The big problem with DDR4 adoption is that DDR4 wasn't a cut and dry 100% improvement for everything, plus there were basically no other releases that made it worth the upgrade, no new cpu sockets, etc. It wasn't timed right imo.
Still not seeing much reason to upgrade from DDR3.
Gonna wait several years before thinking of getting newer RAM, I ain't buying a new motherboard every 2 years.
16GB DDR3 is good enough for now.
I only just got DDR3, was so used to DDR2's ridiculous prices I went and got 24GB because DDR3 is so much cheaper.
we already have GDDR5 for graphics cards, what's the difference between GDDR and DDR aside from their application?
[QUOTE=Dr.C;52039719]we already have GDDR5 for graphics cards, what's the difference between GDDR and DDR aside from their application?[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-GDDR-and-DDR-memory[/url]
[QUOTE]GDDR is very fast at dealing with these “one tick, one operation” workloads and can not only handle them quickly but also handle one whilst returning another because they are “simple”.
DDR is very fast at dealing with “one tick, multiple operation” workloads which by their nature make accepting and returning a result at the same time unfeasible.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.quora.com/Why-not-replace-DDR3-in-CPU-with-GDDR5[/url]
[QUOTE]It just has a very high bandwidth and throughput which is very important for graphic cards/GPUs but not for a CPU. GDDR5 has a very high latency too which is not useful on a CPU. CPU requires low latency. GDDR5 may have high bandwidth but when on CPU it's throughput heavily limited by the latency requirements. Consider GPUs that run at max 1000 MHz clock and CPUs that can even do 5000+ MHz these days. A low latency is very much desirable.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=J!NX;52039788][url]https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-GDDR-and-DDR-memory[/url]
[url]https://www.quora.com/Why-not-replace-DDR3-in-CPU-with-GDDR5[/url][/QUOTE]
The main difference comes down to the actual purpose of the memory really.
DDR, as the quoted thing mentions is lower latency as a CPU needs to be able to fetch instructions from that memory really quickly. Instructions are pretty small (the architecture of your OS defines it, so modern instructions are usually just 64 bits), but need to be fetched relatively quickly (but it's still lightyears slower than CPU cache access). Lower throughput, lower latency.
GDDR contains instructions for the GPU, but also the things the GPU needs to work on like textures, vertex data, etc. Which is all much, much larger than the small 64-bit instructions a CPU reads. So when a GPU is accessing data it needs higher throughput/ bandwidth to get the most data it can in the shortest time possible.
And due to the difference in how CPUs and GPUs work internally (multi-core vs. many-core) latency becomes less of an issue as the GPU does more work in one shot as all the operations are meant to be easy to do in parallel. Where a CPU can do many different things, not all of which are parallelisable, and due to branching (if statements, loops, etc.) in code it may need to fetch new instructions pretty fucking fast.
[QUOTE=Canary;52038937]I only just got DDR3, was so used to DDR2's ridiculous prices I went and got 24GB because DDR3 is so much cheaper.[/QUOTE]
what the hell do you need 24 gb of ram for? are you running some serious data crunching software or something?
[QUOTE=space1;52040084]what the hell do you need 24 gb of ram for? are you running some serious data crunching software or something?[/QUOTE]
He uses Chrome, obviously.
[QUOTE=space1;52040084]what the hell do you need 24 gb of ram for? are you running some serious data crunching software or something?[/QUOTE]
24GB of RAM isn't even considered that much today tbh
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;52040182]24GB of RAM isn't even considered that much today tbh[/QUOTE]
I never exceed 6gb of usage at any given time... Then again I disable every non-essential program when I play games.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;52040182]24GB of RAM isn't even considered that much today tbh[/QUOTE]
It's a lot for a desktop user. Most people are still getting on fine with 8GB, and people using their machines for gaming should be perfectly fine with 16GB.
But RAM is one of those "if you can get it, get it" deals. Having more literally has now downside as it should all be getting used when possible anyway.
[QUOTE=space1;52040283]I never exceed 6gb of usage at any given time... Then again I disable every non-essential program when I play games.[/QUOTE]
There are other uses for computers than gaming. Many people on this forum aren't just gamers.
[QUOTE=B!N4RY;52040182]24GB of RAM isn't even considered that much today tbh[/QUOTE]
my $800 "gaming" laptop had 4 gb when i first got it
[QUOTE=hexpunK;52040299]It's a lot for a desktop user. Most people are still getting on fine with 8GB, and people using their machines for gaming should be perfectly fine with 16GB.
But RAM is one of those "if you can get it, get it" deals. Having more literally has now downside as it should all be getting used when possible anyway.[/QUOTE]
I've modded KSP so heavilly before I was running 15GB of RAM used by it alone.
I kind of went overboard with the mods.....
[QUOTE=Dr.C;52039719]we already have GDDR5 for graphics cards, what's the difference between GDDR and DDR aside from their application?[/QUOTE]
You cant simply compare the two. GDDR has a wider bus, the operations are simpler, and some power effeciency gains to them. Not to mention DDR is an SDRAM while GDDR is a SGRAM. GDDR vs DDR is comparing a RISC processor to a CISC processor. Aint a fair judgement in the end.
[QUOTE=viperfan7;52041238]I've modded KSP so heavilly before I was running 15GB of RAM used by it alone.
I kind of went overboard with the mods.....[/QUOTE]
Cities skylines consumes 17GB of RAM, and 30GB of PF with 2000+ assets.
Honestly, not even 24GB of RAM is cutting it anymore for me with some 64bit games out there.
Also DDR4 was never promised to be a performance gain. If anything, it was supposed to be a minor power effeciency boost. You still don't notice any major gains with DDR3 and DDR4 at higher frequencies. Still a 64bit bus, still handling it as multiple ops per tick. Back in the days of DDR, and DDR2 overclocking RAM had noticable gains. DDR4, why bother degrading your components lifecycle for an extra frame per second?
DDR4 is only worth it for video editing and rendering right?
[QUOTE=alx12345;52044430]DDR4 is only worth it for video editing and rendering right?[/QUOTE]
It's not that big a change over DDR3, it certainly shouldn't impact performance of media editing/ compiling enough to dump into it.
It's more a energy efficiency thing.
Bandwidth really isn't the bottleneck for modern computer memory
[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;52044527]Bandwidth really isn't the bottleneck for modern computer memory[/QUOTE]
Timings still make a huge difference. Granted, your timings will go higher with the higher frequencies, this can also negate performance if the latency is too great. Bandwidth doesn't even begin to solve the problem of DRAM performance. Sure a 128b bus would be nice, but its still not going to help how many cycles your RAM needs before its refreshed.
If they managed to improve the timings, frequencies and boost the bandwidth DDR5 could be quite promising in the end. But this is a PCGamer article, who empasizes that overclocking your RAM to get performance gains with RGB LED coloring on it helps the situation. Their indepth analysis is often lacking and uninformative. Works great for the common non-technical folk, but this is emerging technology, theres no room for this low quality articles other than "hype train for ddr5 even though ddr4 was just released a year ago!"
Servers and Scientific applications where the main driving force behind DDR4, and they have/had plenty of applications with literal bottlenecks on memory bandwidth.
DDR4 is a new standard to accommodate higher speeds and size, better error checking, and less power usage.
As a consumer, the trade-off was/is absolute shite, but there wasn't really supposed to be much of one in the first place, nobody expected the DDR4 prices to stay so high for years.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
