One stick of 8GB?

S

Slams

New Member
Hi, I recently bought a motherboard bundle that specified 8GB RAM, (2 x 4GB) but they have sent me ONE stick of cmz16gx3m2a1600c10r (Corsair Vengeance) which says 16 GB (2X 8GB) but because there's only one stick it's still only 8GB isn't it? Are they allowed to split up kits like this? I'm so confused!
 
Yes, bundles usually only include 1 stick of ram from what I've seen. You may get lucky with some giving you 2 sticks for dual channel but for the most part, you only get 1 stick. Where did you buy it from?
 
Freshtech on Ebay. I've heard that 2x4GB is better than one 8GB stick though. Should I get in touch them them and ask for the 2x4GB like advertised or just stick with the 8GB?
 
May as well stick with the 8GB. Although, yes 2x4GB would be faster. I don't think you'll really notice the performance difference.
 
2 x 4 GB is Dual Channel which is faster. Speed matters, that's like getting a GPU, and saying I thought vRAM mattered, not speed.
 
PCunicorn said:
2 x 4 GB is Dual Channel which is faster. Speed matters, that's like getting a GPU, and saying I thought vRAM mattered, not speed.
Click to expand...

Like I said, although 2x4 would be faster, in most cases, you will not notice the difference at all.

May as well leave it with 1x8 so that upgrading to 16GB and 32GB is easier.
 
PCunicorn said:
2 x 4 GB is Dual Channel which is faster. Speed matters, that's like getting a GPU, and saying I thought vRAM mattered, not speed.
Click to expand...

It has the potential to be faster, it is not necessarily faster. Keeping with your GPU analogy, it is like saying my card is running in a PCI 3.0 lane, therefore is faster than my card in a PCI2.0 lane. This is true with a very quick card under load, but not for 90% of cards and not when they are not under load.

With the memory, you get extra bandwidth in dual channel, not speed, and most programs won't saturate the bandwidth from a single stick, so it really is a non-issue
 
Yup. The only time dual channel really makes a difference is in benchmarks. But would I ever run single channel? Probably not.
 
claptonman said:
Yup. The only time dual channel really makes a difference is in benchmarks. But would I ever run single channel? Probably not.
Click to expand...

Me either, but that is only because two sticks are about the same price as, or often less than, a single DIMM of the same density. I would rather pay the same amount to have the potential for more performance even though, lets be honest, I will never see it.

With that said, I wouldn't be upset if I ended up with a single DIMM instead of two
 
Duel channel, triple channel and quad channel are BS. You won't see a speed increase and will never notice it. Just get the highest speed and lowest cas and lower voltage stuff for overclocking head room. 1 stick is better on the chip.
 
Agent Smith said:
Duel channel, triple channel and quad channel are BS. You won't see a speed increase and will never notice it. Just get the highest speed and lowest cas and lower voltage stuff for overclocking head room. 1 stick is better on the chip.
Click to expand...

Not entirely true.

They do offer performance increases in some, albeit few, situations, as there are some applications that would utilise the extra bandwidth offered by memory not running in single channel.

With regards to looking at frequencies, latencies (there is more than just CAS to think about ;))and voltages, you end up with a trade off. As frequencies go up, latencies go up, as frequencies go down, latencies go down. If you look at these uber clocked memory modules, their latencies are higher than your lower clocked alternatives, so really, the performance gain is non-existant as they end up cancelling each other out.

That and when you end up paying for these silly high clocked modules, you would be better off spending the ridiculous amounts of money on other components instead which will impact performance much more than the memory would do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top