Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 71 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
So I was expecting at least 10% gain to CPU performance, bought suitable for 4 sticks motherboard, pushed new system to the equal tuning, but all I see is 2-5% at best in multiple tests. Is this legit result or am I missing something? CPU 3600x, RAM 3800mhz C16.
 

·
The last VRM burner
Joined
·
2,590 Posts
You're missing telling us what CPU do you have.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4 Posts
It will depend on the game as well as the resolution and the ram timings/how they are tuned. Not all games scale the same. But yeah, 4x8gb in games will outperform 2x8gb at the same frequency/timings, assuming we are comparing motherboards of near or close or identical memory overclocking capability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
It will depend on the game as well as the resolution and the ram timings/how they are tuned.
Tried two games (GTA5 and SOTTR), Superposition 720p, 3DMark API test, best gain was 5%. Never GPU bound, timings are pretty much the same. May be I need to play around BGS?
 

·
The last VRM burner
Joined
·
2,590 Posts
You're getting expected gains.
 

·
Avid Memer
Joined
·
5,940 Posts
In general, dual-rank will perform better than single-rank in gaming. The amount of performance gained depends on a number of factors that include the platform and CPU along with RAM frequency and timings. RAM is generally one of the worst places to spend for additional performance. You're usually better off spending the money on a better video card.
 

·
The last VRM burner
Joined
·
2,590 Posts
In general, dual-rank will perform better than single-rank in gaming. The amount of performance gained depends on a number of factors that include the platform and CPU along with RAM frequency and timings. RAM is generally one of the worst places to spend for additional performance. You're usually better off spending the money on a better video card.
Only partially true, once you hit 3466MHz you must start lowering all timings as they're getting so loose they hurt performance badly. Too bad no one talks about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Only partially true, once you hit 3466MHz you must start lowering all timings as they're getting so loose they hurt performance badly. Too bad no one talks about it.
If you don't keep clock to timings ratio, you're overclocking it wrong.
 

·
The last VRM burner
Joined
·
2,590 Posts
If you don't keep clock to timings ratio, you're overclocking it wrong.
And if you keep XMP on you get exactly this so next time get the context.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,723 Posts
Does "single rank" and "dual rank" refer to a single dual channel collective of modules and a pair of them? I knew more RAM modules added more strain and might limit your overclocking at the very edges of pushing it, but I didn't know it added performance (I figured dual channel was dual channel, and you'd need quad channel to get gains beyond that, all else being the same of course).

I wonder if I was right in getting 4 modules then. I did it because I got a large quantity of RAM, and remember when I was getting it, I was asked if I wanted the 2 module or 4 module version (didn't even know they had former before I went to buy it so I just instantly got the 4 module one I originally set out to get). I later questioned if I should have gotten 2 for less strain and potential future upgradeability, but since I got a lot of RAM and "shouldn't" need more any time soon, I figured it didn't matter. If more has a performance benefit, even slight, I guess that's a nice bonus.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,208 Posts
Does "single rank" and "dual rank" refer to a single dual channel collective of modules and a pair of them? I knew more RAM modules added more strain and might limit your overclocking at the very edges of pushing it, but I didn't know it added performance (I figured dual channel was dual channel, and you'd need quad channel to get gains beyond that, all else being the same of course).

I wonder if I was right in getting 4 modules then. I did it because I got a large quantity of RAM, and remember when I was getting it, I was asked if I wanted the 2 module or 4 module version (didn't even know they had former before I went to buy it so I just instantly got the 4 module one I originally set out to get). I later questioned if I should have gotten 2 for less strain and potential future upgradeability, but since I got a lot of RAM and "shouldn't" need more any time soon, I figured it didn't matter. If more has a performance benefit, even slight, I guess that's a nice bonus.
Folks will recommend the 2 DIMM kit above a 4 DIMM kit because then you don't have to worry about motherboard traces and other motherboard characteristics. The highest clocks are normally reached on boards with only two DIMM slots and some ATX boards are designed as such for overclocking.

I have two sets of 3600C15 and when combined all four DIMMS will run at the settings the weakest 2 DIMM kit will run. I make mention because my experience is that 4 DIMMs doesn't reduce performance beyond what I would see with 2 DIMMs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,723 Posts
Folks will recommend the 2 DIMM kit above a 4 DIMM kit because then you don't have to worry about motherboard traces and other motherboard characteristics. The highest clocks are normally reached on boards with only two DIMM slots and some ATX boards are designed as such for overclocking.
Right. I knew of that, but as I'm not intending to push my memory really far (X.M.P./D.O.C.P. might be all I ever do with it) and have never had issues with 4 modules on my last few PCs, I didn't worry about it.

This thread just had it sounding like two pairs of dual channel RAM sets would net a small performance difference, which was confusing me since I thought you needed quad channel for that. I'm starting to think dual rank refers to something on the RAM module itself (number or arrangement of chips or something?) and not the number of modules. If so, I don't know how to tell the difference.
 

·
To The Game
Joined
·
7,627 Posts
Right. I knew of that, but as I'm not intending to push my memory really far (X.M.P./D.O.C.P. might be all I ever do with it) and have never had issues with 4 modules on my last few PCs, I didn't worry about it.

This thread just had it sounding like two pairs of dual channel RAM sets would net a small performance difference, which was confusing me since I thought you needed quad channel for that. I'm starting to think dual rank refers to something on the RAM module itself (number or arrangement of chips or something?) and not the number of modules. If so, I don't know how to tell the difference.
Unless I'm missing something, the OP was expecting a performance gain moving from 2x8 to 4x8 on a dual channel platform. The conversation then when to single vs dual rank ram. As far as I know, there should be no performance gain going with 4 sticks of ram over 2 sticks of ram in a dual channel system.
 

·
The last VRM burner
Joined
·
2,590 Posts
Unless I'm missing something, the OP was expecting a performance gain moving from 2x8 to 4x8 on a dual channel platform. The conversation then when to single vs dual rank ram. As far as I know, there should be no performance gain going with 4 sticks of ram over 2 sticks of ram in a dual channel system.
There is, since you increase a number of ranks the controller has access to.
 

·
To The Game
Joined
·
7,627 Posts
There is, since you increase a number of ranks the controller has access to.
Are there any benchmarks to show a difference in using dual sticks over quad sticks in a dual channel system? I know increasing the number of sticks should increase the strain on the memory controller but wasn't aware of any benefit. If there's a benefit I'm all for it since I carried my 4x8 sticks of ram over from my x299 system to my z490.

*Found this,

https://www.techspot.com/article/1971-more-ram-modules-better-for-gaming/

That's interesting. Most of the results are within margin of error, but, they consistently favored 4 sticks over 2 sticks in a dual channel system. Especially at the 1% lows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
There is, since you increase a number of ranks the controller has access to.
Are there any benchmarks to show a difference in using dual sticks over quad sticks in a dual channel system? I know increasing the number of sticks should increase the strain on the memory controller but wasn't aware of any benefit. If there's a benefit I'm all for it since I carried my 4x8 sticks of ram over from my x299 system to my z490.

*Found this,

https://www.techspot.com/article/1971-more-ram-modules-better-for-gaming/

That's interesting. Most of the results are within margin of error, but, they consistently favored 4 sticks over 2 sticks in a dual channel system. Especially at the 1% lows.
From my recent experience, by going from 2x8 to 4x8, I gained about 5% performance on Aida copy bandwidth (54->57GB/s), but lost slightly latency speed (37.5->38.5ns)

https://www.gskill.us/forum/forum/general-discussion/general-discussion-aa/164555-4000-cl15-feedback
 
1 - 20 of 71 Posts
Top