No clue why DDR4000 CL16, which is easily achieved on all Samsung bdie, wasn't used here. It crushes DDR5 for way less money. It's wild how long bdie has held the performance crown. Hopefully Samsung can Make a low latency DDR5 8000 kit soon.
Here's a fun idea, take a Bdie cl14 4000 kit, tune the $hit out of it and then compare the performance to a similar price tuned DDR5 kit. Watch the bdie run circles around all the current garbage ddr5 kits. We NEED lower latency DDR5!
Done that, doesn't crush a tuned ddr5 kit. Especially a hynix one.Here's a fun idea, take a Bdie cl14 4000 kit, tune the $hit out of it and then compare the performance to a similar price tuned DDR5 kit. Watch the bdie run circles around all the current garbage ddr5 kits. We NEED lower latency DDR5!
DDR4 is faster in Warzone.Done that, doesn't crush a tuned ddr5 kit. Especially a hynix one.
Maybe if ADL had a better IMC, able to run 4400c16 like cometlake could, yeah, but most ADL hit a wall at 3800-4000 so, nope. Lot's of games actually run better, and I mean WAY better on tuned ddr5 than tuned ddr4. Cyberpunk for example, hardest part of the map, a tuned ddr4 drops to around 100fps on a 12900k, tuned ddr5 holds steady at around 115.
After reading countless reviews, I'm going to stick with my 16GB x 2 setup. For my uses, it's not worth the expense. Gaming-wise, there was literally no difference between dual and quad channel. If there was, I'd jump all over the addition.6 years ago:
DDR4 sweet spot: 3200Mhz, 40GB/s dual channel, 75GB/s quad channel.
DDR4 sweet spot: 3600Mhz, same bandwidth
DDR5: high latency, 75GB/s.
Conclusion, get a quad channel system, and for the sake of all, DON'T bench FPS GAMES ! Bench loading time. It's there where you'll see a 50% increase with quad channel or DDR5.
I think that DDR5 is being thrust upon us prematurely. It's a lot of extra cost for little to no performance gain. Kinda reminds me of the HBM on my R9 Furies.My takeaway is that DDR5's current state is the average kit is comparable to a decent 2400 MHz kit in performance but is way more expensive, and the absolute best kits are ~DDR4 3000 MHz performance but again, wayyyyyy more expensive. Seems like DDR5 needs to be double the clock speed and double or less the timings to be competitive in gaming as a rule of thumb.
In most cases, you can still game just fine with DDR3. I've watched DDR become DDR2, become DDR3, become DDR4, etc. and it has made me realise that the RAM doesn't make a significant difference in most cases. The only time that I've ever seen it truly matter was in a few early cases of Ryzen and that was treated as a strange new anomaly (because it was an anomaly).This happened with DDR3 to DDR4 of course, so in a year or two things should be sorted with DDR5 and we can get some nice DDR5 8000 MHz CL36/CL38 kits. Maybe another year til prices come down past that. Pain.