G.Skill Breaks 4000 mhz on retail kits!

[Harryejp]

That top kit is gorgeous

Agreed the brushed aluminum looks amazing!

[DildorTheDecent]

damn.

[Alurit]

like the neat brushed aluminium look of the Z, it looks like quality, not liking the "gaming" looking products personally, they look like toys not just in this case, but in general. 

[totjup5]

That's pretty insane... Leave it to g-skill I guess.

[PerfectTemplar]

I give up trying to keep up. The 3GHz I got for my new build is enough.

[Lays]

Samsung IC, and the usual CPU IMC woes are applicable here also. Please don't buy expecting these to run as-is just in case someone was.

 

So apparently some of the Skylake chips have been confirmed to have support for up to 4133 mhz some guys on hwbot thinking 5 ghz DDR4 on Ln2 may not be to far away

[TroubleKlef]

Forget the speed. The Trident Z looks BEAUTIFUL

[JerkyMcDilerino]

Once again, price is going to be waaaaay cheesy. 

[ItsGinger35]

A year from now, RAM latency will be "1 year - 9 months - 2 weeks - 3 days" and people will still be cheering for a few extra mhz of bandwith.

And @ frequencies of like 15K MHz

[patrickjp93]

Well, the DDR4 standard covers up to 4266 MHz. Let's see if we can't get there before the end of 2016 on retail kits.

[-CLASSIFIED-]

lol just cuz its rated for 4000mhz doesn't mean you can run it guys , your cpu could have a weak sauce mem controller then your not getting said benefit of faster ram 

[VSG]

So apparently some of the Skylake chips have been confirmed to have support for up to 4133 mhz some guys on hwbot thinking 5 ghz DDR4 on Ln2 may not be to far away

 

Haswell-E has support for over 3800 MHz also, and people have set 4.5 GHz DDR4 records too which means the board and IMC supported it. Doesn't really change anything for us, does it?

[SurvivorNVL]

Well, the DDR4 standard covers up to 4266 MHz. Let's see if we can't get there before the end of 2016 on retail kits.

Though they'll likely need fans to cool ram at 4266mhz or some incredible beefy heatsinks.

[TheMissxu]

A year from now, RAM latency will be "1 year - 9 months - 2 weeks - 3 days" and people will still be cheering for a few extra mhz of bandwith.

That isn't how memory latency is measured...

 

CL 19 @ 4000MT/s means it will communicate with the memory controller in the CPU every 19 clock cycles. It's not 19 nanoseconds or minutes or days or any unit of time. It's clock cycles.

 

It just so happens that clock cycles do happen over a period of time. Importantly, this period of time reduces as the clock rate or frequency increases. In other words, CL 1 is 1 clock cycle by definition, but CL 1 @ 4000MT/s is actually 

2/4000*1000=0.50ns

while CL 1 @ 2133MT/s is really

2/2133*1000=0.94ns

(almost double the time for the same CL!).

 

Finally we can then calculate that CL 19 @ 4GT/s is actually

19*2/4000*1000=9.5ns

which is faster than CL15 @ 3GT/s (10ns). Although 15-15-15-35 does have lower latency further into the memory function, but that isn't as important.

 

Edit: Speed is actually rated in megatransfers which (in DDR) is twice the clock rate.

 

DDR3 2133 @ CL 10 is about the same speed (9.36ns), but it doesn't transfer nearly the same amount of data per 4.75ns. There is a huge parallel to internet speeds and latency (although remember how memory latency is clock cycles, which must be converted to time). Who cares that you can connect to a download site with 60 ping, if you can only download at dial-up speeds. Some would sacrifice 15-30 ping for better speeds. Although, clearly the use case dictates this.

 

Also, don't forget these are using much less power that DDR3 as well.

[Swndlr]

[patrickjp93]

Though they'll likely need fans to cool ram at 4266mhz or some incredible beefy heatsinks.

The voltage will be 1.5 or 1.65, so no higher than DDR3 ever was.

[That Norwegian Guy]

That isn't how memory latency is measured...

 

CL 19 @ 4000MT/s means it will communicate with the memory controller in the CPU every 19 clock cycles. It's not 19 nanoseconds or minutes or days or any unit of time. It's clock cycles.

 

It just so happens that clock cycles do happen over a period of time. Importantly, this period of time reduces as the clock rate or frequency increases. In other words, CL 1 is 1 clock cycle by definition, but CL 1 @ 4000MT/s is actually 

2/4000*1000=0.50ns

while CL 1 @ 2133MT/s is really

2/2133*1000=0.94ns

(almost double the time for the same CL!).

 

Finally we can then calculate that CL 19 @ 4GT/s is actually

19*2/4000*1000=9.5ns

which is faster than CL15 @ 3GT/s (10ns). Although 15-15-15-35 does have lower latency further into the memory function, but that isn't as important.

 

Edit: Speed is actually rated in megatransfers which (in DDR) is twice the clock rate.

 

DDR3 2133 @ CL 10 is about the same speed (9.36ns), but it doesn't transfer nearly the same amount of data per 4.75ns. There is a huge parallel to internet speeds and latency (although remember how memory latency is clock cycles, which must be converted to time). Who cares that you can connect to a download site with 60 ping, if you can only download at dial-up speeds. Some would sacrifice 15-30 ping for better speeds. Although, clearly the use case dictates this.

 

Also, don't forget these are using much less power that DDR3 as well.

 

 

Though thanks for the lesson, I love learning things multiple times over. And semantics is my favorite thing apart from sarcasm.

[Nizo_GTO]

TridentZ? We might be reaching the limits of ddr4, ddr5 coming up!! maybe...