DDR 5 question

[rumple9]

With the move over to DDR5 next year and speeds of upto 8000+mhz, will we only need half as much ram to achieve the same benefit?

For example I currenty run 16gb 3200mhz DDR4. In future would I only need 8gb 6400mhz DDR5 to have the same performance?

 

[Tetras]

No, memory requirements for games will continue to increase.

 

[EsaT]

No, memory requirements for games will continue to increase.

Correction:
Because of general code bloat and increasing amount of bloatware more memory is needed just for same old level of functionality.

 

[Joxeon]

I think 32gb will be the sweetspot for a DDR5 system, if your on a tight budget though you can always get 1x16gb then add another later as with DDR5 a single dimm will run in dual channel.

 

[VersionMonkey]

With the move over to DDR5 next year and speeds of upto 8000+mhz, will we only need half as much ram to achieve the same benefit?

For example I currenty run 16gb 3200mhz DDR4. In future would I only need 8gb 6400mhz DDR5 to have the same performance?

No it doesn't work like that. The memory speed is primarily concerned with the time it takes to get program code and data from the memory onto the CPU.
DDR5 will only reduce the amount of time the CPU spends waiting for the next instruction (insert discussion of caches and pipelines here). Ultimately, the
code and data needs to be in RAM to be processed and if you run out of RAM the code and data will still be paged in and out from your disk; which
gives a huge hit in performance (even if that disk is an SSD).

As others have said, there's not going to be any sudden revolution in programming such that less memory will be needed.

 

[EsaT]

if your on a tight budget though you can always get 1x16gb then add another later as with DDR5 a single dimm will run in dual channel.

That doesn't give any advantage in bandwidth.
Because those two channels per DIMM have been achieved by halving bus width to 32 bits from 64.
Hence single DDR5 channel transfers half the bits per effective frequency compared to DDR4.

 

[EsaT]

DDR5 will only reduce the amount of time the CPU spends waiting for the next instruction (insert discussion of caches and pipelines here).

That will have to wait for future.
Right now clock timings of all known DDR5s are super bad compared to what's normal for DDR4.
Alder Lake leaks even show 110+ ns access latency, which is over double of that DDR4 Intels normally achieve.
https://www.legitreviews.com/ddr5-6400mhz-memory-benchmarks-shown-on-intel-alder-lake-s_226693

That's going to eat into advantage of higher bandwidth in games depending more on access latency of short bursts than raw bandwidth.
AMD's 3D stacked L3 cache might be part of plan to minimize effect of those latencies, besides waiting for DDR5 to mature more.

 

[Yaayuh!]

With the move over to DDR5 next year and speeds of upto 8000+mhz, will we only need half as much ram to achieve the same benefit?

For example I currenty run 16gb 3200mhz DDR4. In future would I only need 8gb 6400mhz DDR5 to have the same performance?

Capacity is one of a key things with DDR5. Depending on cost (will be £LOL to begin with, but lower dramatically as demand picks up) and software, we'll soon see 32GB become minimum and many people on 128GB+.

As for latency, it will be comparable eventually and likely better once we start seeing IMC maturing and tuned kits hit the market taking advantage of the voltage delivery/reg being on the RAM itself.

It'll be a very slow start with DDR5. Remember, they're currently only JEDEC specs at the moment. 4800 CL40 is B spec, the A spec would be CL34. JEDEC for DDR4 @ 3200 is what, CL20/22? JEDEC and general comparisons:

More info on DDR5 JEDEC here: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16143/insights-into-ddr5-subtimings-and-latencies