their list of things to fix as it has the least amount of impact. Intel's SandyBridge-E has twice the bandwidth of the regular i7 2600/2700, yet the 2600/2700 beats it on several benchmarks. Only specific apps will benefit from the increased bandwidth.[/citation]

This is false. Not all architectures scale equally with increased memory bandwidth. There seem to be quite a few test that say Bulldozer (which has largely been a disappointment) is one said architecture.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY