Latency matters & bandwidth difference isn't relevant for most titles. DDR5 7k-8k with decent CL & newer CPU mem controllers will change things. Hard to argue against 12700k/DDR4 vs 12600k/DDR5 in value/$ terms though. By the time current DDR5 makes sense, it's obsolete anyway.
It's not just the DDR5 itself that will be obsolete though. HWUnboxed was arguing that you 'should' use DDR5 in a *budget build* (12100) and get cheap 2x8GB DDR5-4800 now at about the same price as 2x8GB DDR4, and later on you would have an 'upgrade path' as DDR5 gets better and cheaper.
His selection of DDR4 to test against was dubious to start with (3200 C14 and some horrifically bad 4000 C16) - you can go to Newegg and get DDR4-3600 C14 2x8GB right now for about 70-90 bucks, $15 less than 2x8GB DDR5. But even with his lesser DDR4-3200, DDR4 was faster than DDR5-4800 by 5-10% in games.
The big problem with that theory though, is that 'cheap' 6-layer motherboards mostly won't run DDR5 beyond DDR5-6000.
So what happens is, on a budget build you wind up getting 5-10% less performance than DDR4, and in a year or two when say DDR5-6600 becomes cheap, you are
not going to be able to just go buy some 6600 and drop it in. Your motherboard won't be good enough.
To make matters worse, from many other tests out there, if you drop in your best DDR5-6000 guess what? It's gonna perform about like that DDR4-3600 C14.
So then you wind up tossing your motherboard
and your now worthless DDR5-4800 2x8gb.
I would actually agree with HWUnboxed *if* they were talking about building a high end rig, with a high end motherboard, and forking up for DDR5-6000 C30 right now. The high end 8-layer motherboards are already able to hit 7600 on some of the brand new Hynix A-Die. With a mobo that can handle it, you can beat DDR4 with high speed DDR5.
But they were talking budget, and that's just very misleading.
