QuinQuix

Sory for necroing, but I registered specifically to agree with you here. You're absolutely right, and I've been looking for benchmarks the same way you have (I assume you haven't found any yet as I haven't either). In general a lot of the benchmarks are inconclusive because they're not done right. What is the use looking at scenario's that are not memory-bottlenecked and then declaring it doesn't matter? That tells you nothing. Reviewers should look at scenes where you'd expect a difference. And then, they also have to focus on the right numbers. Average fps completely obscures stutter, but it ruins your game experience. The ARMA benchmark you linked is actually very good in this respect. At least the idea that RAM speed is irrelevant has died. There's some discussion on latency vs frequency, but consensus seems to be that both matter with a slight edge to frequency (super low timings eg C12 3200 is about equal to C16 3600 in fps). I discovered on reddit that single rank vs dual rank is also a thing, and that dual rank sticks supposedly are faster everything else being equal (but have more trouble clocking higher, at least on ryzen). The best ram that is still moderately affordable is something like samsung B-die G SKill TridentZ 3200 C14. Gamers Nexus did a video on single vs dual channel and found that you'll get about ~ 5-10% upgrading from single to dual channel (but that's avg fps, so actual impact may be larger). PCworld did an article about dual channel to quad channel and saw no significant results (but again only looked at avg fps). I personally do not expect that it makes ZERO difference going to quad channel. But whether it is beneficial or harmfull likely comes down to latency vs bandwith. Quad channel gives you insane theoretical bandwith, but often the amount of data the cpu needs will probably not be so large. For smaller amounts of data, latency may be where most time is lost. And quad channel has slightly more latency, so it's hard to predict. Arma would be a very interesting benchmark in this regard. It's known (in ARMA 3) that Broadwell C (5775C) with it's L4 cache (only 128MB but that's a lot for cache) improves AVERAGE fps by up to 25%. That's an insane increase in performance. I would like to see this YAAB benchmark with the 5775C, that would be very informative. But in conclusion - you're 100% spot on. We do NOT have the required data to say for certain that quad channel does not help in any games. I would love if someone dit a YAAB benchmark like the article you linked for (fast) quad channel ram vs dual channel ram. And maybe also for single vs dual channel. But these are the kind of articles that may have too much of a niche following to really be worth writing for professional benchmarkers. You have to really love the tech itself to be motivated to do it.