How much difference is there for gaming between (1 x 8GB) and (2 x 4GB)??

Solution
This is my 1st hit after the sponsored ones ...it says something very different

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2364466/4gb-dual-channel-8gb-single-stick.html

As for articles, you need to go past the 1st three links, the 4th is an article ... very poor one as it tested very little but it is an article w/ benchmarks

Again.... see previous post regarding test driving a car in the parking lot. I have never seen more than a simplistic comparison (like Nexus one) which I see of little value. Testing 3 games with a single card, when the card will be the obvious bottleneck proves what ? What about SLI / CF ? What about min. fps ... those times when the game lags, stalls or rubberbands ?

It's the same thing when testing RAM...
Single sticks in dual channel boards is not recommended.... impact is not consistent, prolly ranging from 5 to 15%. Speed matters (despite popular myth).... impact in any given game's average fps can range from a fraction of a percent to 11% going from say 1600 to 2400 with a single card. Impact is much greater on minimum frame rates and with SLI / CF.
 

NostalgicEvolution

Reputable
Jun 4, 2015
33
0
4,530


CF??

And so I can interpret - there is negligible affect on gaming performance between (1 x 8GB) and (2 x 4GB) with the same brand?
 
SLI - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalable_Link_Interface
CF - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_CrossFireX

i can not imagine why someone would use 1 x 8 instead of 2 x 4 .... even in gaming where the effect is limited to being significant in very few games, there's not enough of a cost benefit to make the time investment reading about it worthwhile. My other problem, testing average fps on a single card system with 1 versus 2 sticks is like test driving a car in the dealer's parking lot. Impact on minimum fps ? Impact on SLI / CF ?

I don't think we have done less the 2 x 8GB 2133 is about 18 months.

as for links

https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=dual+channel+ram+1+stick+versus+2&ei=UTF-8&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-001
 

NostalgicEvolution

Reputable
Jun 4, 2015
33
0
4,530


The first page on your link you gave says 'Get the one 8Gb RAM because you can do more cost effectively upgrade to 16GB later. And forget about the single or dual channel mode now.'
 
This is my 1st hit after the sponsored ones ...it says something very different

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2364466/4gb-dual-channel-8gb-single-stick.html

As for articles, you need to go past the 1st three links, the 4th is an article ... very poor one as it tested very little but it is an article w/ benchmarks

Again.... see previous post regarding test driving a car in the parking lot. I have never seen more than a simplistic comparison (like Nexus one) which I see of little value. Testing 3 games with a single card, when the card will be the obvious bottleneck proves what ? What about SLI / CF ? What about min. fps ... those times when the game lags, stalls or rubberbands ?

It's the same thing when testing RAM speeds....there's 100s of youtube vids showing tiny impact w/ high speed RAM but then when you test more than few games you find ones that are affected significantly .... On F1 the impact is 11%. If you test the impact of lower CAS for higher speeds on minimum fps, we do see a very significant impact but most sites never bother. We see a great impact on SLI / CF when the single card is no longer the bottleneck.

I wish I could point you to a site that tested all these things but I have never found one. But again, while looked at acceptable quality 1 x8's or 2 x 4's , I have never seen a cost difference to make it worth my while to spend a lot of time searching for.
 
Solution