Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

[Bofferbrauer2]

Pemalite said:

Bofferbrauer2 said:

Ah, I see your problem. You're on a wrong calculation, that's why you get 64GB/s. DDR5-4800 in dual channel doesn't result in 64GB/s, but in 76.8GB/s. To get 64GB/s, you would need DDR4-4000, hence why I was asking why you were calculating with such low speeds. You could have noted this yourself, as you said in your previous post:

"In saying that... Dual Channel DDR4 3600mhz can do 57.6GB/s... Sadly laptop APU's aren't pushing that though, they stop at 51.2GB/s."

The jump from DDR4-3200 to 3600 brings 6.4GB/s. you need 6.4GB/s more to get to 64GB/s. Which results in 4000, not 4800.

DDR5-6400 is supposed to reach 51.2GB/s in single-channel and thus 102.4Gb/s in dual channel. And they are already testing DDR5-8400, which would result in 134.4GB/s; more than most entry-level GPUs have (RX 560 and 5300XT have 112GB/s; the GTX 1650 originally had 128GB/s).

clock speed X (bits per clock/8) is the formula for calculating theoretical.
But just like flops... Typically isn't real world.

APU's *have* to share it's bandwidth with the *entire* system.

Well, that's true. And because the increase in bandwidth the CPU needs is probably slower than the increase of total bandwidth, the actual bandwidth increase for the GPU part could actually be more than 50% from DDR-3200 to DDR5-4800.