Read more.Quote:
The next gen memory will provide double the bandwidth and density over DDR4.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
The next gen memory will provide double the bandwidth and density over DDR4.
Can anyone on here explain why it has taken so long to create a DIMM for a memory type that is already aging in the GPU world? I am not being critical here I genuinely want to understand what has held this up for so long?
I think GDDR has a different set of requirements from DDR in terms of heat dissipation, power, timings etc.
A quick goggle found a few sites showing the differences in more detail.
The numbering isn't in step if that is what you mean. GDDR4 was short lived, so GDDR5 is similar to DDR4.Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilCycle
This looks more like GDDR5X which isn't mainstream.
I find it strange to still hear about Rambus. I always think back to when they were The Bad Guys in the Pentium 4 days.
First, you are being critical, but a fare question. I wonder the same myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilCycle
"GDDR4 was short lived". hardly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDDR4_SDRAM
From that page:Quote:
Originally Posted by ETR316
which is pretty short in a market where only the mainstream technology really gets used so once GDDR5 turned up the enthusiast boards all switched over.Quote:
but it ended up being replaced by GDDR5 within a year.
It is all kind of moot anyway, the DRAM and GDRAM standards tended to get updated at the same rate so the numbers happened to stay sort of in sync, but they aren't really related.
As I always understood it the DDR and GDDR standards are largely unrelated. GDDR is all about bandwidth whereas DDR tries to get the best bandwidth possible for a reasonable latency - since CPU code branches and therefore fetching new data at short notice is a factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilCycle
Speaking of latency, I hope that DDR5 doesn't prioritise power efficiency over performance like DDR4 did - though it certainly sounds like they are. JEDEC standard DDR4 speeds and latencies are nowhere near as good as they should be.
Edit:
As an example, on Scan.co.uk Corsair are offering two kits, both 2x8GB 2400MT/s. The DDR4 set is 14-16-16-31 and £135 whilst the DDR3 set is 11-13-13-31 for £128.50. Given that the DDR3 standard was released in 2007 and the DDR4 standard 2014 that is not exactly great progress.
Doesn't the increase in bandwidth and memory size negate some of the loss in latency?Quote:
Originally Posted by CAPTAIN_ALLCAPS
If you mean is DDR4 better overall than DDR3 then yes, but it should have been a whole lot better. DDR4 did get standardised 7 years after DDR3 after all (that's Conroe to Haswell-E), and despite the focus on reducing voltage still uses more power than LPDDR3.Quote:
Originally Posted by IotaDoesn't the increase in bandwidth and memory size negate some of the loss in latency?Quote:
Originally Posted by CAPTAIN_ALLCAPS
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAPTAIN_ALLCAPSIf you mean is DDR4 better overall than DDR3 then yes, but it should have been a whole lot better. DDR4 did get standardised 7 years after DDR3 after all (that's Conroe to Haswell-E), and despite the focus on reducing voltage still uses more power than LPDDR3.Quote:
Originally Posted by IotaDoesn't the increase in bandwidth and memory size negate some of the loss in latency?Quote:
Originally Posted by CAPTAIN_ALLCAPS
I feel the same, but I include preocessors. They are getting better just like the RAM, but unless you need the latest high performing PC, I just don't see the appeal to update all the time - I will admit though that the wow factor and bragging rights are reasons if you can afford it. My gaming machine is running a intel i5-4690K (overclocked and watercooled) and I don't have 4K screens or VR (even worse, I am using my TV at the moment due to a broken monitor). ZIt is capable of running VM's and does my photo and video conversions fine. And my other one is a quiet, far less power hungry intel i5-6260U (got a 6th gen so I can run 32GB) NUC for general use. Say I was, by some odd chance, lucky enough to win the Hexus comp 2x screens, I might update my GPU.
As a bank balance challanged person, I just don't see value for money in upgrading the rest yet for how I use a PC.
There is promise on the horizon. When AMD fell behind intel and Nvidea a bit, improvements (appeared to me anyway) to each new gen processor (and the difference between DDR3 and DDR4) seemed to slow down, now there seems to be more of a push from AMD and hopefully it is enough..........
Intel's upcoming mainstream 6 core chip is increased in cost and they are still playing silly beggers with feature locking such as ECC and threading.Quote:
Originally Posted by whatif
DDR memory is an established technology, and like any other established technology it will only move forward if something comes along that disrupts it. That could be HBM stacks on the CPU die making external DDR memory just an expandable disk cache so performance isn't so important, in the same way that cars seem to all be heading to hybrid where an electric motor makes the petrol engine performance less critical.
OTOH, if CPUs start gaining TPU capabilities for running AI nets, then demands om memory may change quite a lot.
With a 3770k as my main PC I am trying to hold out for a Ryzen or Thread Ripper v2 next year. Now I read DDR5 for 2019, arrrrgggghhhh!