Tuesday, November 2nd 2021

G.SKILL Showcases DDR5-7000 CL40 Extreme Speed Memory

G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd., the world's leading manufacturer of extreme performance memory and gaming peripherals, is thrilled to announce the achievement of DDR5-7000 CL40-40-40-76 32 GB (2x16 GB) extreme speed, passing the Memtest stability test. 7000MT/s memory speed is an exciting milestone, as it was only seen under liquid nitrogen sub-zero temperature cooling not long ago in overclocking records. Accomplished with high-performance Samsung DDR5 components, this extreme speed memory is truly worthy of the G.SKILL flagship Trident Z5 family classification.

G.SKILL has been dedicated to develop the fastest possible DDR5 memory on the latest 12th Gen Intel Core desktop processors and Intel Z690 chipset motherboards. Today, G.SKILL is proud to announce the feat of reaching DDR5-7000 extreme speed, while maintaining an ultra-low CAS latency timing of CL40-40-40-76. The memory modules that reached this monumental achievement is built with high-performance Samsung DDR5 components, and has shown to be stable under Memtest. Please refer to the screenshot below.
"We are seeing amazing overclocking potential of DDR5 memory on the latest 12th Gen Intel Core desktop processors and Intel Z690 chipset motherboards," says Tequila Huang, Corporate Vice President of G.SKILL International. "DDR5-7000 is an incredible milestone for us, and we will continue to work with our industry partners to develop ever-faster DDR5 memory for PC enthusiasts and overclockers."

DDR5-6666 CL40 - Fastest on Intel XMP 3.0 List
Following in the footsteps of extreme-performance memory kits, the G.SKILL DDR5-6666 CL40 memory kit is currently the fastest memory kit on the Intel XMP 3.0 memory list. To view the list, please refer to this page.
Add your own comment

44 Comments on G.SKILL Showcases DDR5-7000 CL40 Extreme Speed Memory

#1
TheLostSwede
Ah yes, in a $720 two DIMM motherboard, so most people aren't going to be able to hit this speeds, regardless if they buy this RAM or not.
Posted on Reply
#2
Cobain
Same latency as 3500mhz CL20 DDR4 kit

Pretty bad if you ask me, nothing to see here
Posted on Reply
#3
RealKGB
"ultra-low CAS latency timings"
"CL40"
These do not belong in the same sentence
Posted on Reply
#4
Bruno Vieira
We will see soon enough if DDR5 huge latencies are this bad to benchmarcks or not
Posted on Reply
#5
InVasMani
CobainSame latency as 3500mhz CL20 DDR4 kit

Pretty bad if you ask me, nothing to see here
DDR5 is basically equivalent to DDR4 in triple channel, but also double bank groups. There are better DDR4 kits around, but this is at least to the point where DDR5 starts to look like a reasonable starting point. The weaker DDR5 kits look rather bad though.
Posted on Reply
#6
Pilgrim
Now this is more like it. Get it up to 7200Mhz and we're talking business.
CobainSame latency as 3500mhz CL20 DDR4 kit

Pretty bad if you ask me, nothing to see here
Don't forget the bandwidth increase though, it will help a lot with certain workloads. Gaming is not the only thing people do with their PC's.
Posted on Reply
#7
freeagent
People are like this game is so stressful to run, meanwhile games are very easy to run imo. There are programs that will bring your personal super computer to its knees long before any game will.
Posted on Reply
#8
phanbuey
CobainSame latency as 3500mhz CL20 DDR4 kit

Pretty bad if you ask me, nothing to see here
That’s only for first word access. As soon as you need to transfer more than that first two bytes that 7000mt/s catches up quick.
Posted on Reply
#9
TheEndIsNear
New memory always comes out when it the old memory can still compete usually. I adopted ddr4 as soon as it came out (2133) so I'm going to wait a little while.
Posted on Reply
#10
bonehead123
PilgrimGaming is not the only thing people do with their PC's.
freeagentThere are programs that will bring your personal super computer to its knees long before any game will.
Well, if you hang around here much, you certainly would not believe either of these 2 statements for very long, hahahaha :)

My own rig has NEVA, EVA, NEVA seen, heard, felt nor had any game installed upon it, and yet, I could make it crawl like a wounded, burned up pile of dogpoo, if I chose to do so, which I don't, since I need it for makin moolah, but just sayin....
Posted on Reply
#11
freeagent
bonehead123Well, if you hang around here much, you certainly would not believe either of these 2 statements for very long, hahahaha :)

My own rig has NEVA, EVA, NEVA seen, heard, felt nor had any game installed upon it, and yet, I could make it crawl like a wounded, burned up pile of dogpoo, if I chose to do so, which I don't, since I need it for makin moolah, but just sayin....
Needs moar vram :D
Posted on Reply
#12
Gmr_Chick
I know a lot of us here would consider ourselves PC enthusiasts, myself included (even though I'm poor and don't really understand the inner workings of hardware) but I just....I have to ask this question in regards to this RAM kit and others like it:

Why?

I ask this question because, from my understanding, after a certain point doesn't the memory speed not matter anymore? Like, take Ryzen. I know the "sweet spot" is 3600, and anything above that is basically not worth it, both from a price and performance point. So...why make these high speed kits if RAM speed becomes moot after a certain point?

I hope I made sense. I'm really just trying to understand things better. I mean, I have a 3200 speed kit in my rig (couldn't afford anything higher) and I'm perfectly happy with it...also I don't think I'd even be able to tell the difference between 3200 and 3600 speed lol.
Posted on Reply
#13
TheinsanegamerN
Gmr_ChickI know a lot of us here would consider ourselves PC enthusiasts, myself included (even though I'm poor and don't really understand the inner workings of hardware) but I just....I have to ask this question in regards to this RAM kit and others like it:

Why?

I ask this question because, from my understanding, after a certain point doesn't the memory speed not matter anymore? Like, take Ryzen. I know the "sweet spot" is 3600, and anything above that is basically not worth it, both from a price and performance point. So...why make these high speed kits if RAM speed becomes moot after a certain point?

I hope I made sense. I'm really just trying to understand things better. I mean, I have a 3200 speed kit in my rig (couldn't afford anything higher) and I'm perfectly happy with it...also I don't think I'd even be able to tell the difference between 3200 and 3600 speed lol.
The same thing was said about 2133 DDR3, and 800 mhz DDR2, and so on and so on.

I remember when 3200 was the sweet spot for ryzen, now its 3600. That may be the limit of DDR4's beneficial speed, but DDR5 offers so much more raw bandwidth that it is only a matter of time before everything else catches up.

And really, you should wait for the DDR4 vs DDR5 benchmarks with both alderlake and ryzen before writing DDR5 off.
Posted on Reply
#14
Ibizadr
Gmr_ChickI know a lot of us here would consider ourselves PC enthusiasts, myself included (even though I'm poor and don't really understand the inner workings of hardware) but I just....I have to ask this question in regards to this RAM kit and others like it:

Why?

I ask this question because, from my understanding, after a certain point doesn't the memory speed not matter anymore? Like, take Ryzen. I know the "sweet spot" is 3600, and anything above that is basically not worth it, both from a price and performance point. So...why make these high speed kits if RAM speed becomes moot after a certain point?

I hope I made sense. I'm really just trying to understand things better. I mean, I have a 3200 speed kit in my rig (couldn't afford anything higher) and I'm perfectly happy with it...also I don't think I'd even be able to tell the difference between 3200 and 3600 speed lol.
I think now with the 5000 processors and last agesa bios you can get it at 4000 in 1:1.
Posted on Reply
#15
freeagent
IbizadrI think now with the 5000 processors and last agesa bios you can get it at 4000 in 1:1.
Some can and some cant, its a lottery..
Posted on Reply
#16
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
btarunrwhile maintaining an ultra-low CAS latency timing of CL40
I never thought that we'd see a day where we'd be saying that a CAS or CL of 40 clocks at 7,000 MT/s would be considered "ultra low latency."

Do you know what has better CAS latency? DDR2-800 @ 4-4-4-12. Bandwidth on the other hand is a different story, but still. It's not like it's really all that low latency in the grand scheme of things.
Posted on Reply
#17
freeagent
AquinusDo you know what has better CAS latency?
I think if I am not making stuff up that the lowest latency I have ever had was with a pair of OCZ DDR400 running at something higher with around 3.5v and 2-3-3-6 on an Abit AN8 Fatality with a San Diego 3700 running at 3000MHz got me I want to say 29ns but it might have been 27ns. It was repeatable.. unlike my memory. I might have a screen cap somewhere.. but I doubt it. Thanks imageshack.

I guess there is a reason that X2 6400 Black Edition is at the top of the latency list in Aida64.. I've been chasing it for years.
Posted on Reply
#19
RandallFlagg
(CAS latency/RAM clock speed) x 2000 = latency in nanoseconds

DDR5 7000 CL40

40/7000 *2000 = 11.4ns

DDR4-3600 CL16 (good stuff)

16/3600 * 2000 = 8.9ns

DDR4-3200 CL18 (common stuff)

18/3200 * 2000 = 11.25


This is actually getting there on latency, a whole lot faster than what happened with DDR4 vs DDR3. Friday NDA lift will be an interesting day.
Posted on Reply
#20
Cobain
PilgrimNow this is more like it. Get it up to 7200Mhz and we're talking business.


Don't forget the bandwidth increase though, it will help a lot with certain workloads. Gaming is not the only thing people do with their PC's.
Wich task could possibly benefit from high latency high speed ram? I´m confused now
Posted on Reply
#21
Nihilus
APUs would benefit from the bandwidth, but not much else. The next TR with quad channel low latency memory would be more attractive if they release it in 8 and 12 core variants.
Posted on Reply
#22
RandallFlagg
CobainWich task could possibly benefit from high latency high speed ram? I´m confused now
The speed (3200, or 7000) has to do with how much data can be transferred from RAM in 1s.

The CL or CAS latency is how many clock cycles it takes to access data and make it available to be transferred.

So those are the two factors.

The speed of the RAM also affects real-world latency in nanoseconds - i.e. a DDR5-7000MT/s CL 40 actually has a lower latency than DDR4-2666 CL18.

(CAS latency/RAM clock speed) x 2000 = latency in nanoseconds

So if I compare lets say DDR4-3600 C16 which has an 8.9ns latency to ddr5-7000 C40 which has 11.4ns latency.

So, each time I request a read from RAM the DDR4 is about 2.5ns faster, but how long does it take to transmit that data?

If I'm just reading 100 bytes well, that won't take long to transmit and the latency becomes a major factor. If I'm reading a megabyte then the access time is a negligible percent of the overall time to complete the read / transmit. That last part is going to be very application specific.
Posted on Reply
#23
Cobain
RandallFlaggThe speed (3200, or 7000) has to do with how much data can be transferred from RAM in 1s.

The CL or CAS latency is how many clock cycles it takes to access data and make it available to be transferred.

So those are the two factors.

The speed of the RAM also affects real-world latency in nanoseconds - i.e. a DDR5-7000MT/s CL 40 actually has a lower latency than DDR4-2666 CL18.

(CAS latency/RAM clock speed) x 2000 = latency in nanoseconds

So if I compare lets say DDR4-3600 C16 which has an 8.9ns latency to ddr5-7000 C40 which has 11.4ns latency.

So, each time I request a read from RAM the DDR4 is about 2.5ns faster, but how long does it take to transmit that data?

If I'm just reading 100 bytes well, that won't take long to transmit and the latency becomes a major factor. If I'm reading a megabyte then the access time is a negligible percent of the overall time to complete the read / transmit. That last part is going to be very application specific.
I know for a fact that 10900k is the best CPU for Warzone (most CPU demanding game out there), because it can be paired with really low latency RAM (like 4200 C16, for example) and has 10 cores on a monolhitic die. It averages 220fps with 190ish lows. While 5950x averages 200 with 170ish lows. 5900x, 5800x, 5600x, 11900k, 11700k etc are crap in comparasion.

I have no doubts that Warzone will have worse fps when using DDR5. Latency is the most important thing for CPU bound games. My question was... who is going to buy a mainstream platform and take "advantage" of higher speed DDR5 ram on certain applications that clearly would benefit more from other platforms? That´s what I don´t understand. These are gaming CPUs above anything. Don´t tell me you are going to buy a mainstream platform for 24/7 rendering, makes no sense.

So this is about to happen, people spending loads on new fancy DDR5 just to have worse performance, because the timings are not quit there yet. And if you think about "long term", then waiting for Raptor Lake/Zen 4 would be way better option, as by that time DDR5 will for sure be faster.

People will have a lot of surprises in 2 days when the reviews drop... quick tip, look up for the lower end boards with DDR4... or just skip this gen. Because, oh boy, that 12900k with dual rank DDR4 at 3866 C14 in Gear 1, will completly obliterate any DDR5 config...
Posted on Reply
#24
cadaveca
My name is Dave
TheLostSwedeAh yes, in a $720 two DIMM motherboard, so most people aren't going to be able to hit this speeds, regardless if they buy this RAM or not.
That sucks. Does that really make me want this ram less? Nope. The fun is trying to get it stable in whatever boards you get your hands on.
Posted on Reply
#25
TheLostSwede
cadavecaThat sucks. Does that really make me want this ram less? Nope. The fun is trying to get it stable in whatever boards you get your hands on.
The thing here is that even Intel has officially said that you need a two DIMM board to get the best out of DDR5 memory and it seems like there might be a much harder to pass limit on four DIMM boards. I guess we'll find out soon enough.


www.anandtech.com/show/16959/intel-innovation-alder-lake-november-4th/4
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment