Just how bad is it ? Ram question

[Min]

I'm building budget pc, my motherboard supports up to 5600mhz ddr5 ram, i found super cheap

Crucial 16GB, DDR5, 5600MHz, CL46 ram

i want to buy 2x16gb for dual channel, what worries me is - CL46 , just how bad it is for budget gaming ? I can't find benchmarks but what i found is different benchmarks for example CL40 vs CL36 is only 1-3fps difference, or it is worth it considering for example 5 fps difference ?

[_I_]

its bad

ddr speed / cl > 150 is generic
180 is ok for budget
200 is good value mark
200+ is high performance

its been like this since ddr3

5600 / 46 = 121, thats way lower than generic or oem ram

if its paired with a low end cpu/gpu you wont see a difference
but with i9k and 4090 you will be held back by it

Цитата допису Julien, cut it out.:

In regards of the CAS latency, DDR5-5600 CL46 is comparable to 4800 CL40.
You might find more data on the latter one.

Which motherboard? Intel only guarantees a transfer data up to 4800 MT/s on this cpu.

ignore the intel spec, the cpus imc can always run faster than what intel says
and thats guarantee to run at, worse case with the slowest ram and 4 dimms

[Lixire]

Цитата допису _I_:

its bad

ddr speed / cl > 150 is generic
180 is ok for budget
200 is good value mark
200+ is high performance

its been like this since ddr3

5600 / 46 = 121, thats way lower than generic or oem ram

if its paired with a low end cpu/gpu you wont see a difference
but with i9k and 4090 you will be held back by it

Цитата допису Julien, cut it out.:

In regards of the CAS latency, DDR5-5600 CL46 is comparable to 4800 CL40.
You might find more data on the latter one.

Which motherboard? Intel only guarantees a transfer data up to 4800 MT/s on this cpu.

ignore the intel spec, the cpus imc can always run faster than what intel says
and thats guarantee to run at, worse case with the slowest ram and 4 dimms

CL timings aren't everything, especially on DDR5 where each stick is running at dual channel by its own so your effective bandwidth is much larger and it will make up for those increased timings.
It's also the reason of why 2DPC on DDR5 is just an awful thing as you need much better signal integrity in that case

I do agree that CL46 sticks are awful in terms of value as others with much more tighter timings cost about the same or slightly more and just provide better value

[_I_]

but the cpus are dual channel not quad ch and cannot talk to more than 2 channels at one time

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/236773/intel-core-i9-processor-14900k-36m-cache-up-to-6-00-ghz.html
Max # of Memory Channels = 2

1 dimm vs 4 dimms will have little difference if they are the same speed/cl

cl timings are everything with the way ddr works
its now many ticks between read/write cycles

[Lixire]

Цитата допису _I_:

but the cpus are dual channel not quad ch and cannot talk to more than 2 channels at one time

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/236773/intel-core-i9-processor-14900k-36m-cache-up-to-6-00-ghz.html
Max # of Memory Channels = 2

1 dimm vs 4 dimms will have little difference if they are the same speed/cl

cl timings are everything with the way ddr works
its now many ticks between read/write cycles

It's not about the IMC but rather how DDR5 as a standard works. instead of each stick running on 1x64bit as it did on DDR4. now you have 2x32bit per stick on DDR5 for more efficient memory access as you do have 2 channels to work with at once. hence why DDR5 has so much more bandwidth.

You still should aim at 2 sticks to max out the memory performance by all means but my point is that you aren't being punished as hard in DDR5 for going with slower or having very high CL latency as you did in DDR4

4 sticks on DDR5 is just a flat out no unless you are ready to dump the speeds so hard cause signal integrity and adding far more strain to the IMC