Next-Generation DDR4 Memory to Reach 4.266GHz - Report

Discussion in 'PC Industry' started by Unknown Soldier, Aug 19, 2010.

  1. Unknown Soldier

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2002
    Messages:
    2,280
    Likes Received:
    62
    News Source: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/memory...ion_DDR4_Memory_to_Reach_4_266GHz_Report.html
     
  2. ShaidarHaran

    ShaidarHaran hardware monkey
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    4,000
    Likes Received:
    50
    I'm all for technological advancement but there's no point in this for the desktop. Tri-channel DDR3 is more than enough for every current desktop workload that I'm aware of, let alone quad-channel coming with Sandy Bridge on Waimea Bay.
     
  3. pcchen

    pcchen Moderator
    Moderator Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,800
    Likes Received:
    201
    Location:
    Taiwan
    You'd want that when you have GPU embedded inside a CPU.
     
  4. Rolf N

    Rolf N Recurring Membmare
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,494
    Likes Received:
    55
    Location:
    yes
    Using less channels of faster memory makes the motherboards simpler/cheaper/more reliable, in theory at least.
     
  5. ShaidarHaran

    ShaidarHaran hardware monkey
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    4,000
    Likes Received:
    50
    If you're sharing a direct link with the CPU to RAM and (I assume) sharing the same memory controller, sure.

    Yes. My comments were purely in regard to performance.
     
  6. Blazkowicz

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    256
    obviously there's the latency wall, which ddr4 or any other new memory can't possibly break.
    what's funny is ddr2 is still massively popular for new personal computers, and all the parts and non-PC uses.

    so I guess ddr2, ddr3 and ddr4 will coexist for a while.
    if anything the 2015 date may be when ddr2 gets dropped to the legacy status ddr1 somewhat has.
     
  7. rpg.314

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    /
    Actually, with clock speed saturated, I would have thought that memory latency (in terms of cpu clocks) will reduce as memory technology advances. But so far there doesn't seem to have been much progress in this regard.
     
  8. fehu

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    615
    Location:
    Somewhere over the ocean
    Faking an evolution for the ddr standard is the best that we can do?
    It's always the same: higher latencies, some bw, and for at least a year the newpowerfull standard is weaker and costlyer than the old one

    what happened to native fb modules?
     
  9. Blazkowicz

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    256
    there are physical limits, even the speed of light. much like the situation with hard drives, or internet latency.

    Maybe chip stacking will be used for that purpose?
    i.e. imagine some cheap computer from the year 2020. along with your main processing die's various L1, L2 and L3 caches you've got 1GB or more of low latency, stacked memory, plus 16GB or 32GB memory in regular ddr4 sticks on the motherboard.
     
  10. metafor

    Regular

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    463
    Likes Received:
    0
    For desktops, the limitations is heat dissipation. It's difficult enough cooling these processors without having a DRAM module stacked on top.

    Most embedded processors already use PoP memory.
     
  11. Grall

    Grall Invisible Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    10,801
    Likes Received:
    2,174
    Location:
    La-la land
    It's due to the way DRAM works internally. It takes (pretty much) the same amount of time to precharge banks in a 15-year-old EDO chip as it does in today's DDR3 modules, more or less same amount of time for sense amps to read out bits, and so on... Some progress has been made of course, but nowhere near the same amount as how raw bandwidth has developed.

    Most of the improvements of latency in DRAM tech seems to come from things like pipelining etc, but that only works on regular, uniform access patterns. Random accesses scattered across random memory pages are still terribly slow.

    If we want faster memory, we're going to have to come up with a different technology to store data. Perhaps SRAM will become viable again at some point. After all, if it was good enough for the C64, it ought to be good enough for PCs too... ;)
     
  12. rpg.314

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    /
    I don't believe it. When I look at Hennessey/Patterson, I find that memory access time halves every 12-14 years. Though they mention that memory advances are slowing.
     
  13. Blazkowicz

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    256
    wow I didn't know of SRAM on the commodore 64, but after a search it turns out it had 512 bytes of it, for "Colour-RAM".
    :razz:
     
  14. nutball

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,223
    Likes Received:
    555
    Location:
    en.gb.uk
    12-14 years is a geological time-scale in computing.
     
  15. rpg.314

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    /
    Yes, but the point is that latency is decreasing, and is not constant at all.
     
  16. Blazkowicz

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    256
    maybe one of the magical cooling solutions we can sometimes read about will work out on industrial scale. my favorite one was the ultra-thin nanotube based solution that even turned heat into electric power ; die-stacked or "3D" chips are often hyped as the solution of the future.

    no doubt there's a lot of hot air and hurdles, but I can't rule it out. when seeing that current stuff works at all despite the infinetely complex research, engineering and issues, and that 28nm, 22nm are likely to work I'm amazed already.
     
  17. Grall

    Grall Invisible Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    10,801
    Likes Received:
    2,174
    Location:
    La-la land
    All the RAM in the C64 should be SRAM, since it did not have a DRAM controller. Memory was basically hooked up straight to the main CPU, with maybe a bit of glue logic for banking etc...IIRC of course. Also, I'm pretty certain there was no need for taking account of memory refresh when programming the old breadbox in assembler - you just had a certain number of cycles/memory accesses per raster line, and that was it.

    Latency IS decreasing, extremely slowly. 2x in a decade and a half means access hasn't moved much at all. It's moved from "very slow" to "very slow".

    "Even slower" actually, since CPU clock speeds have increased roughly 700-1000 percent in the same time period...!
     
  18. Thowllly

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    551
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Norway
    It had DRAM, the VIC-II spent 5 cycles every scanline refreshing it.
     
  19. hoom

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,010
    Likes Received:
    540
    Are they talking reasonable DDR4 availability in 2012 or 2014+?
    Point to point bus should make for more efficient operation but I kinda don't like the sound of one DIMM per channel.

    Now that I think about it though; most of the time in recent years I've only had two DIMMs because my RAM upgrades have normally been faster clocked as well as bigger, so I have removed the older modules.

    While GDDR isn't directly comparable to DDR, GDDR4 & 5 came along quite soon after GDDR3, any sign of GDDR6 yet?
     
  20. Grall

    Grall Invisible Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    10,801
    Likes Received:
    2,174
    Location:
    La-la land
    Oh! Then I stand corrected... :D Thanks for the reminder.

    Seems to me the PC hardware market evolution is slowing down. Manufacturers seem more and more unwilling to embrace new standards (unless it has tangible cost benefits - such as replacing cumbersome IDE interfaces with SATA).

    Hoping for "reasonable" (which is a rather loose term) DDR4 in 2012 might be too much to hope for - if one by "reasonable" means somewhat comparable cost/MB - but 2014 is a damn long way off. Perhaps a compromise? 2013 for cost parity? :)

    I think it sounds great. Should improve stability and reliability as well as performance.

    I run OCZ Platinum DDR3 7-7-7-24 1600MHz modules at 7-7-7-20 1660MHz in all 6 slots on my mobo. Works great as long as the RAM is actively cooled (by the CPU fan in this case...) :D If you have quality RAM, and don't go totally overboard with the clocking it's not a problem with two modules per channel.

    Dunno GDDR6, however I wonder how similar DDR4 signaling is from GDDR5. If the two share the same ECC protection capability and so on. I suppose there would have to be ECC in DDR4 at those frequencies or things might get dicey.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...