I wonder how long it’s going to take before some vendor like G.Skill to start binning some low latency DDR5? A year?Memory latency is pretty high.
And the CPUZ score? Providing some context (also relative to other and/or competing products) would generally be greatly appreciated to these posts, so not everyone must take their magnifiers out to check the version number and other factors that may usually hinder comparisons.
Memory latency is pretty high.
I expect it to happen much sooner. But at a high premium and with low availability.I wonder how long it’s going to take before some vendor like G.Skill to start binning some low latency DDR5? A year?
33% more lantency versus competition that has IMC on different die would breach new levels of special stupidity for team already in decline since Rocket Lake memory controller.
There's a very high chance this is related to Gear settings and also interaction with other memory related settings.The rest of numbers look very near expected values ( BW, L1/L2/L3 numbers ), so only hope is that this is some sort of Gear mode4 fluke or uCode problem for memory. Or maybe the test discrepancy.
I wonder how long it’s going to take before some vendor like G.Skill to start binning some low latency DDR5? A year?
I wonder how long it’s going to take before some vendor like G.Skill to start binning some low latency DDR5? A year?
Rocket Lake already proved to have a weird interaction between Gear 2 and Command Rate, in the sense that Gear 2 halved the number of IMC commands irrespective of Command Rate, so choosing Gear 2 in combination with CR 2T would result in something that could be described as Command Rate "4T".
The latency of the memory used itself doesn't explain the very high latency test score. DDR4 3200 CL 20 (equivalent latency) on current Intel CPUs wouldn't score that high. The test results I think are around Zen 1 (1800x) results using DDR4 2400 CL16 (equivalnet to DDR4 3200 CL24).
I expect it to happen much sooner. But at a high premium and with low availability.
Fortunately for me, I've got a few years of life left in my system (w/ probably upgrade to a 5900x at by the time Zen4 is out). So, not my problem . Still, it's not looking good for ADL - curious now where this is going.Depends on when there's enough demand for performance DDR5 to make it worthwhile. i.e., not until there are is an enthusiast market for DDR5, which means not until there are enthusiast boards that can use DDR5 at higher speeds / lower latencies (and the CPUs to put in them) available in sufficient numbers.
Well, I'd be wanting DDR5 CL 32 (def under 40). Now, I haven't sussed out DDR5 in much detail yet, and with the intro of ADL, a lot of interesting data will come out, including system performance in response to frequency and latency. Maybe the effective quad-channel behaviour of two sticks of DDR5 doesn't some good towards latency hiding - don't know.DDR5 6400 CL 40 is already low latency and likely binned. JEDEC timings are 46/52/56 for 6400. For context DDR4 3200 is 20/22/24.
IIRC launch "OCed" DDR4 kits for Haswell-E reviews were DDR4 3000 CL 15. Those were more than 2x the price of lower speed 2133/2400 kits.
The latency of the memory used itself doesn't explain the very high latency test score. DDR4 3200 CL 20 (equivalent latency) on current Intel CPUs wouldn't score that high. The test results I think are around Zen 1 (1800x) results using DDR4 2400 CL16 (equivalnet to DDR4 3200 CL24).
The Alder Lake user will need ddr5 memory.Does the PC user need something more expensive than this kind of CL16 ddr4 memory?
DDR5 getting vote of no confidence from motherboard makers. Compared to Skylake launch where DDR3 supporting motherboards were rare as hen teeth, this time whole lot of mainstream and high volume retail motherboards are gonna come with DDR4 support.
ASUS Z690 Motherboard Lineup Leaks Out - ROG Maximus XIV, ROG STRIX, TUF Gaming & PRIME Series (wccftech.com)
Not really comparable since Skylake doesn't officially support the standard DDR3, only DDR3L which was rare.
OFC, and obviuosly we had DDR4 in HEDT platform before Skylake-S on desktop, so different launch. But having this deluge of motherboards supporting DDR4 is bad sign for DDR5 price/perf and very likely overall performance advantages with DDR5 are questionable at best.
I mean we are getting not only full-on budget motherboards, but casual desktop ones, like PRIME, GAMING series. Thats why it is call of no confidence in everything DDR5 from MB makers.
DDR5 getting vote of no confidence from motherboard makers. Compared to Skylake launch where DDR3 supporting motherboards were rare as hen teeth, this time whole lot of mainstream and high volume retail motherboards are gonna come with DDR4 support.
ASUS Z690 Motherboard Lineup Leaks Out - ROG Maximus XIV, ROG STRIX, TUF Gaming & PRIME Series (wccftech.com)
Looks to me like half are supporting DDR4 and half are supporting DDR5? What's the problem with that?
Reminds me of early DDR3 vs top DDR2
ADL-S supporting DDR-4 is actually great news, since it expands the number of choices available to DIYers and enthusiasts. Also, it takes away half of the ammo stash of the AMDers impatiently waiting on the sidelines to dish on ADL-S for poor memory performance while being expensive. Now, we can add RAM to the number of matching components when it comes time to compare both platforms. Hopefully, that BIG @SS golden cove core won't be bandwidth starved, looking at the fact that we're already seeing 90GB+/s numbers on the AIDA64 benchmark.