Advantage of using indentical RAM blocks

Aephir

Honorable
Nov 9, 2013
6
0
10,510
Hi,

I have a GA Z68X-UD5-B3 motherboard with 2x4 GB Corsair Vengeance XMS3 (DDR3 1600MHz, CL8-8-8-24), and want to add some RAM.

I'd prefer for two 8 GB modules (the motherboard handles up to 32 GB, and I might want to upgrade more later, so might as well get the new RAM in sizes I can use for that), unless there is some advantage of having four identical RAM modules, instead of two of one type, two of another?

Cheers,
W
 
Solution
yep, 2x8GB is definitly the preferred combo, less stress on the MC (memory controller) and ever so slightly faster, so actually for 16GB 4x4 can be a disadvantage.

Tradesman1

Legenda in Aeternum
Your best bet is to buy a single package of the amount of DRAM you want, ANY time you mix packages of DRAM it can be problematic (i.e. the sticks might not want to play together), with a single set you are assured all in the package were tested to work together and especially with Intel, if the sticks are 1600 or better the XMP programming is done by packaged set - not individual sticks - say you buy a set of 2x8GB 2133 sticks in the advanced timings that set will prob call for a tRFC (advanced timing) of 208 where a 4 stick set requires around 278, so micing you may be required to manually set up the timings (both base and advanced) as well as voltages (mixed sets also often require additional voltage to DRAM and/or MC (memory controller)... in short, if it was as easy to just sticks as many purport, then the DRAM makers would simply sell single sticks and mark them up and make a ton more money - since they test to ensure all in a given package work together it takes more time = higher cost, i.e. 'normally' a two stick package will cost more than 2 single sticks purchased together, and a 4 stick package will be a little high than 2 2 stick packages purchased together
 

Aephir

Honorable
Nov 9, 2013
6
0
10,510
13thmonkey: The RAM limit won't be an issue, but thanks I didn't even know/check that.

So if I put in new RAM, that are not identical, all four will run at the speed of the slowest? But if I understand it right, it should be possible to use one set of identical modules in RAM socket 1 and 3, and another set of identical modules in socket 2 and 4, and still have them all running in dual channel (2 and 2 as channel A and B, respectively), right?

Tradesman1: Thanks, though I’m not sure I totally get the whole tRFC setting. Not enough that I'd be comfortable changing it (at least not without knowing what I should set it to, and I wouldn't know that, off the top of my head). But you'd recommend just tossing my 'old' RAM modules, and buy a new set? Even if I was to buy the same exact type of RAM? In my last rig, many years ago, I remember buying new RAM, and having 2 x 1 GB and 2 x 512 MB (and as I remember, 2 and 2, they were running dual channel), which worked fine for years. Maybe I just got lucky? But doing a quick search, I don’t really see any where buying two single is cheaper than buying two in a pack. Generally, I see a 10 - 25% discount when buying the bundles with 2 – 3 modules, instead of 2 or 3 of the same in single packs?

So, are you talking less performance from the new RAM, or less stability (more data corruption/crashes)? Would it help (make issues less likely) if I got new RAM running the same voltage? Or anything else? Getting the exact same? As you might hear, I would like to be able to use the ’old’ RAM as well:)

Basically, I don’t think I have the money to spend on 4 x 8 GB of decent RAM right now, and I just think it seems a bit wasteful to get 4 x 4 GB of new RAM, just to replace all of them in a while. Well, for most RAM I’ve found (e.g. the Corsair Dominator 1866MHz, CL9 I was looking at) 2 x 8 GB are actually cheaper than 4 x 4 GB. But if I “can’t” just get 2 x 8 GB more later, but “should” get a 4 x 8 GB pack, then it might actually be better to wait a bit until I have the extra cash to spend (or prices go down a bit)?

Any suggestions?
 
what are you using it for? 32Gb is massive overkill right now, and for the forseeable future. I'm peaking at 8-9GB out of 16, running Bf3 (for fun) and Dayz (for admin duties) along with 3-4 monitoring programs. so if you can't afford 32 get 16, if you can't afford 16 get 8, you'll still be fine, unless you are running multiple virtual machines.

with regards to being able to do this 'back in the day' yes you could, yes you still can, but as ram gets faster the margin for error gets smaller, and the greater the likelihood of there being an issue. The pain of unidentified bsods is not worth it, sell your old, start with a clean slate.
 

Tradesman1

Legenda in Aeternum
For DRAM, yes, it's best to get all you want in a single package as all are teseted to work together, and you bring up a reason why where you touch on on pricing saying a 4x4GB set is more expensive than a 2x8GB - both are 16GB, but...even the the 8GB sticks have twice as much DRAM (everything tighter, and tighter tolerances due to higher capacity, it's still much easier to pair 2 sticks to work together than it is 4 sticks, thus takes longer to test and find four that play well, so the 4x4GB cost more and to match 4x8GB takes even longer (not to mention the 8GB sticks are harder to match than 4GB sticks), which is why you'll more likely see 2 8GB stick packages are cheaper than a single 4 stick package.

On the timings, what you see is the base timings (the 4 main, like 9-9-9-27), if you delve into the BIOS under DRAM you'll also find what's called secondary or advanced timings, (many of them), most are often those that set up the DRAM to be able to play together with multiple sticks at once, in the rough example I gave with just one of them, the tRFC timing, think of it this way - above I gave the example of 208 and 278 which are fairly typical tRFC values for a set of 4x8GB 2133/9 sticks - for simplicity sake lets change the 208 to a time of 20 seconds and the 278 value to a time of 27 seconds - and lets say we have a conveyor belt - for everything to run smoothly on the line and of the conveyor belt requires 4 people places 1 box each on the belt - so the boss checks out 12 employees and finds 4 that can pace the boxes on the line at the rate of 1 every 20 seconds, but the rest can only do it at the rate of 1 every 27 seconds, so the line is set to run at 27 second intervals, while in the meantime those faster guys could go faster on a smaller belt using 2 people and do things every 20 seconds ---- so they'd be doing a 2 box line (2 sticks) faster than the 4 box line (4 sticks) but the the 4boxes (larger sets would cost more as more people required - can use this both as an analogy of why 4 stick sets costs more (testing/time) as well as why 4 sticks require a higher tRFC - all the workers have to run at the same pace to work well
 

Aephir

Honorable
Nov 9, 2013
6
0
10,510
13thmonkey: Yeah, I that's why I didn't really want to go for 32 GB right now. I mostly use it for gaming, a bit of Ableton/FL studio music production and a whole lotta tabs open in chrome, at any given time. I have 8 GB, and I'm often pushing the limits (never below 50%, very often above 80 % or higher during gaming, a few crashes and fairly often the "change windows color scheme, you are low on RAM" message. Actually, I can't play Arkham Origins without getting this message). The only reason for considering 4 x 8 GB was if it would be a problem to get 2 x 8 now, and 2 x 8 again later, if needed. Then I'd rather not have to discard 2 RAM modules again the next time. But you're absolutely right, 16 GB (or perhaps even 12 GB) would be plenty for right now.

Tradesman1: OK, thanks. So if I (kind of) get it, it would probably be preferable (or at least as good) with 2 x 8 GB instead of 4 x 4 GB? Since my motherboard only supports dual, not quad channel memory, there would not really be an advantage in 4 x 4 instead of 2 x 8 GB, right (assuming that the clock speed, CL etc. are the same)? That would just require more 'guys who stack boxes at identical speed' for the same overall speed (to continue the box-analogy)?
 


I get that message with 16Gb and only 5 being used. It's probably a vram issue, every time without fail on BF3.

 

Aephir

Honorable
Nov 9, 2013
6
0
10,510
Tradesmand1: Thanks a lot, I'll look for that then.

13thmonkey: VRAM limitations, you say. Well, I think I have another question then... Is it worth going SLI, or better just to get a new card (when funding allows)? I've got a Gainward 3GB GTX 580 Phantom. On the motherboard, only one of the PCIe x16 posts run at x16, one shares bandwidth with it, so if I add two, they'll both run at x8. Both are PCIe 2.0.

Cheers,
W
 

Aephir

Honorable
Nov 9, 2013
6
0
10,510
Tradesman: Will do, but if the Windows warning message is bull, I might wait until after Christmas to see if there's a few bucks to save.

13thmonkey: OK, I'll start to ignore that warning. Or, continue, I guess, I've never changed the color scheme because of it:)

Thanks for you help and input, both of you.

Cheers,
/W
 

Aephir

Honorable
Nov 9, 2013
6
0
10,510
Hi,

I ended up changing for a couple of 8 GB Corsair Dominator, and it's been running smooth, rarely passing the 45% usage, and usually at 20 - 30% when not gaming. And as luck had it, my kid brother decided to build a new rig with some Christmas start-up funds, and 'inherited' my old RAM to use until it's a bottleneck for him. So all in all, everything worked out quite nice.

Thanks again for all you help guys! (or girls, of course, I wouldn't want to assume that only guys could hide behind obscure usernames :))

Cheers,
W