I'm sorry, but if you're just looking to "bench-race" your computer, and aren't really looking for performance gains, then your opinion doesn't hold much. And weather or not you can run at 1T does depend on a lot of factors. There are many people running at 1T with the right setups. I can't really be too specific when I don't have enough info to be.
Alright well i'm sorry to point out that there are all those people on the forums that try to get that extra bit of performane out of their computer, by squeezing that last mhz by getting the better cooling solution or by trying to get your memory to run on slightly tighter timings...what does this all lead too..
exactly what i was referring to earlier, enthusiasts...Enthusiasts, the people who want to get the last bit of performance out of their pc but only 10%(pre-conroe era) of the time would ever see a real world gain from overclocking or setting your ram to tighter timings...so why does everyone do this? alot of reasons but just like i said earlier people always want that extra bit of performance whether its 100mhz or 50mhz and having to go from 1T to 2T is no difference, people will still strive to go with the best performance...so i don't think my opinion was wrong in anyway
and i never implied that the performance decrease was enough to justifty only sticking with two sticks of ram rather than four...
i'll give a quick example, how many enthusiasts out their buy slower ram to place in their with their faster ram...none, cause they all know they could be running speeds at their faster ram...
and how many people would buy 4x4 if they knew that the 1 processor by itself ran at 2.6Ghz, but when in 4x4 could only run at 2.2Ghz (only theoretical), they would definitely be unhappy about the performance speed decrease, albeit a small when when adding a second processor