4 GBs x 8 VS 8 GB x 4 [Quad Channel]

Is there downsides of running 4 GB sticks in 8 slot config, versus 8 GB sticks in 4 slots for quad channel?

I know memory controller will work harder with 8 slot config, but actual performance in games or rendering?
Does it change anything, when you still have 32 GBs of ram.

I can't find a definite answer in any of my google searches.

On a single CPU motherboard (x99 / x299 / amd x399) both will run in quad channel, so no performance difference at all. If you're running a dual CPU server (C602/C612), then 8 sticks will run in octa channel or say dual quad channel.

Makes sense. It will be x99 in single CPU set up.
I thought maybe 8 GBs would provide higher buffer, before it overflows into another bank of memory, granted it's not exactly how it works, since it pings all channels, but thought maybe 8 gb sticks provide better buffer, since it doesn't get "full" right away before switching to another banks.

I don't know exactly how the information flows from bank to bank though

I also thought in another scenario maybe 4 gb sticks would be better since it has less ram per bank.

I know it's not HDD, but 7200 rpm 3 TB HDD will be slower than 7200 rpm 1 TB, because it has smaller surface distance on the platter to scan.

RAM structure is a bit of mystery to me.

Until this year, I had no idea that if you put 8 / 4 / 8 / 4 and 4 / 8 / 4 / 8 gb sticks into the set up, it will still run in quad channel. I read it in HP workstation manual, and kind of shrugged it off, and then actually tried it in Lenovo S30, and also saw same set up in HP z420, mismatched ram sizes, but still running in QUAD channel.

I also noticed that mismatched config per channel ran better than just 8 gbs x 4 sticks.

The more you know