DDR4 Memory Will Be Released By Next Month

DDR4 Memory Will Be Released By Next Month.

-- Tom

 

Intel will have to do a better job making CPUs that can OC well if they want DDR4 to push motherboard and CPU sales. DDR4 does not matter at all to the average user as is typical with next gen tech but if gamers can OC their new CPU and pair it with blazing fast DDR4 they will upgrade. Sandy Bridge CPUs OCed like crazy and can be paired with cheap DDR3 2133 so nothing more than a GPU upgrade was needed to keep these systems current for gaming. If the CPUs that support DDR4 can OC to 5 ghz DDR4 will sell like crazy as gamers upgrade.

SATA Express and NVMe has me much more interested at this point.

 

I am afraid I have to disagree with you on this one, Bruce.

For one, self-builders represent a small percentage of the total number of PC buyers - even among gamers (many of whom are migrating to notebooks). Gamers who self-build represent only a portion of all self-builders or custom PC buyers. My clients, for example, want custom PCs, but not for gaming. And "extreme" overclockers ("enthusiasts" who push systems beyond the "relatively safe limits" the motherboard utilities provide - often just to see how far they can go or "bragging rights") are but a niche market share.

As noted in Tom's link, DDR4 is 100% faster than DDR3, requires 20% less voltage and has 300% more density than that of DDR3. So DDR4 will do for the industry what DDR3 did - pack more and faster RAM into more efficient sticks. In the case of notebooks, they should extend battery run time too. Once DDR3 market share surpasses sales of DDR3, costs will drop dramatically, just as it did with DDR3 - resulting in cheaper, more efficient ("greener" and cooler), and more powerful computers.

Now that Micron (parent company of Crucial - and the world's 3rd largest memory chip maker behind Samsung and Hynix) has joined Samsung and Hynix in developing DDR4 (they've been at it since early 2011), there will be more and more chipsets and motherboard makers supporting DDR4.

When it comes to games, the fact of the matter is, game makers know most gamers don't have monster, highly overclocked systems. In fact, according to Unity3d, the largest percentage of Web Players have just 2Gb of RAM with ~77% having 3Gb or less. And 61.5% are using 2 core CPUs. So game makers code their games so you don't need 5GHz systems to achieve good game play and have a good gaming experience.

Most car enthusiasts are not drag racers and most drag racers don't race 8000HP funny cars, but still have a blast running down the track.

I agree with you that the "average user" will not suddenly retire their DDR3 systems and buy new DDR4 systems. And I also agree with you that DDR4 will have to offer significant performance gains to entice the extreme enthusiasts to dump their current systems and upgrade. I am just saying that there just are not that many extreme overclocking, self-building gaming "enthusiasts" to put a concerning dent in regular computer sales patterns to make a difference to Intel, one way or the other. That is, most new computers are purchased because users and companies need to, or are ready to buy new computers - not because some new technology comes out.

Now AMD may be another issue. Since they own less than 25% of the overall market share, they may be wise to accommodate the overclocking self-building gaming enthusiast.

 

I hope this means DDR4 will become mainstream soonish. It would make a perfect opportunity to replace my computers and not be stuck with DDR3.

 

Soonish? I am sure it does, but not sure "being stuck" with DDR3 is such a bad thing.

That said, I note Intel's Haswell-E with DDR4 shows some promising overclocking options.

 

What percentage of people actually need any of that? The average user can see any change when moving from DDR3 1333 to DDR3 2133. The average user does not need more than 2 4 gig sticks and the average user has power consumption through other components trumping their ram by a large factor.

Gamers BTW do more than self build, there is the whole massively overpriced pre-built gaming systems which will no doubt be early adopters of DDR4. If the CPUs in these systems are OCed 200-400 mhz less it will be harder to sell them than the same systems OCed 200-400 mhz more.

There are also a lot of high end system users that have quad channel memory already. Even if DDR4 is faster it wont matter if the CPUs supporting it are all dual channel at first.

My workstation for example runs on a 6 core i7 OCed to 4.6 and quad channel DDR3 2133. How much would it cost for me to ditch everything and upgrade and what do I get out of it? There is no way you can justify that upgrade.

I agree with this and if they went after the upper mid range of self builders they could do well next gen. They have already released a CPU with a 5 ghz turbo OC. If they can keep that speed on top of more instruction per cycle efficiency or take frequencies even higher next gen then I can easily see AMD pushing DDR4 sales.

 

Well, I remember when 40Mb hard drives was "more than I will ever need". When 512Mb of RAM was huge. When 1Gb processors were speed demons. When people wondered why anyone would ever need more than one core in their CPUs.

Power consumption trumping RAM? I don't see your point. Sure CPUs and GPUs consume more. Does that mean it is not worthwhile to cut consumption elsewhere if you can? But that's not even the main point of lower voltages. Lower voltage inside super-high density digital devices means a lower potential for voltages to jump (arc) across junctions. And that, in turn, means you can jam more transistors into the same space and that results in lower costs, and less waste (in the form of heat).

It also mean longer battery run times with notebooks.

But to RAM power consumption, More and more new computers come with Windows 8. And Windows 8 uses RAM while in standby mode for faster boots, so that means less power consumption when in standby/sleep mode too.

I did not say or suggest otherwise. I said that self-builders make up a small percentage of all computer buyers and I said that gamers who self build are even a smaller percentage.

I am NOT suggesting anyone dump their current systems just because DDR4 is faster. There is ALWAYS something better coming just around the corner - whether it be SSDs, faster SSDs, USB 3.0, SATA III, 4th generation 22nm CPUs, faster GPUs, or whatever.

In fact, I said with underline there would have to be significant performance gains to entice the extreme enthusiasts to dump their current systems and upgrade and I said the "average user" won't. And they shouldn't.

But I am saying, as with the migration to every new technology (SDRAM to DDR to DDR2 to DDR3 and now to DDR4; EIDE to SATA; PCI to AGP to PCIe, etc.), once the market is saturated with "NEW" systems supporting the latest technologies, the new technology will become the new "standard". And that will happen here too, regardless if Intel CPUs can be overclocked, or not.

Please note I was responding your comment that Intel will need do better at supporting overclocking if they want DDR4 to push sales. Again, I disagree because overclockers are not (by a long shot) the primary driving force in new PC sales.