Overclock.net banner
21 - 40 of 311 Posts
For ddr5 or ddr4. From what I understand, dual rank doesn’t have too much of a benefit with ddr5 and also since you can run frequency so much higher with SR kits, they perform better than DR.

In that case it would be capacity?

Regardless, I’ll let everyone else figure it out and then buy the best top tier **** to play with in 2-3 years. Me personally I don’t see tangible gains to justify the hefty cost premium right now.
For me its the number of people that think I'm doing something wrong sticking to micron rev b, either I should move onto DDR5 or I have crap ram compared to samsung B die, when in any actual real world usage the difference is negligible especially at 4K.
 
Hey everyone. I compared the performance of manually OCed and tuned DDR4 vs DDR5 to see if the cost difference of $1180 CAD and reduction in memory capacity by 32GB was justified. I got kind of lucky with my CPU and could OC my Crucial 2x32GB 3200 c16 Micron Rev.B kit to 4400 c16 1T gear1 stable. First and foremost this comparison is for my personal use case to evaluate if going with DDR5 is worth it, I just thought I'd share my results with everyone else. I used CapFrameX to capture the data ingame and compare results, except for MW2 in which I used the ingame benchmark. Also note these results are all at 1440p as I don't have a 4K monitor.

To start here are the system specs, I've used the exact same CPU and GPU, NVME drive and power supply, with the difference being motherboard and memory kit.
CPU was cooled with a heatkiller IV block on a mora and the gpu is currently on air. They were left stock just to normalize everything except the memory. Click the links on the ram descriptions to see screenshots of the stable profiles.

General Specs
  • CPU: 13900K - completely stock with power limits disabled
  • GPU: RTX 4090 FE - stock
  • NVME Drive: WD sn850 2TB
  • PSU: Corsair HX1200
  • OS: Windows 11 pro 22H2 fresh install with respective drivers installed
  • GPU Driver: Nvidia driver 527.56
DDR4 Components
DDR5 Components
Here are the results:

Modern Warfare 2 (2022) on High/Ultra settings without DLSS or upscaling
8000 c36 DDR5 results View attachment 2590780
4400 c16 DDR4 results View attachment 2590795

No real variance here as this is within error and run to run variance

Cyberpunk 2077 on Ultra with RT, DLSS on Quality, Crowd density set to High
Results from the the built-in benchmark:

8000 c36 DDR5 View attachment 2590785
4400 c16 DDR4 View attachment 2590786

Results from actual gameplay testing in which I did the exact same thing for both
View attachment 2590787

The Witcher 3 v1.32 - Maxed out
I took the readings on my old 5900X and 3080 system for comparison before the RT update, since I was looking at these for personal use I stuck to version 1.32 for comparitive purposes.
View attachment 2590789

F1 22 - Bahrain Dry in-game benchmark, everything maxed out with relevant RT things on
View attachment 2590790

Fallout 4 - Life in the Ruins modlist from Wabbajack, it's heavily modded basically
View attachment 2590791

SkyrimSE - Elysium Remastered modlist from wabbajack that is also very heavily modded
View attachment 2590792


I think the results are kind of interesting in that there's a negligible performance difference between my DDR4 and DDR5 setup. Surprisingly I have much better 0.1% lows with the DDR4 setup than I do with the DDR5 setup, and this is consistent across various games. I honestly have no idea as to why that is.

I wish I had more time to bench other games but I only looked at those that are relevant to me and ones I would be playing. The DDR5 setup absolutely did not justify a hefty cost premium and a decrease in memory capacity by 32GB. I think there's a case to me made that if you have good ddr4 and can manually OC it, just stick with that instead of early adopting DDR5 unless you enjoy tinkering with the latest hardware. I will personally be on my current DDR4 setup until 2-3 years from now where better, cheaper and more mature DDR5 along with better boards and memory controllers are out. Thank you for reading.
Show us the timings : memtweakit
Maybe other people can compare:)
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: Telstar
Discussion starter · #24 ·
45 mins on cp77 is way off, you should get 90 plus.

Try 7200c32/7400c32 1T, probably you are not 100% stable.
I no longer have any ddr5 hardware so unfortunately I cannot. It could be outliers but it’s a consistent pattern across all results so 🤷🏻‍♂️

I had numbers for 7400 c34 but forgot to save them to another drive before I nuked the OS for my apex setup.

Again, this isn’t a comparison of ddr4 vs ddr5 in general since most imcs aren’t going 4400 gear1. It was just a comparison of ddr4 vs ddr5 manually tuned for my personal setup and use to determine if performance benefit was enough to justify the cost difference.
 
Again, this isn’t a comparison of ddr4 vs ddr5 in general since most imcs aren’t going 4400 gear1.
Another point to note as well is while absolutely impressive for G1 and the capacity, 2 x 32 Micron Rev.B at 4400CL16 is quite a far way off timing wise compared to its 2x16 SR version, and B die.

I was very interested in this kit back when it was around, but felt like I didn't need 64 Gb yet as well as the price being very high, and knew it wouldn't OC as well, so now I will have to continue dealing with those horrendous 0.1% lows on just 32 Gb.
 
Discussion starter · #26 ·
Show us the timings : memtweakit
Maybe other people can compare:)
You don’t see the link to the image in the text section at the start mentioning the setup? I’ll dig through and see if I saved a screenshot with memtweak it but the only timings not in asrock timing config which I changed where wrpre to 64 and wpreden to 63 to set tWR to 24 in memtweakit.

Would also be hard to compare unless you use my save files for things and do the exact same thing in game I did.

I wish I had more time to gather more data but I wasn’t able to. Again was meant to be a comparison for me to assess whether the jump to ddr5 was worth it, just figured I’d share my findings.
 
You don’t see the link to the image in the text section at the start mentioning the setup? I’ll dig through and see if I saved a screenshot with memtweak it but the only timings not in asrock timing config which I changed where wrpre to 64 and wpreden to 63 to set tWR to 24 in memtweakit.

Would also be hard to compare unless you use my save files for things and do the exact same thing in game I did.

I wish I had more time to gather more data but I wasn’t able to. Again was meant to be a comparison for me to assess whether the jump to ddr5 was worth it, just figured I’d share my findings.
Tnx found the link now. Too bad it's too blurry on my phone. So can't see the timings. Will look later on my computer.

Maybe upload higher quality pictures here?
 
I would be absolutely shocked if any one game could eat up all 32 GB worth of RAM.
Try Anthem. I see it hit 28gb system RAM usage regularly. It's always using at least 20gb or so. That game is a pig. I'm one of the few who still think it's fun as all get out, just for the flight physics...
 
Try Anthem. I see it hit 28gb system RAM usage regularly. It's always using at least 20gb or so. That game is a pig. I'm one of the few who still think it's fun as all get out, just for the flight physics...
I've already mentioned it before, Anno 1800 already uses up 28 Gb without the two last expansions, Galciv 3 reuires 32 Gb for its largest map and theres many others.

Not having enough ram doesn't mean the game isn't going to work, just like you surely can load and run any game on a Pentium G4560 and Radeon 550 (Done and tried this a lot).

Anytime page file needs to be used is when you see those terrible 0.1% lows. 16 Gb wasn't enough to avoid that 3 years ago, but you don't notice it unless you test for minimum frames.

If you don't want to believe, then go ahead and fully disable page file and see how well any such title runs.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: Ichirou
Also time for some theory crafting:

1) This is with Micron DDR4, which while good is not as good as Samsung B die.

2) 32 Gb vs 32 Gb, the DDR5 0.1 lows would be the same tiny bit higher as the 1% lows.

3) Tuned Samsung B die however would likely match or even be better than 8000 DDR5 in those few comparisons.
CP2077 is full gpu limit @WQHD so he only test the GPU, you can see @fullhd i think is full CPU limited.
The same setting Raytracing Ultra and then DLSS Quality
CPU@Stock and that Daily
Font Screenshot Parallel Rectangle Number


1440p
Font Electronic device Multimedia Screenshot Display device

1080p
Font Multimedia Screenshot Display device Gadget

720p
Font Screenshot Multimedia Software Display device
 
Hey everyone. I compared the performance of manually OCed and tuned DDR4 vs DDR5 to see if the cost difference of $1180 CAD and reduction in memory capacity by 32GB was justified. I got kind of lucky with my CPU and could OC my Crucial 2x32GB 3200 c16 Micron Rev.B kit to 4400 c16 1T gear1 stable. First and foremost this comparison is for my personal use case to evaluate if going with DDR5 is worth it, I just thought I'd share my results with everyone else. I used CapFrameX to capture the data ingame and compare results, except for MW2 in which I used the ingame benchmark. Also note these results are all at 1440p as I don't have a 4K monitor.

To start here are the system specs, I've used the exact same CPU and GPU, NVME drive and power supply, with the difference being motherboard and memory kit.
CPU was cooled with a heatkiller IV block on a mora and the gpu is currently on air. They were left stock just to normalize everything except the memory. Click the links on the ram descriptions to see screenshots of the stable profiles.

General Specs
  • CPU: 13900K - completely stock with power limits disabled
  • GPU: RTX 4090 FE - stock
  • NVME Drive: WD sn850 2TB
  • PSU: Corsair HX1200
  • OS: Windows 11 pro 22H2 fresh install with respective drivers installed
  • GPU Driver: Nvidia driver 527.56
DDR4 Components
DDR5 Components
Here are the results:

Modern Warfare 2 (2022) on High/Ultra settings without DLSS or upscaling
8000 c36 DDR5 results View attachment 2590780
4400 c16 DDR4 results View attachment 2590795

No real variance here as this is within error and run to run variance

Cyberpunk 2077 on Ultra with RT, DLSS on Quality, Crowd density set to High
Results from the the built-in benchmark:

8000 c36 DDR5 View attachment 2590785
4400 c16 DDR4 View attachment 2590786

Results from actual gameplay testing in which I did the exact same thing for both
View attachment 2590787

The Witcher 3 v1.32 - Maxed out
I took the readings on my old 5900X and 3080 system for comparison before the RT update, since I was looking at these for personal use I stuck to version 1.32 for comparitive purposes.
View attachment 2590789

F1 22 - Bahrain Dry in-game benchmark, everything maxed out with relevant RT things on
View attachment 2590790

Fallout 4 - Life in the Ruins modlist from Wabbajack, it's heavily modded basically
View attachment 2590791

SkyrimSE - Elysium Remastered modlist from wabbajack that is also very heavily modded
View attachment 2590792


I think the results are kind of interesting in that there's a negligible performance difference between my DDR4 and DDR5 setup. Surprisingly I have much better 0.1% lows with the DDR4 setup than I do with the DDR5 setup, and this is consistent across various games. I honestly have no idea as to why that is.

I wish I had more time to bench other games but I only looked at those that are relevant to me and ones I would be playing. The DDR5 setup absolutely did not justify a hefty cost premium and a decrease in memory capacity by 32GB. I think there's a case to me made that if you have good ddr4 and can manually OC it, just stick with that instead of early adopting DDR5 unless you enjoy tinkering with the latest hardware. I will personally be on my current DDR4 setup until 2-3 years from now where better, cheaper and more mature DDR5 along with better boards and memory controllers are out. Thank you for reading.
The 0.1% lows aren't surprising at all. You already have more than enough bandwidth with 4400mhz DDR4, it's the latency that gets you those lows.
 
Page file shouldn't be coming into play with 32gb+
Says who?

Cyberpunk and Witcher 3 are very demanding games, gamers don't get to decide that those games shouldn't be using more than 32 Gb just because it disagrees with their feelings or whatever.

Also in what world does a few ns less latency at most make that big a difference to 0.1% lows?
 
Says who?

Cyberpunk and Witcher 3 are very demanding games, gamers don't get to decide that those games shouldn't be using more than 32 Gb just because it disagrees with their feelings or whatever.
If having 32gb of ram was such a huge bottleneck as to cut 1% lows in half on popular video games, you wouldn't be the one making that discovery. You're the only one here with "feelings" as their actual evidence.
 
If having 32gb of ram was such a huge bottleneck as to cut 1% lows in half on popular video games, you wouldn't be the one making that discovery.
I didn't claim to, the OP made that discovery.

No hardware website even bothers testing ram.

We have some evidence here at last that 64 Gb is beneficial in Cyberpunk and Witcher 3, from what I can see no one else has tested this because they simply don't have such setups to compare.
 
I didn't claim to, the OP made that discovery.

No hardware website even bothers testing ram.

We have some evidence here at last that 64 Gb is beneficial in Cyberpunk and Witcher 3, from what I can see no one else has tested this because they simply don't have such setups to compare.
I don't think that's the evidence you have. You have evidence of a latency disparity between these 2 memory configs. The memory size is a red herring.

It would be nice to see the AIDA numbers for both configs. I'd bet the DDR5 has 25-50%% higher latency.
 
I don't think that's the evidence you have. You have evidence of a latency disparity between these 2 memory configs. The memory size is a red herring.

It would be nice to see the AIDA numbers for both configs. I'd bet the DDR5 has 25% higher latency if not more.
Latency does not make that big a difference, capacity does.
 
Latency does not make that big a difference, capacity does.
If 32GB RAM was a bottleneck in those games, wouldn't the game makers say so in the recommended hardware info? Most gamers are still with 16GB RAM...
 
21 - 40 of 311 Posts