vacancies advertise contact news tip The Vault
facebook rss twitter

G.Skill showcases 32GB DDR4 running at 3,333MHz

by Tarinder Sandhu on 9 September 2014, 20:34

Tags: G.SKILL

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qacixv

Add to My Vault: x

Pushing the boundaries of what's possible with nascent DDR4 memory introduced in concert with the Intel Core i7-5960X processor last month, memory specialists G.Skill showcased an 8-DIMM, 32GB kit operating at a native 3,333MHz at the Intel Developer Forum today.

Cranking up the speed from the reviewed Ripjaws 4 3,000MHz memory, G.Skill claims it is the only vendor to offer a 32GB capacity with class-leading speeds, following on from a 16GB (4x4GB) quad-channel kit announced earlier.

The normal recipe for increasing speeds is to also increase latencies. G.Skill, however, keeps timings at 16-16-16-36, and the 32GB set has been validated on the Asus Rampage V Extreme X99 motherboard. Under the new heatspreaders is specially screened ICs from Hynix.

Benchmarking at over 70GB/s on the popular AIDA benchmark and therefore comfortably ahead of the results we achieved on the 3,000MHz set, super-fast DDR4 is a supremely niche product, reserved for those who want the very last drop of performance from the X99 platform.

And such performance doesn't come cheap. A combination of DDR4 scarcity and bleeding-edge speeds means G.Skill estimates the 32GB kit will cost in the region of $1,400 when released in limited quantities later on this month.



HEXUS Forums :: 5 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
$1400 is a lot of money. How long will it be before games / applications need that amount of memory do people think?

Maybe less than 3 years?
DDR4 is a lot of money, especially as you consider the gains you are going to make are marginal. You need to be running some serious hardware before this makes a difference.
MrComputerSaint
$1400 is a lot of money. How long will it be before games / applications need that amount of memory do people think?

Maybe less than 3 years?

It wasn't too long ago I thought RAM disks would make a comeback in the form of ultra high performance storage for very high quality video capture, but I now think that is a role better handled by PCIe SSDs when they become cheaper. So I don't know how end-consumers like us will eventually utilize 32GB of system memory let alone when.
Both good points, you certainly do need to be running excellent hardware and you'll be needing to use the programs that can really take advantage of the RAM.
Axle_grease, you might still be right with RAM disks coming to the market as that would make sense after the larger 32 and 64GB capacities are reached. If you had a SSD type device but had 4 x connectors to plug into the RAM slots on a motherboard then that'd be useful for the very high capacity systems.

I think that type of device would be used in servers however before making its way to the home user market.

I don't think my whole PC even cost $1400
Axle_Grease
MrComputerSaint
$1400 is a lot of money. How long will it be before games / applications need that amount of memory do people think?

Maybe less than 3 years?

It wasn't too long ago I thought RAM disks would make a comeback in the form of ultra high performance storage for very high quality video capture, but I now think that is a role better handled by PCIe SSDs when they become cheaper. So I don't know how end-consumers like us will eventually utilize 32GB of system memory let alone when.

I use Ramdisks for playing games myself.
I use plain old mechanical drives to store the disk images and just mount the ramdisk for whatever game, takes 30-60s depending of size of game, for eg 18GB of modded skyrim is 54s and that's the largest load I have. Ingame there's no loads whatsoever.
I would use SSD's if there was any performance benefit but as I'm using sataII (Old socket 1366 with xeon5650 hexcore) there's no benefit of SSD over a pair of 750GB mech drives… at least as far as games go, for loading windows it'd probably be worth it in normal circumstances, but I just hibernate and that allows load times that're comparable to SSD anyway.