Question 192GB DDR5 RAM (4x48GB) owner's thread

[igor_kavinski]

I'm seriously being tempted to get two kits of these for my 12700K/Z790: https://www.corsair.com/us/en/Categories/Products/Memory/VENGEANCE-RGB-DDR5-—-Black/p/CMH96GX5M2B5600C40

Anyone tried this with their Intel platform? I think AMD is still working on supporting these kits.

With this development, there's one less reason to go with 128GB DDR4 even if it's faster coz size trumps speed for crazy multitasking (browser tabs, VMs and gaming) without having to close anything.

 

[aigomorla]

Oh those aren't that bad for the price.
I really thought the only downside was the price on the ram.
But i heard these ram sticks were more optimized for the Xeon's 2400 and 3400 class.
Something about how the core handler is more optimized for the density of the ram sticks at 24-48gb parity instead of the standard 16-32.

But man i really hate you.
Those are really good price on that ram, as i was looking at 32gb variants for 50 dollars cheaper, but +16gb of DDR5 for 50 dollars is a no brainer.

ACK its out of stock.... blah...

And i need 4 sets for octo-channel as i will either be on Storm Peak, or Saphire Rapids this year.
Well as soon as i see parts for both reasonably priced near MSRP.

 

[igor_kavinski]

But man i really hate you.

I hate myself for coming upon these and they are like $350 at my local online computer store. I've been thinking incessantly about getting two kits. I saw one reddit post of someone successfully running 128GB at 5600 MT/s with their 7950X. It would suck if I drop $700 on these and then all I get is 3600 MT/s.

 

[aigomorla]

It would suck even more if your cpu's didn't get the net benefit of improvement on having that extra 8gb or not even working at all.

Im hearing a lot of complaints about that ram and AMD tho.

 

[CodeBeholder]

It would suck even more if your cpu's didn't get the net benefit of improvement on having that extra 8gb or not even working at all.

Im hearing a lot of complaints about that ram and AMD tho.

I've seen reports of complaints about AM5 supporting all four channels at once, but I can't seem to find the actual reports, just the rumors.

 

[kschendel]

I've seen reports of complaints about AM5 supporting all four channels at once, but I can't seem to find the actual reports, just the rumors.

AM5 CPU's are all dual channel. I imagine you're talking about running 4 sticks, which means two sticks per channel. AM5 takes a significant speed reduction doing that. I think Intel does as well, although perhaps not as severe (not sure).

 

[igor_kavinski]

It's running on 7950X!

192GB of DDR5-5200 running STABLE on 7950x
by u/thisisnacho in buildapc

 

[aigomorla]

AM5 CPU's are all dual channel. I imagine you're talking about running 4 sticks, which means two sticks per channel. AM5 takes a significant speed reduction doing that. I think Intel does as well, although perhaps not as severe (not sure).

This shouldn't hold true.

Having all populated sticks makes the ram have less latency.
However it makes overclocking it less stable.
But XMP took out all the guess work, so i would honestly say its moot, unless your manually dialing in your memory overclocks, and ignoring XMP.

 

[kschendel]

This shouldn't hold true.

Having all populated sticks makes the ram have less latency.

No, that is not true, at least not CAS latency. Perhaps what you are thinking of is dual ranking, which is implied by having two sticks per channel. With dual ranking, access on one rank can proceed while refreshing the other rank.

However it makes overclocking it less stable.
But XMP took out all the guess work, so i would honestly say its moot, unless your manually dialing in your memory overclocks, and ignoring XMP.

XMP is only a way for the memory sticks to present setup data that can't be passed using the standard SPD stuff. There's no way for XMP to correct for the electrical load issues presented when you run more than one stick per memory channel. Zen 1 and Zen+ had some pretty significant difficulties running two sticks per channel, and it seems that the first gen of DDR5 controllers is repeating the 4 stick learning curve.

 

[aigomorla]

XMP is only a way for the memory sticks to present setup data that can't be passed using the standard SPD stuff.

XMP was intended as a guarentee for gamers for set overclocks on the ram.
It means if your ram is not stable on XMP then you can RMA it for whatever reason, because its not stable at XMP.

Also latency for 4 sticks vs 2 sticks is more in clock cycles, then actual timings.
If the ram can be run at 1T or 2T.
Its independent of CAS or other timings.
You are gaurentee'd on you 4 ram sticks running at 2T

1T or 2T is something that is excluded from XMP.
Because its more on if it can run even at 1T on 4 sticks or not, as a lottery.

Here is more on command rate:

2T vs. 1T on DDR3?

I'm sure it's been addressed before, but the search terms are too short for the search to work :shrug: Can someone explain, or point me to a write-up of how much better 1T over 2T is for DDR3, and also to explain what they mean? I see lots of people at 1T. I'm at 2T (9-9-9-24 2T @1900 on 12gb...

www.overclockers.com

Again something we sort of ignore now, because of XMP.
But before changing clock command, could help increase your overall overclock, giving you faster ram, but at higher latency.