I want to get new RAM, should I throw away my old RAM?

[Tofu Kofu]

I have a system with the Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory, and I am looking to buy new Corsair Vengeance LPX 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 CL18 Memory.

My question is, should I just get rid of the old RAM or add them together to get 48gb? I do not too heavy gaming, some Opera GX tabs, and every now and then video editing.

I am aware that technically it can all work, but the faster RAM would have to be limited to the lowest speed, in this case 3200Hz. So should I just add the new RAM with the old one or put only the new RAM in my system?

[porina]

Unless you have specific reason to have more ram, just run the new ram and sell/reuse/store the old ram.

[Tofu Kofu]

6 minutes ago, porina said:

Unless you have specific reason to have more ram, just run the new ram and sell/reuse/store the old ram.

My only reason was like "More RAM more better" So if there is no real benefit then I dont mind taking out the old one

[BetteBalterZen]

30 minutes ago, Tofu Kofu said:

My only reason was like "More RAM more better" So if there is no real benefit then I dont mind taking out the old one

Just use the new 32GB kit. Try to stay away from 4 sticks. More sticks, more load on IMC, higher CPU temp, higher risk of instability also. 

[porina]

30 minutes ago, Tofu Kofu said:

My only reason was like "More RAM more better" So if there is no real benefit then I dont mind taking out the old one

More ram than needed generally doesn't hurt, but mixing speeds and using 4 slots could add complications. Since you don't need that extra capacity, then keep it simple.

[Needfuldoer]

35 minutes ago, Tofu Kofu said:

My only reason was like "More RAM more better" So if there is no real benefit then I dont mind taking out the old one

Honestly, if you're not constantly running out of physical memory and hitting the virtual memory swap file, more RAM won't make much of a performance difference. (The most strenuous workload you listed is probably video editing, which should be fine on 16 GB.)

 

Faster RAM can help, especially on Zen CPUs, but only if they can handle the faster speed. Are you still running the Ryzen 5 3600 in your profile? If so, you may not benefit from faster RAM because that CPU's only rated for 3200. It may not be stable if you try to overclock it to 3600; you'd have to upgrade to a Ryzen 5000 series in that case.

[Tofu Kofu]

15 minutes ago, Needfuldoer said:

Honestly, if you're not constantly running out of physical memory and hitting the virtual memory swap file, more RAM won't make much of a performance difference. (The most strenuous workload you listed is probably video editing, which should be fine on 16 GB.)

 

Faster RAM can help, especially on Zen CPUs, but only if they can handle the faster speed. Are you still running the Ryzen 5 3600 in your profile? If so, you may not benefit from faster RAM because that CPU's only rated for 3200. It may not be stable if you try to overclock it to 3600; you'd have to upgrade to a Ryzen 5000 series in that case.

I am planning to upgrade to a 5600, was just thinking about what I would do when I upgrade the RAM at the same time as I will upgrade the CPU

[Needfuldoer]

3 minutes ago, Tofu Kofu said:

I am planning to upgrade to a 5600, was just thinking about what I would do when I upgrade the RAM at the same time as I will upgrade the CPU

If you're upgrading both, you might as well get the extra RAM. It's not that much more expensive in the grand scheme of things.

 

Once you have all the parts in-hand, you can always try throwing the old RAM back in and comparing the performance you get from it alongside the faster memory. Worst case scenario, you can just take it back out again.

[freeagent]

35 minutes ago, BetteBalterZen said:

More sticks, more load on IMC, higher CPU temp, higher risk of instability also.

Nah.. 

 

Well maybe the higher risk of instability, but it should rear its ugly head right away.

 

Provided all sticks are single rank, performance will be better with 4 sticks than with 2.

 

But my past with Corsair is spotty. I have never been able to get 2 pairs of Corsair sticks to work with each other.

 

Junk.

[BetteBalterZen]

5 minutes ago, freeagent said:

Nah.. 

 

Well maybe the higher risk of instability, but it should rear its ugly head right away.

 

Provided all sticks are single rank, performance will be better with 4 sticks than with 2.

 

But my past with Corsair is spotty. I have never been able to get 2 pairs of Corsair sticks to work with each other.

 

Junk.

Yes...

Instability is at higher risk, YES
The performance between single and dual rank is kinda non existent for a normal home user, who plays video games. Some games may see a small difference in FPS but is not worth the down sides IMO. And I say this from experience. 

[freeagent]

Dunnno what to say, been running 4 sticks on AM4 for 4 years, can overclock no problem, do everything no problem. No crashes.

 

Performance gains are there.

[Somerandomtechyboi]

if you want it to be convenient then just buy the cheapest 32gb 3200c16/3600c18 kit (branding doesnt matter at all) and resell your old kit

 

if you are fine with putting in abit of effort for a cost cut send a thaiphoon burner pic to identify ic and ill point you to oem sticks that use the exact same ic to guarantee compatibility and no issues running at xmp or higher manual tuning speeds (~3800) and there is a performance benifit to dualrank aswell though im not sure how noticable it is without tuning due to garbage auto subtimings that probably minimize the gains

 

1 hour ago, BetteBalterZen said:

More sticks, more load on IMC, higher CPU temp, higher risk of instability also. 

imc wont be a limit even with quadrank as fclk is your main limiter on ryzen cpus so thats not even worth considering at these slow speeds and theres no benifit to running desync fclk till north of 5000 and i dont think even a unify can hit those speeds on 4 dimms

 

if you have a board known to be a shit clocker for 4dimms like msi b3/450 then it might be abit more annoying to get 3800 stable but 3200 xmp should still jusst work even then

 

instability ties into those two things but the board is the main consideration here, if it can do it then itll just behave like normal, if it cant then the board or rams are garbage and just run at 3200 xmp

 

as for the rams there seems to be a pretty big gap between the garbage and half decent ics, even ics i wouldnt even bother with like hynix 8gbit cjr/jjr should still be able to do abit over 4000 with low volts (<1.5v) where garbage like samsung c die tops out at 3600 with no voltage scaling unless you get a really good bin of it by sheer luck or early hynix 8gbit like mfr and afr that cant really hit 3600+ either but those are thankfully discontinued so only shitty c die remains so as long as it isnt a garbage ic this wont be an issue either and even if its a garbage ic itll still work at the slow 3200 xmp

[porina]

26 minutes ago, freeagent said:

Provided all sticks are single rank, performance will be better with 4 sticks than with 2.

The question may be 2x 3600 vs 4x 3200. 2R helps over 1R where all else is equal, but it isn't in this case. Also the mismatched capacities may add further complications.

 

21 minutes ago, freeagent said:

Dunnno what to say, been running 4 sticks on AM4 for 4 years, can overclock no problem, do everything no problem. No crashes.

In these non-standard conditions, there are a lot of variables. What works for you may not work for everyone.

[freeagent]

Remember the glory days of X58 and you could just run whatever you wanted..