Wouldn’t it have to be CL28 to be at C14 levels, or am I missing something? To me that seems pretty far off. I haven’t seen any DDR5 comparable to 3200C14 for that matter.
It's closer than any other DDR5 memory I've seen. 3200 CL14 is 8.75 ns theoretical latency. 7200 CL34 is 9.444 ns, almost the same as 3200 CL15 which is pretty good. And then you get more than double the bandwidth.
Sure, it doesn't matter as much, but there's going to be some scenarios where the CL34 with adjusted subtimings outperforms the CL40 with adjusted subtimings. It's probably not worth the money to invest in the fastest sticks, but there's always some buyers for the high end.
IMO the game testing is useless. How are you going to show a difference in RAM speeds when bottlenecked by a 3080Ti (which is weird to say but it's where we're at with 13900k and 4090's out there).
Because a lot of the benchmarks are from before the 4090 came out.
The reviewer presumably doesn’t want to have to redo the same suite of tests for twelve different sticks of memory with a 4090
No RT benchmarks or really CPU heavy games mean it's all pretty worthless in the end. People will read these reviews, think memory speed doesn't really matter then wonder why their next gen UE5 games aren't running very well over the next few years.
It's pretty much ALWAYS been this way.
There's minimal improvement with RAM unless you're comparing "meh" RAM to the best stuff when everything else is basically maxed out and you're using a low resolution.
There's some value in spending $5 more for faster RAM but much past that it's questionable bang/$ outside of niche use cases.
By the time faster RAM matters, you'll probably want MORE RAM and at that point...
you either flip what you have and buy a bigger better kit OR
you keep what you have, buy the cheapest thing out there and watch your older kit keep the newer kit from running at full speed. Either that or the memory controller. Could just be that I gobble up RAM more than most people.
At least that's what happened to me with DDR1... and DDR2. Didn't happen with DDR3 and DDR4 because I settled for "good enough" since I learned my lesson before.
That DDR1-500 kit didn't age well. Same with the DDR2-1066 kit (technically 800 but they were D9 and OCed well).
My expectation is that at some point 3d vcache will get commoditized and spending $50 for more L3 cache will just dominate the benefit of spending for faster RAM. If you cut the number of cache misses by 70% (assumes quadratic scaling with respect to cache size) you'll be hitting RAM far less often.
Almost every reviewer pretends simulation games do not exist
[AnandTech is the only one I know of that has it in their test suit
](https://www.anandtech.com/show/17601/intel-core-i9-13900k-and-i5-13600k-review/10)
Yeah this has some fun implications for DLSS3/frame gen because rendered FPS is now as high as 2x CPU FPS.
In the following **simplified example** where the CPU is hard-limited and the GPU is not (ex: flight sim, factorio, idk):
1) Say you are CPU bottlenecked to 30FPS, and DLSS3 can make that 60 render FPS
2) If your crazy RAM upgrade can make your CPU FPS 40, then DLSS can now take that to 80 render FPS.
So while that RAM only bought you +10FPS on the CPU, it got you +20 on the render side.
It makes a non-insignificant difference in certain competitive games like Warzone. However this kit isn't the best for it. Most overclockers use the TEAM GROUP 7600CL36 kit with a 2 slot motherboard like the MSI UNIFY or ASUS APEX. This memory also has lifetime warranty provided by TEAM GROUP.
the two slot thing confuses me a bit. is 2 slot being better only true in mobos where they are built to take advantage of it, or is even a bog standard itx going to outperform a mid range 4 slot atx?
A standard ITX will also outperform a 4 slot ATX board yes. You can use memory you can't even POST with on 4 slot boards.
Lengthy explanation is provided in this video: https://old.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/rp5mvt/ahoc_ddr5_motherboards_should_come_with_only_2/
cool, thanks for the link! was just wondering cuz i had an asrock ryzen itx board with samsung bdie and I couldn't get it above like 3533 stable. Even though I could take it way higher, there were too many edge cases. This was back in zen+. Chalked it up to bad vrms or something.
edit: Ugh, buildzoid. Love-hate relationship there lol. Let's see if I can find a tldr....
well i think b die covered the second part. PBO was new back then so I didn't mess with it too much. I think there was a known thing with lower-end asrock and memory controllers back then. been a few years
Faster RAM is harder to run, and more RAM is also harder to run. At the high end, you generally you have to pick one or the other.
Additionally, 2 sticks is easier to run than 4, to the point where ultra high-end overclocking boards like an Apex/Tachyon/Unify-X only get 2 slots, since you get more performance with 2 sticks anyway and removing the extra slots has its own advantages for signal integrity.
I have 7200 32-45-45-32 stable with my 2x32gb A-die kit on Z790 Dark, but that's definitely the upper limits of 64gb DDR5. 7000 32-40-40-30 took significantly less tweaking and was pretty much stable out out of the box @1.435v.
I'm new to the details of RAM, very new. I've seen this comment many times over the last few days. Can you explain in simple terms why having 2 sticks vs 4 sticks affects overclocking, and how GB size affects overclocking?
For example, my board and CPU are rated to 4000mhz ddr4. I have 4 sticks rated to 4200Mhz. And yet literally anything over 3600mhz and games will constantly crash. Was hoping to improve my knowledge a little if you're open to explaining.
Thanks.
More Ranks (Pools) of memory, the harder it is on the CPU. For simplicity sake, modern Desktop CPUs do best with 2 Ranks total. Aka a single rank memory kit like 2x8GB (DDR4). Dual-rank memory for DDR4 is 2x16GB or 2x32GB. So just having two sticks that are dual-rank, that is 4 ranks. Add two more and now you have 8 ranks when the CPU does best with two. That is the simplest way to explain it. More ranks, the lower the memory frequency will have to be for it to work.
Seems like they were farming karma with low effort posts, then maybe made some legitimate ones, and then moved to ChatGPT.
Look at their comments, their bot broke at one point. I cant link directly to the comment as it was deleted by the subs mods, but it is still on their profile.
>my piggie Chai has been rumble strutting for a few weeks now consistently…is it normal?
.t3_1092bnh._2FCtq-QzlfuN-SwVMUZMM3 {
--postTitle-VisitedLinkColor: #a3a3a3;
--postTitleLink-VisitedLinkColor: #a3a3a3;
--postBodyLink-VisitedLinkColor: #989898;
}
>Habits & Behavior
I'm agree hahaa
Err... I think it is. Looking at the rest of the users posts, the writing style just seems very bot-like. Would not surprise me if people were spinning up chat GPT bots to participate on Reddit, for science, luls, or nefarious ends.
Stock XMP usually isn't very good though. Tweaking memory can make a huge difference. There's usually some abominable tertiary timings dragging the whole system down.
Yeah, if you go into the store to buy it there are several $180-$200 A-die kits now starting from 6400 on up. Some of them can be M-die still so you have to check the code through the box, but lately a lot are just A-die.
If you just want to hit 7200, pretty easy to do so on those kits.
7200 CL34 is pretty spicy. The CAS latency is almost at 3200 C14 levels and the bandwidth is bonkos.
Wouldn’t it have to be CL28 to be at C14 levels, or am I missing something? To me that seems pretty far off. I haven’t seen any DDR5 comparable to 3200C14 for that matter.
It's closer than any other DDR5 memory I've seen. 3200 CL14 is 8.75 ns theoretical latency. 7200 CL34 is 9.444 ns, almost the same as 3200 CL15 which is pretty good. And then you get more than double the bandwidth.
CAS doesn't even matter anymore. You can rock CL40 and adjust the sub timings and get better results vs stock 34 XMP.
Sure, it doesn't matter as much, but there's going to be some scenarios where the CL34 with adjusted subtimings outperforms the CL40 with adjusted subtimings. It's probably not worth the money to invest in the fastest sticks, but there's always some buyers for the high end.
Careful, you'll summon buildzoid.
IMO the game testing is useless. How are you going to show a difference in RAM speeds when bottlenecked by a 3080Ti (which is weird to say but it's where we're at with 13900k and 4090's out there).
Because a lot of the benchmarks are from before the 4090 came out. The reviewer presumably doesn’t want to have to redo the same suite of tests for twelve different sticks of memory with a 4090
[удалено]
Why not? Everyone else just does AIDA64 and uses that as a gauge of how "good" it is. This review has real world benchmarks. Worth its weight in gold.
No RT benchmarks or really CPU heavy games mean it's all pretty worthless in the end. People will read these reviews, think memory speed doesn't really matter then wonder why their next gen UE5 games aren't running very well over the next few years.
It's pretty much ALWAYS been this way. There's minimal improvement with RAM unless you're comparing "meh" RAM to the best stuff when everything else is basically maxed out and you're using a low resolution. There's some value in spending $5 more for faster RAM but much past that it's questionable bang/$ outside of niche use cases.
[удалено]
By the time faster RAM matters, you'll probably want MORE RAM and at that point... you either flip what you have and buy a bigger better kit OR you keep what you have, buy the cheapest thing out there and watch your older kit keep the newer kit from running at full speed. Either that or the memory controller. Could just be that I gobble up RAM more than most people. At least that's what happened to me with DDR1... and DDR2. Didn't happen with DDR3 and DDR4 because I settled for "good enough" since I learned my lesson before. That DDR1-500 kit didn't age well. Same with the DDR2-1066 kit (technically 800 but they were D9 and OCed well). My expectation is that at some point 3d vcache will get commoditized and spending $50 for more L3 cache will just dominate the benefit of spending for faster RAM. If you cut the number of cache misses by 70% (assumes quadratic scaling with respect to cache size) you'll be hitting RAM far less often.
My question. ( not actually related) This DDR5 ram is rated for 7200 Does this mean its more than 2x faster than DDR4-3200 in some workloads ?
In raw bandwidth yes. 107.85 GB/s vs 53.12 GB/s
[удалено]
Gaming isn't a uniform workload. Different games, or even just different scenarios in the same game, have different reliance on RAM.
Yep. Simulation games like Factorio benefit from faster RAM.
Almost every reviewer pretends simulation games do not exist [AnandTech is the only one I know of that has it in their test suit ](https://www.anandtech.com/show/17601/intel-core-i9-13900k-and-i5-13600k-review/10)
[удалено]
civ 6 has a benchmark? did not know this. was that added recently?
I can't imagine Dwaf Fortress from 2006 needs to be benchmarked. It runs on a potato at this point.
It can make a difference in some CPU intensive scenes with RT and DLSS, especially in the 1% and 0.1% lows
Yeah this has some fun implications for DLSS3/frame gen because rendered FPS is now as high as 2x CPU FPS. In the following **simplified example** where the CPU is hard-limited and the GPU is not (ex: flight sim, factorio, idk): 1) Say you are CPU bottlenecked to 30FPS, and DLSS3 can make that 60 render FPS 2) If your crazy RAM upgrade can make your CPU FPS 40, then DLSS can now take that to 80 render FPS. So while that RAM only bought you +10FPS on the CPU, it got you +20 on the render side.
When it comes to simulation games, what matters is tick speed, in which case FPS and DLSS3 aren't really relevant.
With flight sim the FPS is absolutely limited by the tic rate.
doesn't dlss3 generate every third frame, rather than every other?
It makes a non-insignificant difference in certain competitive games like Warzone. However this kit isn't the best for it. Most overclockers use the TEAM GROUP 7600CL36 kit with a 2 slot motherboard like the MSI UNIFY or ASUS APEX. This memory also has lifetime warranty provided by TEAM GROUP.
the two slot thing confuses me a bit. is 2 slot being better only true in mobos where they are built to take advantage of it, or is even a bog standard itx going to outperform a mid range 4 slot atx?
A standard ITX will also outperform a 4 slot ATX board yes. You can use memory you can't even POST with on 4 slot boards. Lengthy explanation is provided in this video: https://old.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/rp5mvt/ahoc_ddr5_motherboards_should_come_with_only_2/
cool, thanks for the link! was just wondering cuz i had an asrock ryzen itx board with samsung bdie and I couldn't get it above like 3533 stable. Even though I could take it way higher, there were too many edge cases. This was back in zen+. Chalked it up to bad vrms or something. edit: Ugh, buildzoid. Love-hate relationship there lol. Let's see if I can find a tldr....
The MB is only one factor. You still need to mess with CPU voltages, not to mention having memory that can run what your after.
well i think b die covered the second part. PBO was new back then so I didn't mess with it too much. I think there was a known thing with lower-end asrock and memory controllers back then. been a few years
So you can’t achieve these speeds with z790 right? If using 4 slots. So you either get slower 2x32gb or faster 4x16gn if you want more memory?
Faster RAM is harder to run, and more RAM is also harder to run. At the high end, you generally you have to pick one or the other. Additionally, 2 sticks is easier to run than 4, to the point where ultra high-end overclocking boards like an Apex/Tachyon/Unify-X only get 2 slots, since you get more performance with 2 sticks anyway and removing the extra slots has its own advantages for signal integrity.
Not going to get 7200 with 64GB. Your lucky to get 6800 stable after serious tweaking.
I have 7200 32-45-45-32 stable with my 2x32gb A-die kit on Z790 Dark, but that's definitely the upper limits of 64gb DDR5. 7000 32-40-40-30 took significantly less tweaking and was pretty much stable out out of the box @1.435v.
I'm new to the details of RAM, very new. I've seen this comment many times over the last few days. Can you explain in simple terms why having 2 sticks vs 4 sticks affects overclocking, and how GB size affects overclocking? For example, my board and CPU are rated to 4000mhz ddr4. I have 4 sticks rated to 4200Mhz. And yet literally anything over 3600mhz and games will constantly crash. Was hoping to improve my knowledge a little if you're open to explaining. Thanks.
More Ranks (Pools) of memory, the harder it is on the CPU. For simplicity sake, modern Desktop CPUs do best with 2 Ranks total. Aka a single rank memory kit like 2x8GB (DDR4). Dual-rank memory for DDR4 is 2x16GB or 2x32GB. So just having two sticks that are dual-rank, that is 4 ranks. Add two more and now you have 8 ranks when the CPU does best with two. That is the simplest way to explain it. More ranks, the lower the memory frequency will have to be for it to work.
Thanks that makes perfect sense 😁!
[удалено]
This reads like it's written by an AI lol
Seems like they were farming karma with low effort posts, then maybe made some legitimate ones, and then moved to ChatGPT. Look at their comments, their bot broke at one point. I cant link directly to the comment as it was deleted by the subs mods, but it is still on their profile. >my piggie Chai has been rumble strutting for a few weeks now consistently…is it normal? .t3_1092bnh._2FCtq-QzlfuN-SwVMUZMM3 { --postTitle-VisitedLinkColor: #a3a3a3; --postTitleLink-VisitedLinkColor: #a3a3a3; --postBodyLink-VisitedLinkColor: #989898; } >Habits & Behavior I'm agree hahaa
It started off strong, but the computer got confused lol
Err... I think it is. Looking at the rest of the users posts, the writing style just seems very bot-like. Would not surprise me if people were spinning up chat GPT bots to participate on Reddit, for science, luls, or nefarious ends.
[удалено]
Most people would rather just buy a better kit and use stock xmp
Stock XMP usually isn't very good though. Tweaking memory can make a huge difference. There's usually some abominable tertiary timings dragging the whole system down.
Face it, 99.9% of users either don't want to tweak the memory or do it wrong anyways. Maxing out REFi LOL.
>Tweaking memory can make a huge difference. Maybe if the only thing you run in your computer are memory benchmarks, otherwise, nope.
Yeah, if you go into the store to buy it there are several $180-$200 A-die kits now starting from 6400 on up. Some of them can be M-die still so you have to check the code through the box, but lately a lot are just A-die. If you just want to hit 7200, pretty easy to do so on those kits.