Originally posted by hearme0:

---

4 years just happens to be a timeframe in which many many PCs become outdated and people are NEEDING an upgrade.

As for explaining why the market DIDN'T GO STRAIGHT TO DDR5................................well, those that honestly can't see why RAM makers didn't go that route are hopeless goofs and should NEVER EVER EVER go into business for themselves as they will inadvertently screw others and themselves without even knowing it because of their brutal lack of understanding as to how a business operates.

---

Originally posted by Jemborg:

---

Which is why I'm pissed off they are only shifting to ddr4 as system RAM on new mobos instead of straight to ddr5.... trying to stretch out a market that can't be stretched out. :/

---

Originally posted by DXR88:

---

If you put Mainboard,CPU and Memory purchases on that chart the bars would be on the up and high.

Most companies nowadays don't buy PC's out right anymore, they have there IT department consolidate what can be upgraded and what needs scrapped.

the issue here is a PC case made in the last 10 years can be gutted its mainboard replaced and put back into service faster than IBM or whoever can deliver new ones.

---

Originally posted by DXR88:

---

Originally posted by Jemborg:

---

Which is why I'm pissed off they are only shifting to ddr4 as system RAM on new mobos instead of straight to ddr5.... trying to stretch out a market that can't be stretched out. :/

---

a processor that could processes and allocate lets say 4-8 threads at a the same time from the same program could theoretically take advantage of the DDR4/5.

Alternatively a processor with a high throughput like 128 bit or 256 bit could easily take advantage of such memory.

until programs use more than two threads efficiently, or 128bit processors become the norm. the chance of ever tapping out the max potential DDR4/5 is slim to nonexistent.

---