Slashdot Mirror
DDR4 RAM To Hit Devices Next Year
angry tapir writes "Micron has said that DDR4 memory — the successor to DDR3 DRAM — will reach computers next year, and that the company has started shipping samples of the upcoming DDR memory type. DDR4 is more power-efficient and faster than DDR3. New forms of DDR memory first make it into servers and desktops, and then into laptops. Micron said it hopes that DDR4 memory will also reach portable devices like tablets, which currently use forms of low-power DDR3 and DDR2 memory."
... I'm still stuck on good ole DDR2
Realistically, while there are benefits for "faster", it's no substitute for reducing inefficient bloatware.
Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
I predict a 33% performance increase going from DDR3 to DDR4 based on my own super-secret analysis of the press release.
I'll be impressed when they finally get around to changing DDR to TDR or QDR.
What is the expected latency of this new RAM? I've noticed that as the RAM technology has progressed, it has favored pure throughput to latency, but this is not always ideal. Is DDR4 going to help with this, or is this yet another advance that comes at the expense of added lag? Just curious on this. I didn't think RAM bandwidth was a problem, but latency could starve these current ultra-fast processors.
today is spelling optional day.
Slightly lower power consumption. Slightly faster memory. Sorry, but it's looking to me like just another way of obsoleting my portable faster, without significant performance improvement.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
The "double" indicates that it transfers data twice during one clock cycle, not that it is double the previous generation's speed.
It's called "Double Data Rate" because data is transferred on both the rising and falling edges of the clock signal.
Double the memory bus clock frequency. DDR runs two transfers per clock cycle.
Isn't it time to drop the "D" in DDR?
Yes, the wall fell in 1989. It's time.
I just bought a new computer with DDR3 in it yesterday.
ARPANET - one project out of millions that produced anything even remotely useful. TCP/IP? Big deal. Networking does not rely on just the protocol and there were plenty of protocols already and more would have been created, it's not like the gov't was needed to push phones or radio usage and development.
You can't handle the truth.
"Just like AT&T beige phones were rented and not sold, these computers also wouldn't be your property,"
It is precisely the US gov't that you should thank for rectifying that situation. The rest of your post is equally baseless and ill informed.
Are we ignoring the fact that the major players in this very industry were at one time colluding to keep prices artificially high until the DoJ stepped in?
What a surprise they neglect to inform us of the cost to the average geek of these Thuper-Duper improvements. Whats so hard about saying the MSRP is projected to be $$$/GB. I can do the street price discount on my own.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Sure! if you ignore the fact that it was government money that helped to pay to lay telephone lines across the country in the first place.
If your CPU hadn't been educated stupid, it would already have the data it needs at any given time, rendering RAM unnecessary...
Right, and DDR2 transferred 4 times per cycle, and DDR3 8 times per cycle. Neither sounds very "double" data rate to me, except when referring to the previous generation ;D.
It is a well known fact that Con Kolivas has inhaled too much anesthetic. The second link is to some page by a clueless guy who wouldn't know how to handle a benchmark if it involved a park bench and some paint.
My Linux box turns on in under 10 seconds (from sleep mode - didn't have that in the IBM PC/XT days) and I get right to work. All of my apps are already open and ready to go, and Internet Connectivity is up and running (You remember the Internet and WiFi from the 80's right?). Try booting an IBM PC/XT with DOS and opening a Spreadsheet someday, then get back to me.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Obligatory Onion .
Never shake hands with a man you meet in a fertility clinic.
But type and location. DRAM has worse access times than SRAM for various reasons. Also there is simply the distance from the processor. When you start wanting super low access time, distance matters. That's why L2 and L3 are on CPU dies these days. For L1, even that isn't enough, it has to be near the core to get the kid of speeds you want there.
The good news is with judicious use of caching, you can have your cake and eat it too for the most part. You can use cheap DRAM for most of your memory, but get overall performance in the 95% range of the SRAM you use for cache.
Great, now can you get my hard drive to keep up?
The facts are not what you think.
About 3000 competitors were destroyed by the gov't to give AT&T its monopoly.
You can't handle the truth.
Intel has already confirmed that the 2013 "tock", Haswell, will still use DDR3.
Not sure about AMD's position, but this sounds like DDR4 will wait on desktops and laptops for 2014 or 2015.
Which gives me an idea. Hats, on Steam, from MS, when you send them the scores from the Windows Experience program.
I am John Hurt.
How will DDR4 be different from DDR3? I recall the changes involved moving from SDR to DDR1, then DDR1 to DDR2 - separate CLK and CLK# signal. In DDR 3, looks like the signal count increased, which is why the packaging went from TSOP to BGAs. So now what's changed? And if they want to save power, does it require that they have multiple/split phases of a clock so that several different slow signals can be issued w/o increasing power consumption? What exactly are the details?
Until we get ECC memory as a standard for all PCs I don't really care.
I know I can get that if I buy server a motherboard and a CPU that can't be overclocked, but those are business limitations, which work mostly because the average consumer is ignorant about this stuff. There are no good technical reasons to keep ECC as a premium feature.
Yes, my external HD transfer speed only increased by a factor of FOUR. THE HORROR!
I'm pretty sure that DDR2, DDR3 and DDR4 still only transfer data two times per clock cycle, because it really doesn't make sense to increase the ratio beyond that. Aha - according to Wikipedia, DDR2 transfers data twice every bus clock cycle, but because the RAM chips divide the bus clock by 2 to get their internal clock they transfer data 4 times per internal clock cycle. It appears that DDR3 divides the bus clock by 4, giving 8 transfers per internal clock cycle, but it's still only double data rate with respect to the external clock. I'm guessing DDR4 is similarly-designed.
I'm still stuck on good ole DDR2. I THINK it is enough to me now. The price of flash memory updated very fast. For personal use, there is latest general quotation information from http://www.usbflashdrive.biz/
I remember the big thing for ddr4 was it was suppose to get rid of dual or tri channel configurations and it was suppose to be point to point or multi channel meaning it will increase the bandwidth depending on how many sticks of ram installed. Did they scrap that because that would have been cool for systems with decent integrated graphics on chip like the hd4000 or or trinity.
AT&T was a government monopoly, and gov't destroyed around 3000 telephone providers to hand over the entire industry to AT&T
You can't handle the truth.
"Just like AT&T beige phones were rented and not sold, these computers also wouldn't be your property," It is precisely the US gov't that you should thank for rectifying that situation
Thank you US gov't for crapping all over me and then being thoughtful enough to wipe off my face.
I'm not really sure why we need ddr4 over ddr3? I mean for the average geek, the cpu is never fast enough, and the hard drive is never fast enough. I don't think i've once thought, in the last 10 years: "hey, wow, my memory is so slow doing this task, I wish it was much faster".
I think I can happily live with ddr3 for the next several years, just keep giving me cheaper and fast cpu's and discs.
"Everyone knows that vi vi vi is the number of the beast" -- Richard Stallman