Question Is DDR4 better than DDR5

[Gamefreaknet]

Considering that there are many instabilities in DDR5 RAM (such as 4 x 16GB having known issues) is DDR4 considered better. Obviously the Clocks on DDR4 can't go as high as DDR5 however in terms of stability and use of the sticks (not mixing but combos of 4x16GB or 4x32GB sticks) considering DDR4 can go to 4400mhz?

 

[Eximo]

DDR4 is not likely to reach 4400 with four sticks either, that is a pretty extreme overclock and getting 4 sticks to do it may be a challenge.

DDR5 has a type of ECC built in, so in terms of stability, pretty much always going to be more stable. Each individual stick is kind of equivalent to a DDR4 dual channel pair as well. DDR4 = 1x64 bit channel, dual channel is 128 bit. Each DDR5 stick is 2x32 bit, also for 128bit, but you get some of the benefits of dual channel operation with a single stick of DDR5.

DDR5 should use less power.

No real reason not to go for DDR5 if it is an option. But if you are really want 64GB, then 2x32GB is a good DDR5 choice. If you can justify 128GB of memory, than speed isn't that important, capacity is more important. Even then, you can probably pull off 4800 or 5200 speeds.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Considering that there are many instabilities in DDR5 RAM (such as 4 x 16GB having known issues) is DDR4 considered better.

Where did you hear this? As far as I know, DDR5 is as stable as any other RAM.

The problem with DDR4 at high speeds is nobody makes a memory controller that can work with it at an access ratio of 1:1. For instance, Ryzen processors top out at DDR4-3733. Going any higher requires a 2:1 access ratio, which increases latency to the point where you need to go beyond DDR4-4400 to get close to DDR4-3200 latency times

For most consumer use cases, RAM speed isn't really that important. Latency is much more important.