Any experience with change of RAM-memory speed?

[jaru-eri]

How much of a role does RAM speed play in the speed of vectric application performance? Is there a big difference from DDR4 to DDR5?

[adze_cnc]

The speed gain of any RAM is related to the amount of memeory retrieved or written. If VCarve is pushing or pulling huge blocks at time yes. If it’s grabbing only small amounts here and ther, no.

But, the caveat to going from DDR4 to 5 is:

DDR5 RAM requires a compatible motherboard with a DDR5 memory slot. It is not backward compatible with DDR4 motherboards, meaning that upgrading from DDR4 to DDR5 requires a complete system overhaul. Additionally, DDR5 modules are not interchangeable with DDR4 modules, so mixing different memory types is not possible.

So, is your current machine ready for replacement?

[GEdward]

I have one computer running DDR4 with 16Gb of RAM and another with 64Gb of DDR5. Of course there is no comparison technically but functionally, the only time I have had an issue running Vectric programs with the slower machine was with the tool path illustration for the preview all but freezing up in one instance while the faster machine had no problem with it. Otherwise, I have not been able to find anything constructive to do in the 15 or 20 milliseconds I saved with the faster machine. As AZDE points out, upgrading will require a new motherboard or system. With that said, DDR6 is slated to come out in 2025. When that happens it should push the price of DDR5 machines down if you are interested in upgrading on a budget. Just my two cents worth.

Ed

[jaru-eri]

I have one computer running DDR4 with 16Gb of RAM and another with 64Gb of DDR5. Of course there is no comparison technically but functionally, the only time I have had an issue running Vectric programs with the slower machine was with the tool path illustration for the preview all but freezing up in one instance while the faster machine had no problem with it. Otherwise, I have not been able to find anything constructive to do in the 15 or 20 milliseconds I saved with the faster machine. As AZDE points out, upgrading will require a new motherboard or system. With that said, DDR6 is slated to come out in 2025. When that happens it should push the price of DDR5 machines down if you are interested in upgrading on a budget. Just my two cents worth.

Ed

OK, so you mean that the toolpath calculation is not significantly slower with ddr4 than ddr5?

[ira]

In my experience, hard drive speed is way more important than memory speed, if you're not using SSDs for your boot, active storage, temp file and virtual memory location, more will be gained by going to SSDs than anything else. I've not built a DDR5 computer yet, but last time I did, the numbers did not seem compelling enough to spend the extra money.

[GEdward]

OK, so you mean that the toolpath calculation is not significantly slower with ddr4 than ddr5?

I guess that comes down to what you consider significant. I have not directly compared a time consuming toolpath calculation for something like a 3D finish toolpath directly, but I believe I will and report back shortly with complete details.

Ed

[GEdward]

OK, so here is the difference between the two computers I mentioned above.
The model is The Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci. It is 10.25 X 5.125 X .375 using the model boundary with a 0.125 offset. I calculated using a 0.25mm radius tapered ball end mill with 12% step over at 50 ipm feed rate and plunge rate. The raster angle is 12°. It took the old computer with 16Gb of DDR4 just under 15 seconds to calculate and the new one with 64Gb of DDR5 just over 9 seconds. With an approximate 6 seconds gained, I guess you will have to determine if that is significant enough to justify the cost of upgrading. Personally, I think that I would need a better excuse to make the investment.
Of course the RAM is not the only difference between the two computers. The old one is a Core i5 with 4 cores and 8 threads at 3.6 GHz compared to the new one running a Ryzen 7 with 6 cores and 12 threads running at 3.9 GHz. Both machines have SSD drives.

Ed

[adze_cnc]

...and the CPU speed, GPU speed, number or processors and cores, program load under Windows, disk drive speed (for Windows paging), disk drive type, etc., were all the same between the two machines and the RAM was the only variable?

I run VCarve 9.519 on a minimum spec instance of Windows XP under VirtualBox on a 7-year old iMac and it blows away, in terms of speed, my assigned Windows 11 box that has 32GB ram, AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX 12-cores, 4.10 Ghz machine.

For that matter a Windows 7 minimum install under VirtualBox runs (with the exception of graphics speed) Aspire Trial v12 not so much slower than the aforementioned Windows 11 box.

[GEdward]

[quote..and the CPU speed, GPU speed, number or processors and cores, program load under Windows, disk drive speed (for Windows paging), disk drive type, etc., were all the same between the two machines and the RAM was the only variable?

[quoteOf course the RAM is not the only difference between the two computers. The old one is a Core i5 with 4 cores and 8 threads at 3.6 GHz compared to the new one running a Ryzen 7 with 6 cores and 12 threads running at 3.9 GHz. Both machines have SSD drives.
]

The main point is that the HUGE difference in RAM between the two machines does not in and of its self make a huge difference in performance in my opinion. Even given that this comparison doesn't sort out the contribution of MANY other variables, it does indicate that a much faster computer in all respects does not by its self blow anything out of the water as your example points out. With each iteration of Windows comes more performance sucking bloatware. So much so that Windows 11 won't run most older machines running Windows 10 let alone 7.

Ed

[Adrian]

Windows 11 running on older machines is far more to do with the security requirements than processor speed.

I've run development versions which bypass the processor requirements on older machines no problems at all.