Wednesday, October 6th 2021

List of Validated DDR5 for Intel Alder Lake Leaks

If you're looking at getting your hands on some DDR5 memory for your new Alder Lake build once it launches, a leak of validated RAM has popped up on Twitter, that should give you an idea of what to expect. The list is only a couple of weeks old and it's not what we'd call a long list, as it only covers five companies, out of which three are actual DRAM manufacturers and one is a subsidiary of one of those companies, there are no real surprises here.

All the DDR5 modules tested are rated at 4800 MHz and are either 8, 16 or 32 GB in size, with all modules using 16 Gbit chips. All modules were tested with timings of 40-39-39 at 1.1 V. Kingston is the only outlier here, since they're not a DRAM manufacturer, unlike SK hynix, Samsung and Micron/Crucial. Intel is listing all the modules as non ECC, which should put an end to the claims of all DDR5 being ECC memory.
Source: @momomo_us
Add your own comment

21 Comments on List of Validated DDR5 for Intel Alder Lake Leaks

#1
lynx29
I wonder if Samsung will retain its legendary status with ram... the B-Die vocab for example, spoken with great reverence among gamers :toast:
Posted on Reply
#2
AusWolf
Ugh, those timings! I know they don't matter too much for most games and applications, but damn!

Also:
"Kingston is the only outlier here, since they're not a DRAM manufacturer." CPU-Z disagrees. :wtf:
Posted on Reply
#3
lynx29
AusWolfUgh, those timings! I know they don't matter too much for most games and applications, but damn!
yeah very interested in gaming benchmark comparisons... same PC system with the only variable change being ddr4 3600 cas 14-14-14 and ddr5 4800-5200 kits that are similar price points.

and then compare the same games in max/min/avg fps...

would be interesting to see the results... I feel like CAS40 will really hurt some games, but probably not all.

@W1zzard might be good to assign this review to one on your team. it will be interesting indeed. or at least give us some clarity on it all when ddr5 is officially launched. :toast:
Posted on Reply
#4
napata
AusWolfUgh, those timings! I know they don't matter too much for most games and applications, but damn!

Also:
"Kingston is the only outlier here, since they're not a DRAM manufacturer." CPU-Z disagrees. :wtf:
Timings do matter though. On Intel they matter a ton. There's a reason why most people stick with Gear 1 for RL.
Posted on Reply
#5
AusWolf
napataTimings do matter though. On Intel they matter a ton. There's a reason why most people stick with Gear 1 for RL.
I'll run some tests, but based on my experience so far, they don't matter (nearly) at all.
Posted on Reply
#6
TheLostSwede
AusWolfUgh, those timings! I know they don't matter too much for most games and applications, but damn!

Also:
"Kingston is the only outlier here, since they're not a DRAM manufacturer." CPU-Z disagrees. :wtf:
Well, you can put whatever you want in the SPD chip, but Kingston clearly don't make any ICs, although they do package some.
Posted on Reply
#7
Aretak
AusWolfI'll run some tests, but based on my experience so far, they don't matter (nearly) at all.
It depends on the application, but tuned RAM will give huge gains in some games and benefits almost across the board.

kingfaris.co.uk/blog/intel-ram-oc-impact

Also, Kingston manufacture RAM modules, but not ICs. Samsung, Micron(/Crucial, just a brand name for Micron) and SK Hynix all actually produce memory ICs, which are then sold to companies like Kingston, G.Skill, Corsair, etc.
Posted on Reply
#8
Vayra86
I reckon for gaming this will do nothing at all. There was never a RAM bandwidth issue for gaming just as little as there is CPU performance deficit, which always has to come first anyway.
Posted on Reply
#9
Colddecked
lynx29I wonder if Samsung will retain its legendary status with ram... the B-Die vocab for example, spoken with great reverence among gamers :toast:
I doubt it since Samsung got good at making sure their RAM doesn't have that kind of overclockability (C die).
Posted on Reply
#10
bug
Meh, who cares? Most people will just run DDR4.
And "most" is relative here, apparently you need Win11 to make sense of the hybrid core configuration.

Keep in mind this is no different than previous DDR transitions: at first they're roughly on par, but it picks up from there.
Posted on Reply
#11
Cobain
Vayra86I reckon for gaming this will do nothing at all. There was never a RAM bandwidth issue for gaming just as little as there is CPU performance deficit, which always has to come first anyway.
Wait, what?

Even had to check if I was on reddit. I mean...

Ram timings and tuning can yield up to 50fps in some games. Please let's stop this nonsense of "ram speed doesnt matter"

Compare 3200 CL16 vs 3600 CL14 and then say again that it doesn't matter. Even at 4k and rubbish 60hz it does matter in a lot of games (1% lows)
Posted on Reply
#12
bug
CobainWait, what?

Even had to check if I was on reddit. I mean...

Ram timings and tuning can yield up to 50fps in some games. Please let's stop this nonsense of "ram speed doesnt matter"

Compare 3200 CL16 vs 3600 CL14 and then say again that it doesn't matter. Even at 4k and rubbish 60hz it does matter in a lot of games (1% lows)
50fps?

www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-zen-2-memory-performance-scaling-benchmark/4.html
Posted on Reply
#13
yeeeeman
I am simply getting tired of all these stupid DDR5 latency comments...
People, wtf do you want? To stay with DDR4 indefinitely? When you do the jump to a freaking new standard you lose a bit of performance on the latency side.

If they would be stuck too long with DDR4 then you would come and whine about DDR4 being long in the tooth.
If they are moving to DDR5, you come and whine because of the latencies.
Guys, mature the FK for once...this is the way tech works, Intel engineers have taken this into consideration and they will hide that latency with caches and stuff.

Stop worrying about these things (you don't even know how to properly cook an egg and you come here giving opinions on memory latency and how Intel engineers are so stupid that their CPUs will have huge latency) and mind your business.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. Period.
Posted on Reply
#14
bug
yeeeemanI am simply getting tired of all these stupid DDR5 latency comments...
People, wtf do you want? To stay with DDR4 indefinitely? When you do the jump to a freaking new standard you lose a bit of performance on the latency side.

If they would be stuck too long with DDR4 then you would come and whine about DDR4 being long in the tooth.
If they are moving to DDR5, you come and whine because of the latencies.
Guys, mature the FK for once...this is the way tech works, Intel engineers have taken this into consideration and they will hide that latency with caches and stuff.

Stop worrying about these things (you don't even know how to properly cook an egg and you come here giving opinions on memory latency and how Intel engineers are so stupid that their CPUs will have huge latency) and mind your business.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. Period.
I think the issue here is latency expressed in clock cycles. Many people don't understand that CL40@4,000MHz is actually the same latency as CL20@2,000MHz.
Posted on Reply
#15
Vayra86
CobainWait, what?

Even had to check if I was on reddit. I mean...

Ram timings and tuning can yield up to 50fps in some games. Please let's stop this nonsense of "ram speed doesnt matter"

Compare 3200 CL16 vs 3600 CL14 and then say again that it doesn't matter. Even at 4k and rubbish 60hz it does matter in a lot of games (1% lows)
Note the fine print. Faster RAM only gives gains in situations where CPU throughput is the bottleneck. And in todays CPUs on DDR4 there realistically isn't one, especially at higher res/GPU load scenarios.
Posted on Reply
#16
TheLostSwede
yeeeemanyou don't even know how to properly cook an egg and you come here giving opinions on memory latency
I can cook an egg at least 12 different ways, thankyouverymuch.
Posted on Reply
#17
AusWolf
TheLostSwedeWell, you can put whatever you want in the SPD chip, but Kingston clearly don't make any ICs, although they do package some.
I know. I don't find your statement weird. I find CPU-Z's report weird.
yeeeemanI am simply getting tired of all these stupid DDR5 latency comments...
People, wtf do you want? To stay with DDR4 indefinitely? When you do the jump to a freaking new standard you lose a bit of performance on the latency side.

If they would be stuck too long with DDR4 then you would come and whine about DDR4 being long in the tooth.
If they are moving to DDR5, you come and whine because of the latencies.
Guys, mature the FK for once...this is the way tech works, Intel engineers have taken this into consideration and they will hide that latency with caches and stuff.

Stop worrying about these things (you don't even know how to properly cook an egg and you come here giving opinions on memory latency and how Intel engineers are so stupid that their CPUs will have huge latency) and mind your business.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. Period.
What's all that anger about? Are you OK?

I can only speak for myself here:
  1. I know about the fact that technology jumps come with increased latencies.
  2. I also know that RAM latency doesn't matter much in real life (except for a few oddball situations).
  3. I'm not gonna buy into first generation DDR5 (or first generation anything as a matter of fact) without a good incentive.
  4. I don't think DDR4 is long in the tooth.
All this doesn't change the fact that this is a tech forum where people can read about whatever the F they want, and comment on whatever the F they want. If you don't like it, don't read it. Period. ;)
Posted on Reply
#19
docnorth
bugI think the issue here is latency expressed in clock cycles. Many people don't understand that CL40@4,000MHz is actually the same latency as CL20@2,000MHz.
Add to this the embedded light form of ECC and results might be even better.
Posted on Reply
#20
dicobalt
Increased latency and sometimes worse performance on a brand new DDR standard is typical. This happened with DDR2, DDR3, and DDR4. It is going to take some time for the fabs to be able to produce the lower latency faster modules. Again I repeat, this happened with DDR2, DDR3, and DDR4. So everyone hyped for DDR5 as something to jump on the moment it comes out will be disappointed, same as DDR2, DDR3, and DDR4. Did I mention that this happened with DDR2, DDR3, and DDR4?
Posted on Reply
#21
TheinsanegamerN
yeeeemanI am simply getting tired of all these stupid DDR5 latency comments...
People, wtf do you want? To stay with DDR4 indefinitely? When you do the jump to a freaking new standard you lose a bit of performance on the latency side.

If they would be stuck too long with DDR4 then you would come and whine about DDR4 being long in the tooth.
If they are moving to DDR5, you come and whine because of the latencies.
Guys, mature the FK for once...this is the way tech works, Intel engineers have taken this into consideration and they will hide that latency with caches and stuff.

Stop worrying about these things (you don't even know how to properly cook an egg and you come here giving opinions on memory latency and how Intel engineers are so stupid that their CPUs will have huge latency) and mind your business.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. Period.
I'm tired of them too. The EXACT SAME THING was said of DDR3 and 2, and yet I dont see these people using such old systems. Give them a couple years and they'll be posting "LOL which 10000 mhz DDR5 should I buy".

If you're fine with DDR4 and 2020 tech, fine. Great. More power to you. Stop crapping on everyone excited for the biggest jump in memory performance since the introduction of dual channel RAM.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment