[redrol]

I made my point, you seem to want something else?

 

[dougms3]

I made my point, you seem to want something else?

Yeah, could explain how this noise reduction works as stated in this paragraph.

"There are other sources of noise in DDR5 channels that become even more problematic than in previous generations, especially given the higher speeds required to accommodate the higher data/clock rates (e.g., 3.2 GHz.in DDR5-6400). Despite the use of equalization to overcome channel losses and distortion, extremely precise termination and impedance control is required to ensure equalization can provide signal recovery. In such low voltage devices, these impedance mismatch constraints become ever more critical to ensuring a low BER."

What other sources of noise do you suppose he's referring to?

How does the equalization method overcome channel losses and distortion?

How of much of the signal is lost before equalization?

Whats BER?

 

[gregorio]

I'm not interested with bandwidth, throughput or error correction. I'm interested in the noise and jitter reduction.

But noise and jitter reduction are only implemented to ensure bandwidth, throughput and error reduction.

Jitter affects all data, some are negligibly affected but with audio, it makes a difference.

Unfortunately you have that backwards. Jitter does affect all data, it is negligible with audio but can make a difference with data transfer, particularly with higher transfer rates.

I searched the articles and they mention absolutely nothing about jitter or audio.

Of course they mention nothing about audio, RAM chips do not operate with audio, they operate with data (bits).

There are no studies on if jitter affects audio or not, its all theories and conjecture, no one cares except us.

There are numerous studies on the effects of jitter and audio, going back at least half a century, loads of people cared about it and it’s certainly not all theories and conjecture. If you want to know the actual facts and evidence you’ll have to ask in the sound science forum, as it’s not allowed here. Almost no one cares about jitter and audio these days because it’s an issue that was resolved decades ago. However, none of this is relevant because RAM chips do not operate with audio, only data!

It is 100% true that jitter affects all data but as I said, its neglible with most things but not audio.

It doesn’t matter whether you’ve already said it or how many times you say that, it doesn’t change the actual facts. EG. It doesn’t matter whether I say 1+1=3 one time or a million times, the actual fact that 1+1=2 is not affected.

If you're using a streaming service for music, the network jitter will absolutely affect the audio.

If you are using a streaming service, the network jitter cannot have any effect on the audio because jitter ceases to exist when the data is buffered, which occurs before the data is decoded as audio.

20 years ago, the effect of jitter on audio was claimed to be a myth, there aren't many in depth studies or research on this because for the most part again, no one cares except us.

No, the effect of jitter on audio has never been claimed to be a myth. What was claimed and demonstrated to be a myth, more than 20 years ago, is that the effect is audible under any typical listening conditions. And again, yes there are in depth research and studies because scientists and engineers in several fields absolutely did care!

What other sources of noise do you suppose he's referring to?

The sources of noise that can affect a 3.2gHz data/clock signal, as explained.

How does the equalization method overcome channel losses and distortion?

It boosts the data signal (at around the gigaHertz range) relative to the surrounding noise and distortion. Obviously this has nothing to do with audio. Your HPs/Speaker probably can’t reproduce frequencies higher than around 40 kiloHertz, certainly nothing even vaguely close to the gigaHertz range and your hearing probably doesn’t even extend to 20 kiloHertz!

How of much of the signal is lost before equalization?

None of it, or rather; That’s irrelevant, as long as not so much of the signal is lost that the bit data cannot be recognised. Equalisation only reduces noise and distortion around the signal, to avoid it being mid-interpreted and causing an error.

Whats BER?

Bit Error Rate.

G

 

[castleofargh]

Just like I don’t expect that having faster data flow in and out of the RAM will change the pitch of my music, I don’t expect standard accepted level of jitter in the ram to matter much to any ”modern” DAC that handles timing on its own(internal buffer, async, and proprietary etc).
I might be wrong, but if there even is a relation outside of catastrophic scenarios, I’d need to see quantified evidence from more than one source to consider believing it might exists.

 

[dougms3]

Anyone familiar with these noise reduction techs?

Quote from Kingston website

PMIC​

DDR5 modules feature on-board Power Management Integrate Circuits (PMIC), which help regulate the power required by the various components of the memory module (DRAM, Register, SPD hub, etc). For server class modules the PMIC uses 12V, and for PC class modules the PMIC uses 5V. This makes for better power distribution than previous generations, improves signal integrity, and reduces noise.

Quote from micron site

Reduces VDDQ noise on modules.

 

[redrol]

NOISE! not that!!

 

[gregorio]

This makes for better power distribution than previous generations, improves signal integrity, and reduces noise.

It’s already been explained to you: It reduces noise on the data signal (in the giga-Hertz range), it does NOT reduce noise on the audio or acoustic signal.

G

 

[OCC7N]

Buy RAM with good chips not RAM that has the highest XMP speed. Buy the RAMs where the actual speed is high. Most RAMs(profile) overclocked/XMP from 2100MHz

Go for the chips with Samsungs 3200Mhz.

Dont xmp let the RAM run at there actual speeds, this WILL give less stress(voltage) on the CPU and lower the EF around the CPU/VRM. Also don´t OC the CPU.

When you run at the actual speed timing/latency can be set perfectly.

When looking at the QVL list of the motherboard, just go straight for Team Force without RGB lightings. they have the best chips and are the most expensive on the.

__________________________

To the discussion about noise

A point I forgot in my previous message: You can just build a Faraday cage around your computer if you think EMI is causing issues. Then use a USB interface with a powerful PLL and you can also forget about jitter.

Alternatively, leave the PC in a separate room and use a network bridge.

Although, to be honest, I find the premise that EMI from a PC built with FCC-compliant parts is causing a ruckus on other devices dubious.

Have you ever used an EF device to measure electric field. I measure EF 50cm on a lightbulp thats not even lit but connected/on to the main. Imagine how many components in a computer that does this. These frequencies collide with each other and will create noise. You can prevent all you want externally but a computer is a powerhouse of EFs.

 

[Pumpo]

after seeing this thread somebody out there has the idea of selling audiophile ram that "Improves dynamics" or some BS like that

 

[kingoftown1]

No need. Apacer ECC industrial wide temp ram already exists

 

[bfreedma]

No need. Apacer ECC industrial wide temp ram already exists

Meh - no marketing material describing improved PRAT or mid bass...

 

[dougms3]

after seeing this thread somebody out there has the idea of selling audiophile ram that "Improves dynamics" or some BS like that

Anything that operates at high speeds, rpm, mhz, ghz generates emi/noise.

The pc is an emi generator, at the speeds that ddr5 operate, it creates enough emi for the designers to incorporate noise reduction tech so that it does not interfere with other components or data.

This noise is carried by the motherboard to all components attached to it. Any reduction in noise will be beneficial not only to the PC but to the audio system attached to it.

 

[gregorio]

The pc is an emi generator, at the speeds that ddr5 operate, it creates enough emi for the designers to incorporate noise reduction tech so that it does not interfere with other components or data.

It’s already been explained to you why ddr5 has noise reduction tech, and it is not to stop the emi generated from interfering with other components or data. You seem to be worried about relatively tiny amounts of emi generated by ram chips but ignoring the relatively massive and deliberate amount of emi being output by the Wi-Fi transmitter.

Any reduction in noise will be beneficial not only to the PC but to the audio system attached to it.

Why would reducing noise/emi in the gigahertz range be beneficial to an audio system?

G