sneekypeet As I am told, the main deal with DDR4 is power savings.

...and capacity. The DDR4 spec includes support for stacked DRAM. In reality, bandwidth is plenty and improving latency means moving memory closer to the compute cores which isn't exactly feasible with DIMMs themselves. That leaves power consumption and capacity. On the front of latency, we're seeing an evolution of another layer of memory somewhere between cache (SRAM) and system memory (DRAM) where HBM and Intel's eDRAM (on Iris Pro CPUs,) are shining examples of a move that direction. Latency will be far lower if buses end up being a fraction of the length (physical length signals have to travel,) than they are now with system memory. A great example is how DDR4 is almost as fast as the L3 cache on my 3820 at stock but, the L3 cache has latency that's anywhere between 1/4 or 1/5 of DRAM in general.With that said, I think really high frequency memory is funny because high clocks don't make electrical signals travel any faster, it just lets you cram more data in when bandwidth already isn't a problem. It doesn't change the memory hierarchy of computers in any way. So while it's nifty to see how "fast" (which is a misnomer,) they can go (single channel...) it just doesn't tell us anything useful IMHO.With that said, give me lower latency, not high bandwidth if we're really concerned about performance. :)