Does DDR5 suck?

[ᶻ𝗓𐰁]

I heard someone say it sucks. Is it worth getting DDR5 or should I stick with DDR4?

[_I_]

currently its not much better than ddr4
there are issues with some cpu ram boards combos

in the future it will get better and more compatible, like previous cpus/boards/dimms with ddr4

every version of ddr was the same way

[ᶻ𝗓𐰁]

I'll stick with DDR4 thanks. The RAM and MoBos are cheaper.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

So is DDR3 but you don't see us using that. You want a better CPU you gotta step it up a notch.

[Tiberius]

I wish it does so i have friend to accompany me during those lonely nights 😔

More serious answer, ddr5 is actually cheap if you need large quantity of ram

[Heretic]

The initial benefit was its lower power requirements, which is good for laptops and other mobile devices. For PC gamings the improvement is minor, because memory is such a small gaming improvement compared to everything else. This is why DDR3 was fine for years after DDR4 launched, but as the years went by and faster DDR4 memory kept being released it eventually became the standard. DDR5 will most likely follow the same path.

[nullable]

Originally posted by ᶻ𝗓𐰁:

I'll stick with DDR4 thanks. The RAM and MoBos are cheaper.

And the CPUs are several years old too.

I'm not sure what people really expect from DDR5, but I do know once some kind of idea takes hold people repeat it ad nauseam regardless of how things develop over time.

When I built an i7 12700k/DDR5 machine things were a bit rougher, I had to update my BIOS to improve RAM stability and compatibility. Depending on the board you buy you may still need to do that. Outside of that anyone expecting DDR5 to provide some kind of miracle improvement in performance is kidding themselves.

It wasn't like DDr3 to DDR4 was a huge leap either.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/8959/ddr4-haswell-e-scaling-review-2133-to-3200-with-gskill-corsair-adata-and-crucial/8

Maybe if you got the slowest DDR3 in a low end system and compared it to the fastest DDR4 in a much more powerful system you'd have eye popping results. But when you put it on a level playing field, not really much to write home about.

[GOD RAYS ON ULTRA™]

DDR5 is a little better, not much. Mainly the configuration is better for higher frequency and quad channel support. Larger modules and higher capacity is another advantage.

In actual gaming though, DDR5 doesn't really do anything significant.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

48GB modules is nice too

[ᶻ𝗓𐰁]

Originally posted by GOD RAYS ON ULTRA™:

DDR5 is a little better, not much. Mainly the configuration is better for higher frequency and quad channel support. Larger modules and higher capacity is another advantage.

In actual gaming though, DDR5 doesn't really do anything significant.

Yeah, seems like DDR4 CPUs are a bit more expensive for similar performance but the RAM and MoBOs are a bit cheaper. I guess it balances out but DDR4 seems more stable right now.

[_I_]

intel 12-14th gen have ddr4 and ddr5 imc, best intel cpus so far
for amd, am4 cpus only have a ddr4 imc, ryzen 5xxx or lower

am5, 7xxx-9xxx only have ddr5 imc, not possible to use ddr4 with them

it will get better in the next gens

[ᶻ𝗓𐰁]

Originally posted by _I_:

intel 12-14th gen have ddr4 imc, best intel cpus so far
for amd, am4 cpus only have a ddr4 imc, ryzen 5xxx or lower

am5, 7xxx-9xxx only have ddr5 imc, not possible to use ddr4 with them

it will get better in the next gens

Yeah, I am looking at 5xxx right now, I don't trust 13/14 gen intel tbh.

[ᶻ𝗓𐰁]

Originally posted by tbialoof:

it doesnt suck, however despite increased bandwidth there is a small but negative impact to latency which can mean certain applications like specific games can sometimes perform better on high end optimal ddr4 systems, though this is likely irrelevant for x3d vcache cpus and most ddr4 consumer systems

the main issue is early adoption, early ddr5 kinda sucked but so did early ddr4

these factors combined paint the perception that ddr5 is somehow bad, but its a specific moment in time

the main glaring issue of ddr4 is if you dont have two dual rank sticks or four single rank sticks, then you are at a performance deficit because ddr4 refreshes an entire rank at once

ddr5 solves this by refreshing a single bank of each bank group at a time, leaving the others open

essentially for general consumers, two 16gb sticks of ddr5 will perform better than two 16gb sticks of newest style single rank ddr4, in this case with ddr4 you would need to have four sticks or two double sided sticks to solve the performance deficit, but this will put additional strain on the controller, limiting speeds. this is also why mobos with 2 memory slots are still popular and why cpus dont officially support max ram speeds for more than 2 sticks, being able to run 2 sticks stable at max performance without the performance hits of ddr4 rank refreshing puts ddr5 at an advantage over ddr4.

I'm just gonna slap 2 sticks in a cheap micro form factor.

[Illusion of Progress]

You shouldn't be buying based on RAM generation. You should choose a CPU/platform first and that will almost always determine your RAM. There are generations that are sometimes compatible with more than one RAM generation. The Core 2 worked with DDR2 and DDR3, and I think the 6th and 7th generation worked with DDR3 and DDR4 (?), and the current example is the 12th through 14th generation which works with DDR4 and DDR5. Typically, for games, it won't matter because the newer generations of RAM usually offers more bandwidth, but higher timings, so it sort of cancels out (give or take) for them because they aren't often bandwidth limited but rather latency limited, but other applications besides games may see more uplifts. If they are ever bandwidth limited.

So in current times, only the LGA 1700 platform CPUs are compatible with both DDR4 and DDR5. By default, I'd be trying to choose DDR5 for them because it shouldn't be much more expensive, they usually see small uplifts from it, even in games, and their DDR4 controller apparently isn't always great, especially on CPUs like the 12400F and below (12600K/KF and above may differ). Though I realize anyone choosing LGA 1700 at this point would probably doing so for a value angle, so DDR4 might fit in there. It's your choice, but this niche example is the only platform where you even have to ask this.

If your CPU choice lands on anything else, you don't even have to ask about RAM generation.

There's really only one difference to be aware of between the two "current" RAM generations, and that is that DDR5 has a terrible time reaching the frequencies people desire with more than two DIMMs present. If you don't need high capacity, this isn't a problem, and for clarity, "high capacity" in this case would be anything you need more than two DIMMs to reach. Currently, single DDR5 DIMMs are commonly available in capacities of 16 GB or 24 GB as single rank, and thus 32 GB or 48 GB as dual rank (8 GB DIMMs exist but they're bottom of the barrel "partial" DIMMs that give up performance and you shouldn't actively choose them, so I'm ignoring them). This means 96 GB is currently the ceiling for capacity, at least if you don't want to have to drop the frequencies down. This is probably high enough that it doesn't matter for most people anyway, including those who are merely gamers.

[ᶻ𝗓𐰁]

One of the reasons I'm leaning towards DDR4 is because I have 16gb of DDR4 and want to upgrade to 32. Figure I can reuse it and put the 16gb back in later when I sell this one.

[_I_]

same as with ddr3-ddr5, running 4 dimms is more load on the cpus imc
may not hit higher speeds and be stable

imho stick to 2 dimms, unless you buy a 4 dimm kit or 2 of the exact same 2 dimm kits