←back to thread

276 points transpute | 9 comments | | HN request time: 0.495s | source | bottom
1. nottorp ◴[] No.44464229[source]
> DDR5 SO-DIMMs are not compatible with DDR4 SO-DIMM slots—just something I learned on this project... I knew full-size DIMMs were incompatible due to the extra on-stick ECC circuit on DDR5 RAM, I just didn't know the same applied to SO-DIMMs. Obvious in hindsight, but something to keep in mind.

Umm... what?

replies(2): >>44464356 #>>44464922 #
2. Retr0id ◴[] No.44464356[source]
Which part is unclear?
replies(4): >>44464419 #>>44464420 #>>44464820 #>>44465569 #
3. wtallis ◴[] No.44464419[source]
The on-die ECC used by DDR5 (and pretty much all other recent DRAM) actually doesn't have many compatibility implications, precisely because it's done entirely on-die unlike traditional ECC memory modules that include an extra one or two chips to enable end to end ECC managed by the CPU's memory controller.

The more significant incompatibilities between DDR4 and DDR5 are in the power delivery (DDR5 has voltage regulators on the module rather than on the motherboard) and rearranging of the address bus and command encoding.

replies(1): >>44464885 #
4. scrlk ◴[] No.44464420[source]
The incompatibility between DDR4 and DDR5 DIMMS is also enforced by a physically different notch and slot. It's always been this way.
replies(1): >>44464698 #
5. Retr0id ◴[] No.44464698{3}[source]
Sure, but it's only obvious once you know that. Given that the N100 itself supports both DDR4 and DDR5, I think the confusion is entirely understandable.
6. nottorp ◴[] No.44464820[source]
DDR 4 and 5 are incompatible just because of the ecc?

You could desolder the ecc chip off a ddr 5 stick and then just plug it into a ddr 4 slot?

7. Retr0id ◴[] No.44464885{3}[source]
Oh, right, yeah I see the meta-confusion. They are incompatible for a bunch of reasons, of which ECC is not particularly relevant.
8. hollerith ◴[] No.44464922[source]
I found that perfectly clear and unambiguous...
9. numpad0 ◴[] No.44465569[source]
The reason why the author thought these might be interchangeable in the first place?