DDR3 or DDR4?

[xfia]

yo intel!!! why does cas latency suck on every ddr4 kit i see?
i have seen gaming ram testing that shows cas 9 1600mhz is a good place to be at but the ddr4 kits i see are clocked like cas 15 2133mhz..
something different with the memory controller im missing or what gives?

 

[AsRock]

Higher MHz the higher CL will be, been the case for many years now.

 

[sneekypeet]

http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/memory-performance-speed-latency

Read that, it may help to shed some light on your "suck", you will see that latency has slightly improved.

Also if you are a clocker, and find the right kits, with minimal voltage added, you can drop timings on most, but not all kits out there.

 

[xfia]

guess just leave it to crucial to write something that makes since and explains the progression of ddr.
actually kinda simple if you can wrap your head around it.. jeeze we need clock cycle time and true latency labeled on kits.

 

[sneekypeet]

guess just leave it to crucial to write something that makes since and explains the progression of ddr.
actually kinda simple if you can wrap your head around it.. jeeze we need clock cycle time and true latency labeled on kits.

They should help users in such a manner, but everyone just follows the basic standards.

 

[cdawall]

I feel like the OP should do some reading. Before deciding what sucks.

 

[GreiverBlade]

well my Predator kit is a 2800 C14 and they don't suck that much

 

[Bill_Bright]

Good find, sneekypeet! Bookmarked. I never gave much care about CAS latency values - primarily concentrating on quantity first, then speed (and motherboard compatibility, of course). So Crucial's "The bottom line" vindicates my philosophy!

For optimal performance, install as much memory as possible, use the latest memory technology, and choose modules with as much speed as is cost-effective and/or relevant for the applications you’re using.

I've had many heated discussions where some of my peers were, IMO, too concerned with CL values. So I will be sure to point them to this Crucial whitepaper. And BTW, I recommend following the link to the actual whitepaper as it has a little more detail.

 

[sneekypeet]

I feel like the OP should do some reading. Before deciding what sucks.

Most people pondering DDR4 assume this. It isn't just one or two people. My reviews are constantly trolled with less informed users.

 

[Bill_Bright]

My reviews are constantly trolled with less informed users.

That does not seem like a fair statement to me. The very fact they (the majority anyway) are reading reviews seems to me they are interested in, and trying to learn. And reviews are a great place for that.

Please note I am going only on the connotations "trolled" implies. If that is not what you mean then my apologies.

 

[sneekypeet]

That does not seem like a fair statement to me. The very fact they (the majority anyway) are reading reviews seems to me they are interested in, and trying to learn. And reviews are a great place for that.

Please note I am going only on the connotations "trolled" implies. If that is not what you mean then my apologies.

Trolled in this context is something along the lines of how their DDR3 is better because of lower timings. IE they have no idea what they are talking about but are still compelled to post FUD.

 

[xfia]

Trolled in this context is something along the lines of how their DDR3 is better because of lower timings. IE they have no idea what they are talking about but are still compelled to post FUD.

its easy to see your a bit annoyed with common misconceptions.. understandable.
i have read several memory overclocking guides and have also read a few articles with gaming testing and now i can see such a test is practically pointless if you understand the formula. the formula that i had never seen laid out like crucial has kindly done.

 

[cdawall]

Most people pondering DDR4 assume this. It isn't just one or two people. My reviews are constantly trolled with less informed users.

Reminds me of when DDR3 came out.

 

[Kanan]

Basically the situation now is, if your DDR4 isn't clocked really high (3000+) it sucks compared to good DDR3 (high MHz, low latency, eg DDR3 2400 at CL10). But DDR4 is still in its child days so... it will easily surpass DDR3 after some time, even with cheap kits. I guess it was "always" like that, with DDR2 compared to DDR3, or DDR1 compared to DDR2. And so on.

 

[sneekypeet]

its easy to see your a bit annoyed with common misconceptions.. understandable.
i have read several memory overclocking guides and have also read a few articles with gaming testing and now i can see such a test is practically pointless if you understand the formula. the formula that i had never seen laid out like crucial has kindly done.

Was not intended as a dig, just a lot of people have a misconception and instead of asking to understand run around trying to make everyone side with what they think is reality. While you may have thought it sucked, with a little more information, you accepted the facts