News DDR5 Will Probably Cost 50% to 60% More Than DDR4

[Admin]

MSI shares its thoughts on the initial pricing for DDR5 memory kits.

DDR5 Will Probably Cost 50% to 60% More Than DDR4 : Read more

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

There was a steep early adopter penalty for DDR4 as well, especially if you went with Socket AM4 which had a litany of compatibility issues and required higher priced memory modules to guarantee compatibility.

$188 for 16GB DDR4-3200...

 

[korekan]

no need to rush unless you are a streamer to showoff this or reviewer or too much money i dont know what to spend anymore

 

[Pytheus]

I'll have to see the benchmarks first before I can judge if it's worth the upgrade. DDR4 is still fairly new and most people buy the 3200 or 3600 speeds though faster speeds are available. Not sure how much faster one can go before you have diminishing returns on your investment.

 

[InvalidError]

Comparing DDR5-4800-40-40-40 to DDR4-3600-14-xx-xx isn't exactly fair since 4800-40 is a baseline JEDEC grade while 3600-14 is a very premium grade. 3600-18 still has significantly lower first-word latency than 4800-40 (equivalent to 4800-24) and is only slightly more expensive than now-bog-standard 3200-16.

 

[jkflipflop98]

Is this really news? New RAM tech is always more expensive than older tech. That's how it works.

DDR was more expensive than DRAM when it first arrived
DDR2 was more expensive than DDR when it first hit the scene.
Same with DDR3. And DDR4. And now DDR5.

 

[Udyr]

Is this really news? New RAM tech is always more expensive than older tech. That's how it works.

DDR was more expensive than DRAM when it first arrived
DDR2 was more expensive than DDR when it first hit the scene.
Same with DDR3. And DDR4. And now DDR5.

Writer's gotta eat.

 

[helper800]

Is this really news? New RAM tech is always more expensive than older tech. That's how it works.

DDR was more expensive than DRAM when it first arrived
DDR2 was more expensive than DDR when it first hit the scene.
Same with DDR3. And DDR4. And now DDR5.

It definitely new when its reported to be this much more while also being much slower.

 

[InvalidError]

Is this really news? New RAM tech is always more expensive than older tech. That's how it works.

Except this time around, you have the on-DIMM VRM, data and control buffer chips adding a significant chunk of cost that didn't exist on previous mainstream memory tech, which are going to greatly increase the baseline costs that cannot be optimized out of the design and mean DDR5 will remain at a relative premium until DDR4 prices rise from getting phased out of production.

Things will be different in the high-memory server space where buffer chips were already the norm and the incremental cost of on-DIMM VRM is spread across a much larger typical memory size per DIMM.

 

[Eximo]

I recall dropping $300 on DDR3 1600 3x4GB kit. Not doing that again, especially to only have it slowly kill the motherboard.

 

[lazyabum]

The of computing today is really pathetic. So basically they're forcing us to pay for our own supercomputer at more than supercomputer prices in order to have a descent computer. Nothing is getting better, just absolutely worse.

 

[helper800]

I recall dropping $300 on DDR3 1600 3x4GB kit. Not doing that again, especially to only have it slowly kill the motherboard.

What do you mean by it slowly killing the motherboard? Was is significantly overvolted to get to 1600? I remember in my 3570k build DDR3 was natively 1333 or 1600 cl9

 

[Eximo]

What do you mean by it slowly killing the motherboard? Was is significantly overvolted to get to 1600? I remember in my 3570k build DDR3 was natively 1333 or 1600 cl9

X58 and 1st gen i7-950. 1066 was the launch speed, 1333 mid range and 1600 full blast at 1.65 volts, and it needed it to work.

 

[helper800]

X58 and 1st gen i7-950. 1066 was the launch speed, 1333 mid range and 1600 full blast at 1.65 volts, and it needed it to work.

1.65 volts even for ddr3 is comical.

 

[boju]

Except this time around, you have the on-DIMM VRM, data and control buffer chips adding a significant chunk of cost that didn't exist on previous mainstream memory tech,

So motherboard's be cheaper relocating these components ?

 

[InvalidError]

So motherboard's be cheaper relocating these components ?

Between motherboards requiring more layers to maintain signal integrity at ludicrously high DDR5 and PCIe5 bus speeds, along with the rising costs of raw materials, their processing and shipping, unfortunately no.