Empty RAM slots can harm DRAM performance — Asus NitroPath slots curb electrical interference, gain 400 MT/s, and are 40% shorter

New Asus NitroPath memory slots, on board and cross-section.
(Image credit: Der8auer, ASUSTek Computer Inc.)
33

Asus's new short NitroPath RAM slot design, arriving on select Asus X870E and Z890 motherboards, boosts RAM speeds by up to 400 MT/s by cutting down on harmful electrical interference from empty RAM slots. Der8auer, a fixture in the extreme overclocking space, recently uploaded his analysis of the new tech, helping to elucidate how a better RAM slot can make RAM more stable at high speeds.

Der8auer's video, which includes previously unseen images and insider quotes, was started based on a strange observation. NitroPath RAM slots are not included on Asus's 2-RAM-slot high-end Z890 motherboards—such as the upcoming ROG Maximus Z890 Apex—even though Maximus boards are typically tuned for extreme overclocking. Omitting a strictly better RAM slot from a high-end motherboard seems a strange choice by Asus, but further analysis reveals that NitroPath would likely make no impact on a 2-slot motherboard.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Sunny Grimm
Contributing Writer

Sunny Grimm is a contributing writer for Tom's Hardware. He has been building and breaking computers since 2017, serving as the resident youngster at Tom's. From APUs to RGB, Sunny has a handle on all the latest tech news.

  • FunSurfer
    There is a difference in the size of the eye also at 6,400 MT/s, it is bigger with the new connector, but the eye is very small at 10,000 MT/s even with the new connector, so there will be a stability problem at about 12,000 MT/s, so to avoid that for now a dummy RAM is the only option at those RAM speeds.
    Reply
  • H4UnT3R
    So it will scratch the RAM pins more?
    Reply
  • thestryker
    It would be interesting to see how these perform compared to using dummy sticks (though exact testing isn't going to be possible). I imagine the difference wouldn't be very large, but it'd be interesting just the same. I'd guess that current CPUs wouldn't really be able to push high enough memory clocks to negate the benefits without CUDIMMs. It's also entirely possible that the electrical properties of CUDIMMs would end up being different than UDIMMs as well.

    I'm guessing the mounting pressure has more to do with the design and longevity than it being any practical advantage.
    Reply
  • cyrusfox
    H4UnT3R said:
    So it will scratch the RAM pins more?
    Agreed, I believe you will get less insertion cycles due to this, not a concern for an end user, but will impact the life of dram test modules
    Reply
  • bit_user
    The article said:
    This interference is why many servers occasionally use dummy RAM sticks to populate all empty RAM slots, safely terminating their open connections.
    Really? The ones I've seen (which are admittedly pre-DDR5 era) were just plastic and didn't terminate anything. I assumed they were there to keep the contacts free of dust or to retain similar airflow as if the slots were populated.




    Reply
  • Notton
    Yeah, Buildzoid has been saying this for years about DDR5.
    And whenever a maker released a 2-slot DDR5 mobo, so many people would complain.
    "waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh! I want 4 slots! I want futureproofing when my sticks only hit 5200MT/s anyways! waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh! but I want to hit 6400MT/s with 4 slots populatated! waaaaaaaaaaaaaagh!

    Without ever realizing 4-slots populated guaranteed speed is like... 4200-4800MT/s
    or that the extra slots was hurting the DRAM stability.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    cyrusfox said:
    I believe you will get less insertion cycles due to this, not a concern for an end user, but will impact the life of dram test modules
    What the article said seems to contradict this:
    "Asus's press release claims that NitroPath slots have a 57% higher retention force than standard ones and 20% improvements in lateral latching and release forces. This increased toughness should make a difference for gamers or other enthusiasts who often replace DIMMs in their systems"
    It would be nice to get some hard stats on how they compare.

    BTW, like a decade ago, I heard of some alternative electroplating that provided similar corrosion resistance as gold, but was cheaper and tougher. I wonder why that didn't seem to catch on.
    https://www.semiaccurate.com/2016/04/12/xtalic-makes-a-better-contact-material-than-gold/
    I also got some hi-fi cables, like a decade ago, that used some other plating than gold. I wonder if it was the same sort of alloy. Given how much environmental destruction is happening due to particularly the illegal gold mining industry (they use lots of mercury to leech out the gold and it just gets dumped into water ways), I support anything that reduces reliance on gold.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    Notton said:
    Yeah, Buildzoid has been saying this for years about DDR5.
    And whenever a maker released a 2-slot DDR5 mobo, so many people would complain.
    "waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh! I want 4 slots! I want futureproofing when my sticks only hit 5200MT/s anyways! waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh! but I want to hit 6400MT/s with 4 slots populatated! waaaaaaaaaaaaaagh!

    Without ever realizing 4-slots populated guaranteed speed is like... 4200-4800MT/s
    or that the extra slots was hurting the DRAM stability.
    Among W680 boards, 2-slots is basically nonexistent. Well, you can find them in mini-ITX boards, but I wanted ATX. I'd have definitely gone for one, if I could've. I had to get 2x 32 GiB DIMMs just so I could get dual ranked, yet 64 GiB is already more than I expect to use for the life of the machine. Plus, now 64 GiB UDIMMs are on their way (if not already here), making the case for 4 DIMM boards even weaker.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    bit_user said:
    Really? The ones I've seen (which are admittedly pre-DDR5 era) were just plastic and didn't terminate anything. I assumed they were there to keep the contacts free of dust or to retain similar airflow as if the slots were populated.
    The enterprise ones I've seen were all this, but the consumer ones have been different.

    Corsair had them for DDR4 (Gigabyte sold a kit which was 2 DIMMs/2 fakes unsure if they still do): https://www.corsair.com/us/en/p/pc-components-accessories/cmwlekit2/vengeance-rgb-pro-light-enhancement-kit-aca-a-black-cmwlekit2
    They were supposed to have something similar for DDR5, but it hasn't materialized. The price, performance limit and restriction of only Intel on these v-color ones for DDR5 may explain why they haven't: https://v-color.net/collections/ddr5-rgb-filler-kit
    bit_user said:
    Presumably you don't mean this Lotus??
    Probably these folks: https://www.lotes.cc/en
    Reply
  • Hotrod2go
    This reminds me of the dummy sticks used in old Intel 850 & E variant chipset boards that featured RDRAM technology around the early 2000s.
    Reply