back to article While you lounged about all weekend Samsung fired up its biggest-ever chip factory and started cranking out 16Gb LPDDR5 DRAM

Samsung has flicked the 'on' switch for a new production line at its Pyeongtaek facility and set it to work cranking out what it says is the first 16-gigabit (Gb) LPDDR5 mobile DRAM module. The Low-Power Double Data Rate Synchronous DRAM spec allows data to move at up to 6,400 megabits per second (Mb/s) and Samsung says it’s …

  1. LeahroyNake

    Soccer fields?

    El Reg convertor 128900 sqm spits out 31.8 football pitches ?

    Is this soccer thing played on a larger American version ?

    Maybe it's just the .com effect of the ElReg abandoning it's roots :0

    1. lglethal Silver badge

      Re: Soccer fields?

      So 6.2 microWales. Oh that makes much more sense now...

  2. MiguelC Silver badge

    You say 16 Gb, the picture shows 16 GB

    So, which is it?

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: You say 16 Gb, the picture shows 16 GB

      Marketing hat=ON

      What's the difference

      1. Anonymous Coward

        Re: You say 16 Gb, the picture shows 16 GB

        Re: You say 16 Gb, the picture shows 16 GB

        Marketing hat=ON

        What's the difference


        In this case nothing.

        When you talk about data rates 16GB = 16Gigabytes , 16Gb = 16 Gigabits.

    2. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

      Re: 16Gb, 16GB

      It looks like both on Samsung's site. The photo is a 16GB package containing 8x 16Gb chips.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Always registered.

    What I find interesting about DDR5, I guess, is that supposedly all DDR5 is registered. It would be nice when buying RAM to _NOT_ have to check that you picked the "buffered"/"unbuffered" version. That said, if you look at DDR6 (six), you kind of have to wonder why they just don't skip 5, as 6 is not too dissimilar and seems to better approach the low power goal of 5. That part scares me a bit, as DDR6 (six) appears to be more like DDR5.1, so could a ".1" appear in the future, taking the USB 3.x confusion approach (where nobody has a fuck'n clue which USB 3 standard we're on)?

    1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

      Re: USB 3 Standard

      And the recent renaming has really helped normal people understand what different between USB 3.1 and USB 3.0 (NOT!)

    2. DS999 Silver badge

      Re: Always registered.

      JEDEC solves the problem for DRAM by defining DIMMs that won't fit if their version doesn't match the version of the slot. USB uses the same connector for everything, but has different capabilities of the port and even the cable to create mass confusion.

      1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

        Re: Always registered.

        "USB uses the same connector for everything"

        Really? I can think of six without even looking in my box of cables and adaptors.

        (But you are right that the connector is just *one* of the ways in which you might have the wrong kind of USB.)

        1. DS999 Silver badge

          Re: Always registered.

          Well now that they've settled on USB-C they've solved THAT problem, but the fact that not all USB-C to USB-C cables will work for all types of connections made things even worse. At least with a different connector you could tell which is which...

      2. EveryTime

        Re: Always registered.

        A quibble about that statement: different slot keying avoids (uhmm, reduces the chance) of an incompatible module being installed. But it doesn't solve the problem of ordering the wrong part, and needing to pay a 25% restocking plus 10% market value change fee.

    3. Nate Amsden Silver badge

      Re: Always registered.

      I haven't paid close attention to memory specs since the days of socket 7 it just got so confusing. Anyway for me if I need memory I just go to Micron's site (or Kingston if I have to), and use their memory selector to find which memory is compatible. Historically I prefer Micron (since I learned maybe 15 years ago that Kingston uses several different manufacturers at least at the time), but it takes the complexity out of trying to figure out what exact type of memory you need to get for a given system.

      1. RM Myers

        Re: Always registered.

        Most (all?) of the DRAM makers or resellers have similar memory selectors on their websites. I wouldn't buy DRAM without using a memory selector to verify compatibility.

      2. Lee D

        Re: Always registered.


        20 years working in IT, and I've never had to match a RAM and motherboard and CPU socket combination. If you want to play silly marketing games, then someone else can mess about and guarantee compatibility for me, and I'll back it to them if not.

        Set a standard, sell me a chip. Because the only thing I ever upgrade on a PC is the RAM anyway, and usually by slotting more in, rather than replacing what's there.

        Last time I knew / understood the naming allocations of things like that, I was looking at adding 2MB to a 386... and then it turned out that we had SIP chip sockets for main RAM and not SIMMs on the motherboard (I kid you not... the only other place I've seen SIP's, mainstream-PC-wise, was in a Laserjet 4).

        To be honest, I actually laugh when people tell me that they "built" their PC nowadays. What they mean is they bought a kit of already-compatible parts and plugged them together using the modern equivalent of ZIF sockets, and ended up with a machine that's no cheaper and no higher-performing than if they'd just bought a decent PC as a unit. Oh, unless you count that LED junk that slather everything with. No word of a lie, last time I selected a RAM chip for my personal use, I had to exclude those with RGB LEDs on them... I mean... WHY?!

        P.S. Those two memory "features" sound bog-useless unless you're clearing RAM, and I can't imagine that you do that often enough to warrant specific support for that, presumably in the motherboard and the OS. If you do, it's after you're done with something, so who cares if it takes a few microseconds to finally release the RAM after clearing it?

        1. David Hicklin

          Re: Always registered.

          ended up with a machine that's no cheaper and no higher-performing than if they'd just bought a decent PC as a unit.

          Ah but I know that if one of those parts fails then I can replace it instead of possibly having to buy a new PC because the part if "proprietary"

          1. Lee D

            Re: Always registered.

            So long as you don't buy Dell shite, with their stupid plastic caddies, etc. then PC components are pretty much interchangable.

            I've yet to find an advantage to building your own PC, not least because even if you had bought Dell you could just phone them up and say "I bought this thing from you and need a new Part X". Build your own, you're on your own, and therefore you need to know what you're doing.

            I don't see that a modern PC is a very complex device at all, to be honest, from the user point of view. Stick in a card, it either works or doesn't and if it doesn't, it generally means you didn't account for power requirements (which, to upgrade, pretty much means a new PSU or possibly even a PC anyway).

        2. sw guy

          Re: Always registered → Clearing RAM

          In fact, every sensible OS takes care of clearing any page upon allocation to a process.

          Otherwise, fighting against spectre and al. would be useless, because randomly reading old data from RAM by running a bunch of processes massively allocating stack and/or heap would be enough to get all sorts of /interesting/ informations.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022