• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

I

igor_kavinski

Lifer
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.
 
aigomorla said:
But man i really hate you.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
aigomorla said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
CodeBeholder said:
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.
Click to expand...
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).
 
kschendel said:
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).
Click to expand...

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.
 
aigomorla said:
This shouldn't hold true.

Having all populated sticks makes the ram have less latency.
Click to expand...
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.
aigomorla said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
kschendel said:
XMP is only a way for the memory sticks to present setup data that can't be passed using the standard SPD stuff.
Click to expand...

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:
www.overclockers.com

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 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.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top