• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

Crucial Demos DDR4 DRAM Modules at CES

Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
4,785 (2.18/day)
Likes
1,187
Location
Still on the East Side
#1
Crucial, a leading global brand of memory and storage upgrades, today announced its first DDR4 DRAM demonstration at CES 2013. As a global brand of Micron, the Crucial DDR4 DRAM demonstration is based on Micron's 30-nanometer (nm) technology, the 4-gigabit (Gb) DDR4 x8 part is the first piece of what is expected to be the industry's most complete portfolio of DDR4-based modules, which will include RDIMMs, LRDIMMs, SODIMMs and UDIMMs (standard and ECC).

Show full news post
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
12,353 (2.56/day)
Likes
5,810
Location
Europe\Slovenia
System Name Dark Silence 2
Processor Intel Core i7 5820K @ 4.5 GHz (1.15V)
Motherboard MSI X99A Gaming 7
Cooling Cooler Master Nepton 120XL
Memory 32 GB DDR4 Kingston HyperX Fury 2400 MHz @ 2666 MHz 15-15-15-32 1T (1.25V)
Video Card(s) AORUS GeForce GTX 1080Ti 11GB (1950/11000 OC Mode)
Storage Samsung 850 Pro 2TB SSD (3D V-NAND)
Display(s) ASUS VG248QE 144Hz 1ms (DisplayPort)
Case Corsair Carbide 330R Titanium
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound BlasterX AE-5 + Altec Lansing MX5021 (HiFi capacitors and OPAMP upgrade)
Power Supply BeQuiet! Dark Power Pro 11 750W
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum
Keyboard Cherry Stream XT Black
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (Fall Creators Update)
#2
And how many CPU's and mobos support DDR4 ?
 

Soup

New Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
159 (0.07/day)
Likes
71
Location
'merica
System Name Bebop
Processor Intel Core i7-2600K @ 4.4Ghz
Motherboard GIGABYTE GA-Z68XP-UD3P
Cooling ZALMAN CNPS9900MAX-B
Memory G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3 2133MHz
Video Card(s) 2x SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7970 CF
Storage OCZ Vertex 3 120GB SATA III x2 Raid 0
Display(s) Asus VG236H 23" 1920x1080 120Hz
Case Antec Eleven Hundred
Power Supply Rosewill BRONZE Series RBR1000-M 1000W
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
#3
Afraid of the future?:laugh:
 

AsRock

TPU addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2007
Messages
15,309 (4.00/day)
Likes
4,717
Location
US
Processor 2500k \ 3770k
Motherboard ASRock Z68 \ Z77
Memory Samsung low profile 1600
Video Card(s) XFX 6770 \ XFX R9 290X
Storage Intel 80Gb (SATA2) WD 250Gb \ Team SSD+Samsung Evo 250Gb+500Gb+ 2xCorsair Force+WD250GbHDD
Display(s) Samsung 1080P \ Toshiba HDTV 1080P
Case HTPC400 \ Thermaltake Armor case ( original ), With Zalman fan controller ( wattage usage ).
Audio Device(s) Yamaha RX-V475 \ Marantz SR5008 Tannoy Mercury MKII Paradigm 5SE + Tannoy Mercury F4
Power Supply PC&Power 750w \ Seasonic 750w MKII
Mouse MS intelimouse \ Logitech G700s + Steelseries Sensei wireless
Keyboard Logitech K120 \ ROCCAT MK Pro ( modded amber leds )
Benchmark Scores Meh benchmarks.
#4
Now watch Samsung pop out 20nm when it counts. Other than that they speak the talk but they do not really show ya shit..
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
1,016 (0.37/day)
Likes
224
Location
USA, Arizona
System Name SolarwindMobile
Processor AMD FX-9800P RADEON R7, 12 COMPUTE CORES 4C+8G
Motherboard Acer Wasp_BR
Cooling It's Copper.
Memory 2 x 8GB SK Hynix/HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF
Video Card(s) ATI/AMD Radeon R7 Series (Bristol Ridge FP4) [ACER]
Storage TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 1TB + KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 128 GB
Display(s) ViewSonic XG2401 SERIES
Case Acer Aspire E5-553G
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC255
Power Supply PANASONIC AS16A5K
Mouse SteelSeries Rival
Keyboard Ducky Channel Shine 3
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit (Version 1607, Build 14393.969)
#5
And how many CPU's and mobos support DDR4 ?
Broadwell(LGA1150R2) and Haswell-E(LGA2011R3), Steamroller on C2014/G2014.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
1,319 (0.64/day)
Likes
686
Location
78°55' N, 11°56' E
System Name -aLiEn beaTs-
Processor Intel i7 4770k OC 4.7GHz @ 1.28v | Cache 4.2GHz
Motherboard Asus Z87-Deluxe
Cooling Corsair H90 custom p|p fans
Memory G.skill TridentX 2x8GB DDR3 2400MHz CL10|1T
Video Card(s) Zotac GTX 980TI AMP!Omega Factory OC 1420MHz
Storage Intel SSD
Display(s) EIZO FS2333
Case CoolerMaster HAF 932 USB3.0
Audio Device(s) X-Fi Titanium HD @ 2.1 Bose acoustimass 5
Power Supply Chieftec Ntro88+ 650W [52A]
Mouse oldschool Razer Copperhead blu
Keyboard Logitech G19s
Software Windows 10 Pro RS2
Benchmark Scores ► ♪♫♪♩♬♫♪♭
#8
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
1,016 (0.37/day)
Likes
224
Location
USA, Arizona
System Name SolarwindMobile
Processor AMD FX-9800P RADEON R7, 12 COMPUTE CORES 4C+8G
Motherboard Acer Wasp_BR
Cooling It's Copper.
Memory 2 x 8GB SK Hynix/HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF
Video Card(s) ATI/AMD Radeon R7 Series (Bristol Ridge FP4) [ACER]
Storage TOSHIBA MQ01ABD100 1TB + KINGSTON RBU-SNS8152S3128GG2 128 GB
Display(s) ViewSonic XG2401 SERIES
Case Acer Aspire E5-553G
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC255
Power Supply PANASONIC AS16A5K
Mouse SteelSeries Rival
Keyboard Ducky Channel Shine 3
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit (Version 1607, Build 14393.969)
#9
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
895 (0.50/day)
Likes
114
#10
DDR4 will be useful for servers and perhaps cellphones, but it has no current value for typical desktop PCs as even DDR3 @ 1600 MHz. is not a system bottleneck. Each new industry standard is typically developed years before it's needed and this is no different. DDR4 has some significant departures from DDR3 and won't be rapidly adapted to the desktop for a number of good reasons, though server mobos will likely start using it in the next 6-12 months - depending on cost.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR4_SDRAM

You will see more low voltage (1.35v) DDR3 as DRAM makers try to stimulate DDR3 sales because DRAM prices are in the cellar and staying their with PC sales down and a rocky economy expected for years more.

http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/technolog/holiday-pc-sales-slide-first-time-5-years-1B7931427
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2011
Messages
1,240 (0.50/day)
Likes
503
#11
DDR4 will be useful for servers and perhaps cellphones, but it has no current value for typical desktop PCs as even DDR3 @ 1600 MHz. is not a system bottleneck.
It's true that modern integrated memory controllers (the one in the Sandy Bridge for example) are very efficient and the DDR-1600 is the sweet spot most of the times with every day usage (like gaming or with office applications), but stating that faster RAM has no value for typical Desktop PCs is wrong, and it's especially wrong on a enthusiast site;)

APUs which are getting rapidly popular, and (almost all) IGPs are using the system memory as video memory, and the faster the RAMs are, the better GPU performance you will get (mainly because you can feed more to the ROPs). Besides the obvious GPU performance benefits, you also gain computational speed increase as well (e.g.: compressions, offline CGI rendering, etc), and that's something you usually also do on desktop workstations. Just my two cents.
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
895 (0.50/day)
Likes
114
#12
Ikaruga-

APUs are the only place on desktop PCs where faster than 1600 MHz. RAM shows any tangible performance gains in real applications. Synthetic memory testing benches exaggerate the tiny gains from increased RAM frequency above 1600 MHz. and those who don't know any different think that will improve system performance, but it doesn't because the RAM isn't a bottleneck @ 1600+ MHz.

The IMC has nothing to do with the bandwidth per se of the system and isn't what determines the RAM frequency that is sufficient to eliminate system bottlenecks. The IMC just moves memory control inside the CPU instead of having a discrete chipset controlling the flow of data. Both Intel and AMD systems have been documented to have sufficient bandwidth with just DDR3 @ 1333 MHz. but 1600 MHz. gives you bandwidth to spare and no system bottleneck.

Folks can prove this by running real applications and timing them. There is no tangible gains for enthusiasts or anyone else. This has been proven over and over and I suggest people prove it to themselves with back-to-back test on their own desktop PC by running their DRAM at 1600 MHz. then upping the frequency to it's fastest stable speed and running the real applications again.

Most people will be shocked to find no tangible, i.e. meaningful system gains, unless they understand that DDR3 RAM @ 1600 MHz. is more than enough bandwidth to handle current CPUs and then some. That is why there is no tangible gains except for APUs where the GPU section is able to take advantage of higher frequency RAM. Those who aren't up to speed technically on system performance can easily be duped into buying faster RAM that does not deliver any useful performance gains at all in real apps.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 18, 2011
Messages
1,240 (0.50/day)
Likes
503
#13
Most people will be shocked to find .............
Please read my reply,
......the DDR-1600 is the sweet spot most of the times with every day usage (like gaming or with office applications), but stating that faster RAM has no value for typical Desktop PCs is wrong, and it's especially wrong on a enthusiast site;)
, so NO, most people here won't be shocked, because this is an enthusiast site where we check and compare bench and test results on a daily basis (I also built hundreds of systems for the living, so it not that I just started things). I personally (but probably most of us here) spent days if not weeks comparing the performance changes with different CPU, GPU or Memory speeds with all kind of different applications and the truth is that some benefits while others don't (and not with useless synthetic tests of course.) For example, I render (renderman and mental_ray) and compress (winrar) a lot, and faster RAM makes difference in both.
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
895 (0.50/day)
Likes
114
#14
Yes it's true there are no TANGIBLE benefits from using faster than 1600 MHz. RAM in typical desktop PCs other than APUs.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2011
Messages
1,240 (0.50/day)
Likes
503
#15
Yes it's true there are no TANGIBLE benefits from using faster than 1600 MHz. RAM in typical desktop PCs other than APUs.
Integrated graphics is mainstream and APUs and EPGs will get even more popular in the future. According to Steam's latest hardware surey, both the DX9 and DX10 most popular GPUs are integrated ones (Geforce6100+IntelG33 for DX9 and HD3000 for DX10) and only among DX11 cards where you can find a discrete card to be the most popular (560ti). So if I would have to guess, I would say that probalby 25-30% of the Steam users and only about 10-15% of the PC users have a discrete card, and the rest are all APUs or IGPs relying on the speed of the system memory.

I could agree with you about tighter memory timings and lower latency are nothing but marketing gimmicks for the syntetic benchers, but can't agree about memory speeds, which is indeed delivers more performance with the most popular integrated GPUs (HPGs/APUs and EPGs) and with many applications as well, and the sooner the DDR4 will become mainstream, the better is for everybody.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2007
Messages
4,058 (1.07/day)
Likes
1,122
Location
Geneva, FL, USA
Processor Intel i5-6600
Motherboard ASRock H170M-ITX
Cooling Cooler Master Geminii S524
Memory G.Skill DDR4-2133 16GB (8GB x 2)
Video Card(s) Gigabyte R9-380X 4GB
Storage Samsung 950 EVO 250GB (mSATA)
Display(s) LG 29UM69G-B 2560x1080 IPS
Case Lian Li PC-Q25
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC892
Power Supply Seasonic SS-460FL2
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard Logitech G110
Software Windows 10 Pro
#16
Also, it's not like there's a huge cost between speeds until 2400 and above. Unless it's for a specific reason (e.g. lower voltage), not going to get 1600 when 1866 is $5 more, not going to stop at 1866 when 2133 is $5 more than that. ;)

My parts trickle down to other systems, so even if it's giving me a marginal gain now, it may be more substantial later on.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2011
Messages
1,240 (0.50/day)
Likes
503
#17
Also, it's not like there's a huge cost between speeds until 2400 and above. Unless it's for a specific reason (e.g. lower voltage), not going to get 1600 when 1866 is $5 more, not going to stop at 1866 when 2133 is $5 more than that. ;)

My parts trickle down to other systems, so even if it's giving me a marginal gain now, it may be more substantial later on.
I agree, sometimes only 4-5% extra performance is all you need:toast:
 

cadaveca

My name is Dave
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
16,546 (3.88/day)
Likes
10,908
Location
Parkland County, Alberta
System Name Gamer
Processor Intel i7-6700K (ES)
Motherboard MSI Aegis TI
Cooling Custom Dragon Cooler
Memory 16 GB Kingston HyperX 2133 MHz C13
Video Card(s) 2x MSI GAMING GTX 980
Storage 2x Intel 600P
Display(s) Dell 3008WFP
Case MSI Aegis Ti
Mouse MSI Interceptor DS B1
Keyboard MSI DS4200 GAMING Keyboard
Software Windows 10 Home
#18
Ikaruga-

APUs are the only place on desktop PCs where faster than 1600 MHz. RAM shows any tangible performance gains in real applications. Synthetic memory testing benches exaggerate the tiny gains from increased RAM frequency above 1600 MHz. and those who don't know any different think that will improve system performance, but it doesn't because the RAM isn't a bottleneck @ 1600+ MHz.

The IMC has nothing to do with the bandwidth per se of the system and isn't what determines the RAM frequency that is sufficient to eliminate system bottlenecks. The IMC just moves memory control inside the CPU instead of having a discrete chipset controlling the flow of data. Both Intel and AMD systems have been documented to have sufficient bandwidth with just DDR3 @ 1333 MHz. but 1600 MHz. gives you bandwidth to spare and no system bottleneck.

Folks can prove this by running real applications and timing them. There is no tangible gains for enthusiasts or anyone else. This has been proven over and over and I suggest people prove it to themselves with back-to-back test on their own desktop PC by running their DRAM at 1600 MHz. then upping the frequency to it's fastest stable speed and running the real applications again.

Most people will be shocked to find no tangible, i.e. meaningful system gains, unless they understand that DDR3 RAM @ 1600 MHz. is more than enough bandwidth to handle current CPUs and then some. That is why there is no tangible gains except for APUs where the GPU section is able to take advantage of higher frequency RAM. Those who aren't up to speed technically on system performance can easily be duped into buying faster RAM that does not deliver any useful performance gains at all in real apps.
I disagree, but I've been running multi-GPU systems for the past 8 years. Most users, yes, will not benefit much, if at all.

IMC matters a TONNE, too. AMD's IMC sucks, and Intel's is far better. Most performance differences between the two can be summed up to differences in CPU cache, IMC, and memory performance.

Perfect example is how an FM1 APU will kick the snot out of an AMD 1100T, same ram speed, in CodeMasters F1 titles(Dirt too). An FM1 APU is 50% faster than an 1100T, even with the lack of L3 cache(same CPU cores). Boosting ram performance matters little here on the APU, as shown.:



Just so we are clear, the APU and the 1100T are both using an HD6950 here. So the APU's onboard GPU is not what's seeing the benefit here. It's purely about memory control(IMC).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
895 (0.50/day)
Likes
114
#19
Integrated graphics is mainstream and APUs and EPGs will get even more popular in the future. According to Steam's latest hardware surey, both the DX9 and DX10 most popular GPUs are integrated ones (Geforce6100+IntelG33 for DX9 and HD3000 for DX10) and only among DX11 cards where you can find a discrete card to be the most popular (560ti). So if I would have to guess, I would say that probalby 25-30% of the Steam users and only about 10-15% of the PC users have a discrete card, and the rest are all APUs or IGPs relying on the speed of the system memory.

I could agree with you about tighter memory timings and lower latency are nothing but marketing gimmicks for the syntetic benchers, but can't agree about memory speeds, which is indeed delivers more performance with the most popular integrated GPUs (HPGs/APUs and EPGs) and with many applications as well, and the sooner the DDR4 will become mainstream, the better is for everybody.
Yes APUs are the future for most people and AMD is leading the change. Eventually they will offer mid-range and high-end model APUs that will use less power, cost less and perform as well or better than the same priced discrete CPU/APU combos. That however was not the point of my comment regarding the lack of need for DDR4 on the typical desktop PC. The point was that there is no need for DDR4 on desktops any time soon, like in the next 5 years. DDR3 even at 1600 MHz. will not be a system bottleneck for years to come, as 1333 MHz. isn't saturated for any period of time even with video games/editing, etc.

Anyone who doesn't want to bother running extensive test to see for yourself that RAM speeds above 1600 MHz. do not provide any significant, i.e. tangible system gains, can go to AnndTech or Tom's Hardware and see independent confirmation on RAM frequencies from 1333 MHz. to 2000 MHz. on multiple AMD and Intel platforms. What you will see is slight variations depending on the software tested but the overall conclusion by AnandTech and Tom's based on their extensive testing, including rendering, is that "there is NO SIGNIFICANT system performance gains with the faster RAM."

Numerous people in several PC enthusiasts hardware forums have conducted their own test and even those who are proponents of using faster RAM had to admit after posting their own test results in RAM intensive software such as video games, that there was no significant system performance gains from testing at 1333 MHz. to 2000 MHz. That is why I suggest that people run their own test and see with their own eyes.

If you want to buy faster RAM because it makes you happy, that is perfectly fine. There is nothing wrong with that approach at all. If however you are buying faster than 1600 MHz. RAM for typical desktop use OTHER than for an APU system, then you won't see any significant, i.e. tangible system performance gains. It's been documented by many reputable sources yet some folks still refuse to believe reality.

And yes as noted by you, me and many others, tighter memory timings also do not make any tangible gains in system performance with DDR3 RAM with frequencies of 1333 MHz. or more.

As far as RAM pricing, if you can get 1866 MHz. for the same price as 1600 MHz. then go for it. $5. more for 1866 MHz. is an option, though you still won't get $5.00 more performance, but paying $30-$50 more for 2x 4 GB. of RAM is just throwing money away. You'd be WAY farther ahead to use that $30-$50 on a faster CPU or GPU, but it's your dime so you get to spend in whatever way makes you happy. :)
 
Last edited: