• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

DDR5-6400 RAM Benchmarked on Intel Alder Lake Platform, Shows Major Improvement Over DDR4

AleksandarK

News Editor
Staff member
Joined
Aug 19, 2017
Messages
2,189 (0.91/day)
As the industry is preparing for a shift to the new DDR standard, companies are trying to adopt the new technology and many companies are manufacturing the latest DDR5 memory modules. One of them is Shenzhen Longsys Electronics Co. Ltd, a Chinese manufacturer of memory chips, which has today demonstrated the power of DDR5 technology. Starting with this year, client platforms are expected to make a transition to the new standard, with the data center/server platform following. Using Intel's yet unreleased Alder Lake-S client platform, Longsys has been able to test its DDR5 DIMMs running at an amazing 6400 MHz speed and the company got some very interesting results.

Longsys has demoed a DDR5 module with 32 GB capacity, CAS Latency (CL) of 40 CL, operating voltage of 1.1 V, and memory modules clocked at 6400 MHz. With this being an impressive memory module, this is not the peak of DDR5. According to JEDEC specification, DDR5 will come with up to 8400 MHz speeds and capacities that are up to 128 GB per DIMM. Longsys has run some benchmarks, using an 8-core Alder Lake CPU, in AIDA64 and Ludashi. The company then proceeded to compare these results with DDR4-3200 MHz CL22 memory, which Longsys also manufactures. And the results? In AIDA64 tests, the new DDR5 module is faster anywhere from 12-36%, with the only regression seen in latency, where DDR5 is doubling it. In synthetic Ludashi Master Lu benchmark, the new DDR5 was spotted running 112% faster. Of course, these benchmarks, which you can check out here, are provided by the manufacturer, so you must take them with a grain of salt.


View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
1,525 (0.82/day)
System Name Personal Gaming Rig
Processor Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI X670E Carbon
Cooling MO-RA 3 420
Memory 32GB 6000MHz
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 ICHILL FROSTBITE ULTRA
Storage 4x 2TB Nvme
Display(s) Samsung G8 OLED
Case Silverstone FT04
If we count the latency with MHz and CL only
DDR4 2400 CL15 will be 1/2400*15 = 0.00625
This DDR5 6400 CL40 will be 1/6400*40 = 0.00625

So it is very roughly DDR4 2400 JEDEC performance
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
3,475 (1.33/day)
Processor R5 5600X
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX B550-I GAMING
Cooling Alpenföhn Black Ridge
Memory 2*16GB DDR4-2666 VLP @3800
Video Card(s) EVGA Geforce RTX 3080 XC3
Storage 1TB Samsung 970 Pro, 2TB Intel 660p
Display(s) ASUS PG279Q, Eizo EV2736W
Case Dan Cases A4-SFX
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse Corsair Ironclaw Wireless RGB
Keyboard Corsair K60
VR HMD HTC Vive
If we count the latency with MHz and CL only
DDR4 2400 CL15 will be 1/2400*15 = 0.00625
This DDR5 6400 CL40 will be 1/6400*40 = 0.00625

So it is very roughly DDR4 2400 JEDEC performance
Also DDR4 3200 CL20 is the same, this would be DDR4 3200 JEDEC spec.
 
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
2,202 (0.46/day)
System Name Ultima
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard MSI Mag B550M Mortar
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer II 240 rev4 w/ Ryzen offset mount
Memory G.SKill Ripjaws V 2x16GB DDR4 3600
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 4070 12GB Dual
Storage WD Black SN850X 2TB Gen4, Samsung 970 Evo Plus 500GB , 1TB Crucial MX500 SSD sata,
Display(s) ASUS TUF VG249Q3A 24" 1080p 165-180Hz VRR
Case DarkFlash DLM21 Mesh
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek ALC1200 Audio/Nvidia HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair RM650
Mouse Steelseries Rival 3 Wireless | Wacom Intuos CTH-480
Keyboard A4Tech B314 Keyboard
Software Windows 10 Pro
isn't latency continuously increasing ever since for each generation and we dont have issues with them?
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
454 (0.17/day)
System Name Sillicon Nightmares
Processor Intel i7 9700KF 5ghz (5.1ghz 4 core load, no avx offset), 4.7ghz ring, 1.412vcore 1.3vcio 1.264vcsa
Motherboard Asus Z390 Strix F
Cooling DEEPCOOL Gamer Storm CAPTAIN 360
Memory 2x8GB G.Skill Trident Z RGB (B-Die) 3600 14-14-14-28 1t, tRFC 220 tREFI 65535, tFAW 16, 1.545vddq
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX 1060 Strix 6GB XOC, Core: 2202-2240, Vcore: 1.075v, Mem: 9818mhz (Sillicon Lottery Jackpot)
Storage Samsung 840 EVO 1TB SSD, WD Blue 1TB, Seagate 3TB, Samsung 970 Evo Plus 512GB
Display(s) BenQ XL2430 1080p 144HZ + (2) Samsung SyncMaster 913v 1280x1024 75HZ + A Shitty TV For Movies
Case Deepcool Genome ROG Edition
Audio Device(s) Bunta Sniff Speakers From The Tip Edition With Extra Kenwoods
Power Supply Corsair AX860i/Cable Mod Cables
Mouse Logitech G602 Spilled Beer Edition
Keyboard Dell KB4021
Software Windows 10 x64
Benchmark Scores 13543 Firestrike (3dmark.com/fs/22336777) 601 points CPU-Z ST 37.4ns AIDA Memory
utter trash, i get high 50 gb/s and 36ns of latency on some trash tier 3600 cl17 bdie bin huhuhuhuhuhu
 
Joined
Mar 9, 2017
Messages
27 (0.01/day)
Processor 9900k HT OFF 5.0/4.6 1.21v
Motherboard XI Gene
Cooling NH-U12A - direct die
Memory 4100 17-17-17-36 1T 1.35v / 3800 14-14-14-32 1T 1.55v
Video Card(s) 1080 ti evga black
Power Supply Seasonic 1000W
utter trash, i get high 50 gb/s and 36ns of latency on some trash tier 3600 cl17 bdie bin huhuhuhuhuhu
Latency is trash , sure, but that 35 gb/s bandwith is single channel. I'm positive that in few years time DDR5 will break 100+ gb/s in dual channel mode.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
1,632 (1.12/day)
I think best to wait and see if we will see any benefits over time. The JEDEC standards are usually very low, and we should see better timings from overclocked versions.
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
3 (0.00/day)
Is there a mistake in the article?
Elsewhere the same news is reported with 4800Mhz


4800, with those latency and bandwidth is very different than 6400. ;)
 
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
5,363 (1.04/day)
Location
Gougeland (NZ)
System Name Cumquat 2021
Processor AMD RyZen R7 7800X3D
Motherboard Asus Strix X670E - E Gaming WIFI
Cooling Deep Cool LT720 + CM MasterGel Pro TP + Lian Li Uni Fan V2
Memory 32GB GSkill Trident Z5 Neo 6000
Video Card(s) Sapphire Nitro+ OC RX6800 16GB DDR6 2270Cclk / 2010Mclk
Storage 1x Adata SX8200PRO NVMe 1TB gen3 x4 1X Samsung 980 Pro NVMe Gen 4 x4 1TB, 12TB of HDD Storage
Display(s) AOC 24G2 IPS 144Hz FreeSync Premium 1920x1080p
Case Lian Li O11D XL ROG edition
Audio Device(s) RX6800 via HDMI + Pioneer VSX-531 amp Technics 100W 5.1 Speaker set
Power Supply EVGA 1000W G5 Gold
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core Wired
Keyboard Logitech G915 Wireless
Software Windows 11 X64 PRO (build 23H2)
Benchmark Scores it sucks even more less now ;)
Is there a mistake in the article?
Elsewhere the same news is reported with 4800Mhz


4800, with those latency and bandwidth is very different than 6400. ;)

That also looks like it's running in single channel mode :kookoo: or am I missing something shouldn't the second stick be in Controller 1 Channel 0 I think someone at Intel needs a :slap:
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
302 (0.08/day)
Location
Michigan, USA
Processor AMD 1700X
Motherboard Crosshair VI Hero
Memory F4-3200C14D-16GFX
Video Card(s) GTX 1070
Storage 960 Pro
Display(s) PG279Q
Case HAF X
Power Supply Silencer MK III 850
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard Logitech G105
Software Windows 10
I must have reached knowledge obsolescence. I have no idea what I am looking at. For what it is, it looks like junk. I don't know how anyone can tell what channel mode this is in. If single, why? What would be the intent? To show you can run in single channel mode with this new DDR5 at crippled latency and 10 year old speeds? I have been sitting on an old skylake 6700k and DDR4 for about 5 years now waiting for that next upgrade and it outperforms whatever is shown here by a mile.
 

Attachments

  • lowly3000.PNG
    lowly3000.PNG
    123.3 KB · Views: 209
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
3,475 (1.33/day)
Processor R5 5600X
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX B550-I GAMING
Cooling Alpenföhn Black Ridge
Memory 2*16GB DDR4-2666 VLP @3800
Video Card(s) EVGA Geforce RTX 3080 XC3
Storage 1TB Samsung 970 Pro, 2TB Intel 660p
Display(s) ASUS PG279Q, Eizo EV2736W
Case Dan Cases A4-SFX
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse Corsair Ironclaw Wireless RGB
Keyboard Corsair K60
VR HMD HTC Vive
is it Quad channel, 2 per controller.
DDR5 has 2 channels per DIMM.

DDR4 has 72-bit channel: 64-bit data + 8-bit ECC.
DDR5 has two 40-bit channels: 32-bit data + 8-bit ECC each.
 
D

Deleted member 205776

Guest
I'm good with this for the next few years, thanks.

 
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
553 (0.23/day)
Location
Here
Processor Intel i9 11900K
Motherboard Z590 MSI ACE
Cooling Corsair H80i v2
Memory Ballistix Elite 4000 32GB 18-19-19-39
Video Card(s) EVGA 3090 XC3 ULTRA HYBRID
Storage 2x Seagate Barracuda 120 SSD 1 TB, XPG SX8200 PRO 1 TB
Display(s) Acer Predator Z321QU
Case Fractal Design Meshify C
Power Supply Asus ROG Strix 1000W
"Major improvement"....Am i missing something? :confused:

cach.jpg
 

Toothless

Tech, Games, and TPU!
Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Messages
9,223 (2.52/day)
Location
Washington, USA
System Name Veral
Processor 5950x
Motherboard MSI MEG x570 Ace
Cooling Corsair H150i Elite
Memory 4x16GB G.Skill TridentZ
Video Card(s) Powercolor 7900XTX Red Devil
Storage Crucial P5 Plus 1TB, Samsung 980 1TB, Teamgroup MP34 4TB
Display(s) Acer Nitro XZ342CK Pbmiiphx + 2x AOC 2425W
Case Fractal Design Meshify Lite 2
Audio Device(s) Blue Yeti + SteelSeries Arctis 5 / Samsung HW-T550
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Mouse Corsair Nightsword
Keyboard Corsair K55
VR HMD HP Reverb G2
Software Windows 11 Professional
Benchmark Scores PEBCAK
Everyone being all like "hurdedur I'm faster" while benching dual and quad channels against a single stick.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
25,559 (6.52/day)
is that latency going to be ok for gaming though???
It has the potential for being a problem for gaming.
"proceeded to compare these results with DDR4-3200 MHz CL22"

what kind of garbage DDR4 comes with such a crappy CL for that speed? CL16 is pretty much the norm for that speed on good memory kits.
Agreed, those are crap specs. At CL22 DDR4 should be running at 4000mhz nominal.
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
1,669 (0.43/day)
If we count the latency with MHz and CL only
DDR4 2400 CL15 will be 1/2400*15 = 0.00625
This DDR5 6400 CL40 will be 1/6400*40 = 0.00625

So it is very roughly DDR4 2400 JEDEC performance
Unless DDR5 does some magic behind the scenes i dont see it being any faster than DDR4. Atleast in terms of latency:

4800 Mhz @ CL40 is 16,66ns

3200 Mhz CL16 DDR4 is 10,00ns.
3800 CL14 is 7,36ns.
4800 CL18 is 7,91ns.

So intial DDR5 latency will be double that of DDR4. Bit less when compared to standard 3200 CL16 kits.
I also calculated numbers based on speeds we should be getting in the coming years. Assuming the latency does not rise even more:

6400 Mhz CL40 is 12,50ns.
8400 Mhz CL40 is 9,52ns.

So only when DDR5 crosses 8000 Mhz at CL40 does it achieve latency parity with 3200 CL16 but it will still lose to faster DDR4 kits.
So here's hoping that they are no just hoping to brute force performance with raw bandwidth and there are some other things DDR5 does to achieve better latency than a simple Mhz/CL calculation would suggest.

isn't latency continuously increasing ever since for each generation and we dont have issues with them?
That is bevcause thus far the speed increase has been able to offset latency increase. DDR5 will need 8000Mhz to be able to do that. And those speeds are still years away.
Latency is trash , sure, but that 35 gb/s bandwith is single channel. I'm positive that in few years time DDR5 will break 100+ gb/s in dual channel mode.
This was dual channel. As inheritly it would be impossible to run DDR5 on single channel even with just one stick seeing as all DDR5 will have dual channel from a single stick.
is it Quad channel, 2 per controller.
That's not how memory channels work. You do not get Quad channel simply by using more sticks. Its still dual channel as determined by the motherboard and CPU.
That also looks like it's running in single channel mode :kookoo: or am I missing something shouldn't the second stick be in Controller 1 Channel 0 I think someone at Intel needs a :slap:
DDR5 is unable to run in single channel (unless there is a BIOS option for force disable half the stick) as a single stick will appear to the system as dual channel with all the performance benefits.

But yeah those numbers are atrocious. Dual channel ~30GB/s with 112ns latency. I already get nearly 60GB/s at half that latency on DDR4. As anyone who has experienced DDR generation change - skip the 1st gen. It's not worth it. Only 4800Mhz. DDR4 can already achieve this (with much lower latency). Double or even triple the DDR4 latency and miniscule voltage savings (1.1v vs 1.35v etc).

DDR5 needs to achieve 8000Mhz (at CL40 or lower) to match DDR4-3200 CL16 latency. Preferrably we need something like DDR5-8000 at ~CL30 to establish a clear lead. And you can bet those kits are years away. Not before 2023 or even 2024. Not to mention the early adopter price. I feel like Alder Lake will be great for portable devices (in terms of battery life) with it's big.LITTLE design and lower voltage DDR5 but will offer no benefits on desktop.

Even if they manage to double the bandwidth shown in these pathetic results by Alder Lake's launch it will still match, not exceed DDR4. With triple the system latency to boot. But im sure they will advertise "great savings" in terms of power. A few watts at best considering how little power RAM uses. I feel like DDR5 is aimed at servers first are foremost (low voltage, big capacity etc) and regular desktop users and enthusiasts get shafted once again in the first years.
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
681 (0.10/day)
Unless DDR5 does some magic behind the scenes i dont see it being any faster than DDR4. Atleast in terms of latency:

4800 Mhz @ CL40 is 16,66ns

3200 Mhz CL16 DDR4 is 10,00ns.
3800 CL14 is 7,36ns.
4800 CL18 is 7,91ns.

So intial DDR5 latency will be double that of DDR4. Bit less when compared to standard 3200 CL16 kits.
I also calculated numbers based on speeds we should be getting in the coming years. Assuming the latency does not rise even more:

6400 Mhz CL40 is 12,50ns.
8400 Mhz CL40 is 9,52ns.

So only when DDR5 crosses 8000 Mhz at CL40 does it achieve latency parity with 3200 CL16 but it will still lose to faster DDR4 kits.
So here's hoping that they are no just hoping to brute force performance with raw bandwidth and there are some other things DDR5 does to achieve better latency than a simple Mhz/CL calculation would suggest.


That is bevcause thus far the speed increase has been able to offset latency increase. DDR5 will need 8000Mhz to be able to do that. And those speeds are still years away.

This was dual channel. As inheritly it would be impossible to run DDR5 on single channel even with just one stick seeing as all DDR5 will have dual channel from a single stick.

That's not how memory channels work. You do not get Quad channel simply by using more sticks. Its still dual channel as determined by the motherboard and CPU.

DDR5 is unable to run in single channel (unless there is a BIOS option for force disable half the stick) as a single stick will appear to the system as dual channel with all the performance benefits.

But yeah those numbers are atrocious. Dual channel ~30GB/s with 112ns latency. I already get nearly 60GB/s at half that latency on DDR4. As anyone who has experienced DDR generation change - skip the 1st gen. It's not worth it. Only 4800Mhz. DDR4 can already achieve this (with much lower latency). Double or even triple the DDR4 latency and miniscule voltage savings (1.1v vs 1.35v etc).

DDR5 needs to achieve 8000Mhz (at CL40 or lower) to match DDR4-3200 CL16 latency. Preferrably we need something like DDR5-8000 at ~CL30 to establish a clear lead. And you can bet those kits are years away. Not before 2023 or even 2024. Not to mention the early adopter price. I feel like Alder Lake will be great for portable devices (in terms of battery life) with it's big.LITTLE design and lower voltage DDR5 but will offer no benefits on desktop.

Even if they manage to double the bandwidth shown in these pathetic results by Alder Lake's launch it will still match, not exceed DDR4. With triple the system latency to boot. But im sure they will advertise "great savings" in terms of power. A few watts at best considering how little power RAM uses. I feel like DDR5 is aimed at servers first are foremost (low voltage, big capacity etc) and regular desktop users and enthusiasts get shafted once again in the first years.
each DDR5 DIMM have it's own 2x32 memory channel instead of 1x64 like all previous version. So if you run it with what we call currently dual channel, you will have 4x32bit memory channel instead of 2x64 memory channel. This was made to reduce the channel number per core. When dual channel was implemented it was 2 memory channel per "core" as cpu were single core at the time. Now, it's 1 memory channel per 5 on Intel right now and 1 per 8 core on AMD best desktop CPU.
This will cut these number in half. The memory will burst a 64 bit line and will use the increased memory bandwidth to do it.

This shouldn't help a lot in synthetic benchmark, but it will greatly help for heavily threaded load.

Also, there are many other feature that will increase overall performance but still might not appear in synthetic benchmark. By example, Same bank refresh instead of whole dimm refresh will increase memory availability since only the chip being refresh will be unavailable.
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
7,189 (3.86/day)
System Name Bragging Rights
Processor Atom Z3735F 1.33GHz
Motherboard It has no markings but it's green
Cooling No, it's a 2.2W processor
Memory 2GB DDR3L-1333
Video Card(s) Gen7 Intel HD (4EU @ 311MHz)
Storage 32GB eMMC and 128GB Sandisk Extreme U3
Display(s) 10" IPS 1280x800 60Hz
Case Veddha T2
Audio Device(s) Apparently, yes
Power Supply Samsung 18W 5V fast-charger
Mouse MX Anywhere 2
Keyboard Logitech MX Keys (not Cherry MX at all)
VR HMD Samsung Oddyssey, not that I'd plug it into this though....
Software W10 21H1, barely
Benchmark Scores I once clocked a Celeron-300A to 564MHz on an Abit BE6 and it scored over 9000.
If we count the latency with MHz and CL only
DDR4 2400 CL15 will be 1/2400*15 = 0.00625
This DDR5 6400 CL40 will be 1/6400*40 = 0.00625

So it is very roughly DDR4 2400 JEDEC performance
Latency should always be compared in nanoseconds, yes.

Still, 6400 CL40 is the same as 3200 CL20 and nobody buys CL20 DDR4-3200 any more. It's CL16 for the cheapo-tier mass-market/OEM stuff and CL15/CL14 for the premium bins, meaning that this is a big step backwards over even the cheapest RAM on the market at the moment.

Still, it's only an early demo. Final retail DDR5 should be at least as good as the mainstream stuff when it arrives - in terms of absolute latency, with the added bonus of far more bandwidth (hello, IGP performance!)
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
957 (0.44/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5950X
Motherboard Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Hero WiFi
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer II 420
Memory 32Gb G-Skill Trident Z Neo @3806MHz C14
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX2070
Storage Seagate FireCuda 530 1TB
Display(s) Samsung G9 49" Curved Ultrawide
Case Cooler Master Cosmos
Audio Device(s) O2 USB Headphone AMP
Power Supply Corsair HX850i
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Cherry MX
Software Windows 11
They found some DDR4-3200 MHz CL22??? You can bet your arse that they totally mangled the rest of the DDR4 memory sub-timings to be as high in latency as possible.

This is pure marketing BS, and will end up being the same as every other launch of a memory standard - The new stuff will be marginally worse than the best DDR4, but bandwidth will be better for DDR5. I hope Intel and AMD add some cache to the DDR5 memory controllers, to hide some of that ridiculous latency!
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
25,559 (6.52/day)
Still, it's only an early demo. Final retail DDR5 should be at least as good as the mainstream stuff when it arrives - in terms of absolute latency, with the added bonus of far more bandwidth (hello, IGP performance!)
While that might be a bit optimistic, it would be very nice.
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
1,669 (0.43/day)
each DDR5 DIMM have it's own 2x32 memory channel instead of 1x64 like all previous version. So if you run it with what we call currently dual channel, you will have 4x32bit memory channel instead of 2x64 memory channel. This was made to reduce the channel number per core. When dual channel was implemented it was 2 memory channel per "core" as cpu were single core at the time. Now, it's 1 memory channel per 5 on Intel right now and 1 per 8 core on AMD best desktop CPU.
This will cut these number in half. The memory will burst a 64 bit line and will use the increased memory bandwidth to do it.

This shouldn't help a lot in synthetic benchmark, but it will greatly help for heavily threaded load.

Also, there are many other feature that will increase overall performance but still might not appear in synthetic benchmark. By example, Same bank refresh instead of whole dimm refresh will increase memory availability since only the chip being refresh will be unavailable.
Even when using two DDR5 sticks the system will still be dual channel (dual rank, 2 dimm's per channel) because that is determined by the motherboard. The fact that DDR5 enables dual channel from a single stick does not make the system magickly quad channel when using two or even four sticks. Quad channel requires motherboard and CPU support. Alder Lake-S is dual channel. That more than anything confirms that it will be dual channel.
 
Top