alt Hacker NewsSo what I am trying to say, industry took a wrong turn. Instead of moving to over-priced DDR5, they should just make even cheapest CPUs support 8/16 DDR4 channels. Because a 32Gb DDR5-4800 module costs $360, and two 32Gb DDR4-3200 modules cost $320, so you get twice more size, more bandwidth and it costs you less. DDR5 is just a rip off.
Replies
icedchai • today at 5:29 PM
In the alternate reality where this happened, wouldn't the price of DDR4 still be sky high? We'll ignore any costs for CPU, chip set, and motherboard redesign. You're just pushing the demand somewhere else.
➕ show 1 reply
tbrownaw • today at 5:17 PM
> just make even cheapest CPUs support 8/16 DDR4 channels
Isn't adding pins kind of expensive?
➕ show 1 reply
Each memory controller interface is a not-insignificant number of PCB traces. Increasing the number of memory controllers may dramatically increase the number of PCB layers (or may not, it really depends on the CPU pinout) but it definitely will increase the number of pins on the CPU socket.
This is one of the main reasons (the other is the number of PCIe lanes) why high end desktop and server CPUs have like double the number of pins and so much bigger sockets as compared to consumer desktop CPUs.