This was posted 2 years 5 months 16 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

[Pre Order] Crucial RAM CT16G48C40U5 16GB DDR5 4800MHz CL40 $165.82 + Delivery ($0 with Prime) @ Amazon UK via AU

510
[Pre Order] Crucial RAM CT16G48C40U5 16GB DDR5 4800MHz CL40 $165.82 + Delivery ($0 with Prime) @ Amazon UK via AUAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
Thunder-Wombat on 12/11/2021 - 15:55 amazon.com.au (783 clicks)
Last edited 12/11/2021 - 18:01 by 2 other users
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

For anyone getting the new Intel 12th Gen Chips. DDR5 ram can be quite expensive but the Crucial 16gb sticks are at $165 on Amazon.

Seems there may be a delay in stock, sold by Amazon UK. Usually dispatched within 1 to 2 months.

Currently on preorder at Scorptec for $219 : https://www.scorptec.com.au/product/memory/ddr5/93235-ct16g4…

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.
Computing 16GB Computer Component Crucial DDR5 RAM

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Marketplace
Amazon UK Store
Amazon UK Store

closed Comments

  • Click_It on 12/11/2021 - 15:57
    +3

    4800 seems like it'll be very slow for DDR5 as speeds ramp up in time but it's an entry for those who need it, and a good price.

    • Thunder-Wombat on 12/11/2021 - 15:59
      +5

      At the moment 5200 is the highest base rate I have found for DDR5 on the market

      • garetz on 12/11/2021 - 17:05
        +2

        ddr5 - 5200 is relative to ddr4 - 2600 so this would be relative to ddr4 - 2400

    • kungfuman on 12/11/2021 - 16:00
      -1

      That ram also doesn't have heat syncs I think it will be a while before you see high performance ram with head syncs for DDR 5

      • Click_It on 12/11/2021 - 16:03
        +2

        True, I think DDR4 started at 2133Mhz to give an indication of what's to come.

        • JDNE on 12/11/2021 - 16:26

          If I was to buy a new DDR5 supported Mobo and get this ram on release, in say 2 years time when the technology has adapted to become much faster, I'd just be able to swap the new ram in?

          Just curious to see if there's any Mobo limiting factors that may have occurred with DDR4 for example.

          Don't want to build a new computer on DDR5 release and then have to rebuild when I want to swap out for the faster series of RAM.

          • donthaveGamepass on 12/11/2021 - 16:36
            +1

            @JDNE: According to Gigabyte version of Z690, RAM can go up to 6400mhz.

          • d3al on 12/11/2021 - 16:46

            @JDNE: Most DDR5 motherboards have support for up to 6400Mhz so you should be fine for the time being. However, DDR5 RAM can theoretically go up to 8400 Mhz (I don't see this happening in the immediate term, 5200-5400Mhz seems to be the sweet spot) so you might need to swap out your mobo to accommate anything over 6400Mhz.

          • huggsymersh on 12/11/2021 - 17:20

            @JDNE: Depending on use case, there's greater cost to being an early adopter, but doesn't seem that much advantage:

            Optimum Tech Youtube Comparsion "DDR5 up to 20% Faster vs. DDR4 (don't buy it)"

            https://youtu.be/5wQ9MGrTvwc

          • OMGJL on 13/11/2021 - 00:20

            @JDNE: Example from DDR4, an average Z170 board would top out around 3466/3600, and a high end one will top out around 3866 —- Usually a normal user would likely to experience issue before approaching the upper limit (also depends on how conservative manufacturers are advertising the upper limit)

            The "sweet spot" for DDR4 right now is around 3600/3733/3866, and a "ambient daily" (means you don't need to have a fan blowing into the ram kit after all the crazy OC you have on it, and timings is not ridiculously loose to push high frequency and not worry about actual performance) usually is around less than 4400.

            so if you have a 3600 kit on Z170 it might not even post after enable XMP.

          • donkeydoc on 13/11/2021 - 11:36

            @JDNE: Yeah just wait 2 years or so. Also with Intel entering the graphics card world and ethereum mining gradually becomes less profitable, PC building may become affordable in 2 years!

      • Diji1 on 12/11/2021 - 17:07

        RAM typically doesn't require heatsinks.

        • kungfuman on 12/11/2021 - 17:11
          +4

          DDR 5 needs it it runs way too hot.

          • Diji1 on 12/11/2021 - 17:15
            -1

            @kungfuman: And yet here we have DDR5 without heatsinks.

            • kungfuman on 12/11/2021 - 18:27

              @Diji1: yep not running at full speed either. hence why we have underclocked DDR 5 with out heatsinks

              • JerraJones on 14/11/2021 - 01:03

                @kungfuman: Probably one of the dumbest things I've read this week, the clockspeed has literally nothing to do with heatsinks. I know OZB aren't the brightest bunch but heatsinks have no tangible benefit for ram, ddr5 is no different. Also 99% of 'heatsinks' aren't heatsinks and will actually raise ram temperatures, they're just pieces of plastic there for aesthetic. Same goes for nvme heatsinks which are also snake oil.

                • lombadge on 15/11/2021 - 08:35

                  @JerraJones: Hi, Doesn't DDR move the power management onto the RAM board? Hence the necessity for heat dissipation. Quite a change from older RAM types. See the little chips in the centre.

          • abjsdhasehasee on 13/11/2021 - 00:40

            @kungfuman: ram doesnt need 'heat syncs' because theyre not heat syncs, they dont just use thermal pads, they use double sided sticky tape with some thermal pad in the middle. removing the heat syncs on ddr4 dropped temps by 5-10c easily. same thing applies here.

            although ram without heatsyncs often means lowend as the heatsyncs are just pure aesthetic

      • abjsdhasehasee on 12/11/2021 - 17:17

        heat traps, i mean heat sync make ram hotter not cooler. they are purely for aesthetics

      • greatlamp on 13/11/2021 - 01:15
        +2

        Heat sinks are just marketing devices.

        DDR5 runs at 1.1v. Even DDR3 at 1.5v does not generate enough heat require a heatsink.

        • ShannonN on 13/11/2021 - 04:15

          Finally someone who spelt heat sink correctly or had predictive text off LOL

  • chingy213 on 12/11/2021 - 16:10
    +12

    Who is still using DDR3 in there high end rig and there is nothing wrong with it?

      • Alzori on 12/11/2021 - 22:52

        I wish my Nana had a high end rig. It would be sick to play co op together.

    • Titan Tech on 12/11/2021 - 16:35

      Don't fix things that aren't broken

    • newopolarfan1 on 12/11/2021 - 16:40
      +2

      People are still regularly paying $40+ for 8 (?) year old 2x4gb Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600mhz used sticks on ebay, it's pretty crazy. More than double that for 2x8gb sticks from the same product line when you could grab new DDR4 3200 mhz sticks for essentially the same price.

      I wish I could say I was surprised, but this market is something else.

      • netsurfer on 12/11/2021 - 17:30
        +1

        For HDD recovery, the cost of a donor drive can be pretty crazy at times.

        Also, you probably live in a metropolitan area. When I sold my DDR3 a couple of years ago (or maybe it was 3 years ago), I noticed the buyer lives in a country area. I'm sure my price was the lowest at the time and I used express post instead (he paid for regular).

        $40 isn't a big deal. Apple is charging ~$260 (based on discounted site price) for 8GB more, $518 for 16GB more.

    • donkeydoc on 13/11/2021 - 11:38

      i5 4570 :)

      must say went through 2 motherboards since then though

      HD7970 OC 3GB died too, got RX570 4GB

      May build a new PC in 2-3 years as work paid for laptop with 1660ti

  • squall3031 on 12/11/2021 - 16:15
    +2

    I still use DDR3 and I'm using i5 3rd gen.

    • Presence on 12/11/2021 - 19:02

      i5-3470 masterrace powering budget gaming PCs everywhere!

      Still flies through any day to day tasks!

      • nofate on 13/11/2021 - 03:00
        +1

        3570K FTW!! Handed it down, still going stroooong!

      • ValouSydney on 14/11/2021 - 11:52
        +1

        I7 2600k here, still going strong although some intensive CPU game such as New World are pushing it to the limit. Otherwise any other app/games are fine

  • yaaNaa on 12/11/2021 - 16:31
    +1

    CL 40? Wouldn't that be latency and it seems high?

    • joshau on 12/11/2021 - 16:42
      +3

      Yes, but latency also decreases as frequency increases, so they usually tend to cancel each other out. Crucial has a good white paper that helps address this myth: https://www.crucial.com/articles/about-memory/difference-bet…. Even though 4800MHz DDR5 has a CAS Latency of 40, and 2133MHz DDR4 has a CAS latency of 15, the DDR5 only has a 2ns higher latency.

    • Diji1 on 12/11/2021 - 17:10
      +1

      The Cas latency is the time that the RAM module takes to address the full memory space.

      It must complete before the next cycle (measured in cycles per second - MHz) begins so CL must increase with Mhz generally speaking.

    • Breno785au on 12/11/2021 - 18:16
      +1

      That was my first thought but I don't know shit so I didn't say anything.

    • greatlamp on 13/11/2021 - 01:16

      It's roughly equivalent to DDR4 3600 cas 14.

      That is pretty good for a baseline generic stick of ram

      DDR5 has about 30% more bandwidth at the same clockspeed as DDR4

  • vash12 on 12/11/2021 - 17:08

    Missing RGB Heatsinks !

  • abjsdhasehasee on 12/11/2021 - 17:18

    ddr5 is such a scamaz rn, until it has matured and we know the rev e / b die of ddr5 its just not worth it. waiting for the adata 12600mhz xmp :)

  • [Deactivated] on 12/11/2021 - 17:21

    CL40!! I have ddr4 4400 sticks that run at CL18. I Understand you need it for the new 12th gen chips but surely there is ddr5 ram out there with better timings than this.

    • Thunder-Wombat on 12/11/2021 - 17:25

      lowest CL I have seen is CL38

    • netsurfer on 12/11/2021 - 17:33
      +1

      You should move back to DDR3 then. CAS latency of 9.

      • bex000 on 12/11/2021 - 20:36
        +1

        Why not back to DDR1 CAS latency 1.5

    • Doomedgrind on 12/11/2021 - 18:50
      +1

      Let's compare apples to oranges! my orange is CL18 your apple is CL40 my god how crazy!!!!!!!

  • askbargain on 12/11/2021 - 17:32

    A lot of RAM experts in this thread!

    • CriticalImpact on 12/11/2021 - 17:42
      +3

      I'll have you know that I got a ram degree from mail order college

      • futaris on 12/11/2021 - 17:56

        My RAMs degree came with a home loan, that I got as an Aries in April. Came with a free ball mount too.

        Are ewe laughing with a sheepish grin ?

        • zonfierre on 12/11/2021 - 18:25

          Nope, I'm laughing with a mosquitoeish grin

    • Stinger01TheOG on 13/11/2021 - 01:05

      I will have you know I have been downloading ram for the good part of 10yrs

  • neosin on 12/11/2021 - 17:48
    +1

    Am i missing something?

    4800mhz at cl40 = 16.6666666 ns latency
    my b die 4400mhz cl17 = 7.72727272 ns latency

    ? Is latency on ddr5 calculated in a different way?

    • MHLoppy on 12/11/2021 - 18:42

      Commonly available "fast" DDR5 is just higher actual-latency than commonly available "fast" DDR4 right now. It'll be a while before it catches up as manufacturing matures etc. Using a top DDR4 kit makes it look extra bad though haha.

    • LilyRose2798 on 12/11/2021 - 19:34

      There are architectural changes that should help make these perform more equally depending on the workload. For example, the 64-bit bus that DDR4 had is now split into two 32-bit buses, so I think that 16ns latency could be effectively halved if you were utilizing a workload that was only able to half fill the bus each cycle with DDR4 (probably not entirely correct, but from performance tests I've seen so far DDR5 seems to benchmark pretty similar to a DDR4 kit with half the latency in some workloads).

    • netsurfer on 12/11/2021 - 23:41

      The calculation is based on theoretical maximum / ideal condition. The problem is with AMD CPUs, you have infinity fabric speed limitation. For Intel, the memory controller is also optimised for certain speed. When you give the CPU a RAM that's way faster than it is generally designed for, it is not able to pump data in the most optimal way to use that faster RAM.

      It's quite likely your B-die 4400 CL17 DDR4 will out perform this DDR5 RAM in most cases, except for applications which can take advantage DDR5 RAM (i.e. 7-zip).

      The problem is that for gaming, the RAM speed really only matters in 1080p or 720p gaming. Even on those cases, the results are mixed. For Intel, it looks like lower CL value (i.e. DDR4-3200-CL14, DDR4-3600-CL16 at lower clock) can beat higher frequencies at higher CL (i.e. DDR4-4400-CL19).

      Honestly, getting RAM modules is something people start to do with AMD Ryzen based systems (because the built in memory controller is picky on RAM). The reality is that the CPU and the GPU matter a lot more (especially the GPU). You can have the fastest system RAM all you want, video cards still need VRAM (GDDR6 or better ideally).

      The main issue with Alder Lake is that if you want some of those high speed I/O features (i.e. Thunderbolt 4, PCIe gen 5 m.2 SSD), going with DDR5 is required as M/B makers are only offering cost effective M/Bs for DDR4 setup.

  • McFly on 12/11/2021 - 18:38
    +2

    This came out from Gamers Nexus an hour ago: DDR5 vs. DDR4 Benchmarks on Intel i9-12900K (Alder Lake Memory Comparison)

  • donkeydoc on 12/11/2021 - 20:20

    Since graphics cards are unattainable at ozbargain prices, we should just wait for ddr5 to become optimised for performance, maybe in 2 years build a system.

  • aussieprepper on 12/11/2021 - 20:29

    Good price for a product that is new technology and new to the market, how much was ram when we had the memory shortages. I paid more for my ddr3 ram years after it came out.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join