Chinese Manufacturer Asgard to Launch DDR5 128 GB, 5,600 MHz Sticks As Early as 2022

[Raevenlord]

Chinese company Jiahe Jinwei owns a sub-brand of gaming-oriented products named after Norse mythology - Asgard. The company has now announced that the trial production for high-speed DDR5 modules using Micron's semiconductors has completed without issue, meaning that their roadmap is going through without a hitch. Of course, as with the introduction of any new DDR memory standard, operating frequencies are still in their nascent stage; Asgard currently is only offering 4,800 MHz DDR5 sticks, which the most premium DDR4 sticks can already surpass.

It's only a matter of time before DDR5 speeds accelerate however, and Asgard is already planning to launch 5600 MHz DDR5 kits as early as 2022. These should be available in 32 GB and 128 GB capacities with a CAS latency of 46 cycles. The next step in performance increase would look towards 6,400 MHz kits, but these should only be expected towards the end of 2022 and beginning of 2023, should the development continue to move along smoothly. All of the DDR5 memory speeds should still make do with a relatively puny 1.1 V.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[8BitZ80]

I thought Asgard was destroyed by Ragnarok.

A minimum of 4800MHz will be great for their gaming-oriented products, although the CL40 latency is a bit less gamer-oriented.

 

[R0H1T]

I thought Asgard was destroyed by Ragnarok.

A minimum of 4800MHz will be great for their gaming-oriented products, although the CL40 latency is a bit less gamer-oriented.

Maybe it was revived after RDJ reset the universe

 

[napata]

I thought Asgard was destroyed by Ragnarok.

A minimum of 4800MHz will be great for their gaming-oriented products, although the CL40 latency is a bit less gamer-oriented.

Latency is often more important than bandwidth for games. Just look at Gear 1 vs Gear 2 on RL where you need atleast 4800CL18 in G2 to slightly beat G1 3733CL14 and even then it doesn't beat it in all games.

 

[dj-electric]

Micron, Samsung and SKHynix are expected to destroy those latencies, in case anyone worries.

 

[Tardian]

Does editing 8K 4:4:4 60hz video in ProRes RAW need 256GB of memory? If not what does?

 

[Zubasa]

Does editing 8K 4:4:4 60hz video in ProRes RAW need 256GB of memory? If not what does?

More importantly nothing was mentioned about ECC, whats the point of so much memory without full ECC?

 

[Axaion]

More importantly nothing was mentioned about ECC, whats the point of so much memory without full ECC?

all ddr5 is ecc iirc

 

[las]

Wake me up when latency is good. Those timings are horrible

 

[Deleted member 205776]

Wake me up when latency is good. Those timings are horrible.

Welcome to DDR5, wait a couple years.

 

[las]

Welcome to DDR5, wait a couple years.

Thats what I plan to do.

Why would I go from 4000 at CL15 to this

I clearly remember when DDR4 came out. Same thing. I was using DDR3 at 2400 MHz at CL9 back then. DDR4 was 2400-2933 at CL14-18 or so IIRC.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Micron, Samsung and SKHynix are expected to destroy those latencies, in case anyone worries.

I thought Asgard was destroyed by Ragnarok.

A minimum of 4800MHz will be great for their gaming-oriented products, although the CL40 latency is a bit less gamer-oriented.

Latency is often more important than bandwidth for games. Just look at Gear 1 vs Gear 2 on RL where you need atleast 4800CL18 in G2 to slightly beat G1 3733CL14 and even then it doesn't beat it in all games.

From Techspot:

"A CAS latency of 50 just means 50 clock cycles between addressing a column and when the data becomes available. DDR5-10000 has an I/O bus clock of 5 GHz and a DRAM clock of 1.25 GHz, so 50 cycles equates to 40 nanoseconds. For something like DDR4-2400, this time period would be equivalent to a CAS latency of 12. In other words, if DDR5-10000 did have a tCAS of 50, then that would be perfectly okay."

People see 40ns or 50ns and freak out because "OmG tHaTs So HiGh!"

 

[Zubasa]

all ddr5 is ecc iirc

DDR5 will still offer both ECC and non-ECC variants. Only chip-level ECC by default.
That is why I said 'FULL' ECC.

 

[RedelZaVedno]

Why is CL so bad on DDR5 chips?

If I understand it correctly "what determines absolute latency (and thus system performance) is determined by both the timings and the memory clock frequency. When translating memory timings into actual latency, it is important to note that timings are in units of clock cycles, which for double data rate memory is half the speed of the commonly quoted transfer rate. Without knowing the clock frequency it is impossible to state if one set of timings is "faster" than another.

For example, DDR3-2000 memory has a 1000 MHz clock frequency, which yields a 1 ns clock cycle. With this 1 ns clock, a CAS latency of 7 gives an absolute CAS latency of 7 ns. Faster DDR3-2666 memory (with a 1333 MHz clock, or 0.75 ns per cycle) may have a larger CAS latency of 9, but at a clock frequency of 1333 MHz the amount of time to wait 9 clock cycles is only 6.75 ns. It is for this reason that DDR3-2666 CL9 has a faster absolute CAS latency than DDR3-2000 CL7 memory."

So 6400MHz CL=52 DDR5 would give us 8.125ns, far worse than lets say DDR4-4000 CL16 (=4ns)?

Will DDR5 come down to more respectable timings over time, cause I don't see a reason why even bother with higher frequencies if CL has to be raised so much (it kind of kills the purpose)?

 

[R-T-B]

all ddr5 is ecc iirc

It does some primitive internal ECC but it's not quite proper ECC.

 

[efikkan]

I thought Asgard was destroyed by Ragnarok.

Then how are you still alive?

A minimum of 4800MHz will be great for their gaming-oriented products, although the CL40 latency is a bit less gamer-oriented.

Games are usually not bandwidth limited, so I see no need to rush to DDR5 for gamers. Lower latency can help a bit though.
CL40 is a bit much, ~CL30 would be in line with what DDR4 have today, assuming the timings work the same way.

Micron, Samsung and SKHynix are expected to destroy those latencies, in case anyone worries.

But what JEDEC compliant timings will they reach?

Why would I go from 4000 at CL15 to this

But that's heavily overclocked.

 

[1d10t]

I bet Hynix module still run better than this.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Someone around here said DDR5 will be available before DDR4 has matured.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Funny how even now, we can find DDR4-5600 modules with CL24 (24-32-32-52 CR1)... Not sure why the timing are almost double for the same freq with those crappy DDR5 modules?

 

[Kaotik]

Why is TechPowerUp still spreading those marketing lies? Nothing in it will work at 5600 MHz. Call it what it really is, 5600 MT/s or DDR5-5600, never ever 5600 MHz.

Funny how even now, we can find DDR4-5600 modules with CL24 (24-32-32-52 CR1)... Not sure why the timing are almost double for the same freq with those crappy DDR5 modules?

Because "those crappy DDR5 modules" adhere to spec, DDR4-5600 doesn't. Fastest DDR4 within spec is DDR4-3200 CAS22

 

[First Strike]

Because "those crappy DDR5 modules" adhere to spec, DDR4-5600 doesn't. Fastest DDR4 within spec is DDR4-3200 CAS22

You are mixing cause and effect. A spec is a temporary compromise between manufacturers. The spec are so shitty because they can only make these shitty timings at presumed launch time. Not they make shitty timings because of the spec.

 

[ixi]

Does editing 8K 4:4:4 60hz video in ProRes RAW need 256GB of memory? If not what does?

In 256GB you could fully load any game. That would be awesome.

 

[Zubasa]

I thought Asgard was destroyed by Ragnarok.

Then how are you still alive?

The last time I heard, we are living in the realm of Midgard and the Forst Giants invaded Texas not too long ago.

Why is TechPowerUp still spreading those marketing lies? Nothing in it will work at 5600 MHz. Call it what it really is, 5600 MT/s or DDR5-5600, never ever 5600 MHz.

Because even M$ is onboard with this mess now. They label it Mhz in task manager.

 

[PapaTaipei]

Worse than ddr4 good job

 

[las]

But that's heavily overclocked.

Not that heavily but it took years before DDR4 was even able to run at this speed.
Same will be true for DDR5; Clockspeed and timings improve alot in the first few years, I am def not buying 1st generation DDR5.