4 GBs x 8 VS 8 GB x 4 [Quad Channel] - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

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

 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 3 (permalink) Old 10-22-2019, 02:34 AM - Thread Starter
Свет
 
XLifted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,246
Rep: 37 (Unique: 36)
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.
XLifted is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 3 (permalink) Old 10-22-2019, 02:36 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 82
Rep: 3 (Unique: 3)
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.
TopM5 is offline  
post #3 of 3 (permalink) Old 10-22-2019, 03:20 AM - Thread Starter
Свет
 
XLifted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,246
Rep: 37 (Unique: 36)
Quote: Originally Posted by TopM5 View Post
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
XLifted is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off