DDR ram Misunderstanding?

[SXTC]

I've been doing a lot of research because I want to upgrade my pc with the best gear for the lowest price, wich is quite a hard task.

But by doing that I've read some doubtfull answers from a lot of users... I'm posting it here because I know the brainies are on this forum.

 

So here is the confusion I want cleared up:

 

When talking about Dual channel memory people keep saying to only use 2 slots instead of all 4 to put less load on the CPU/Mainboard, according to most users it should work (better) more efficient that way.

When talking about Quad channel memory people say the same, they say "use 4 slots instead of 8".

But considering I've learned that Ram is supposed to take some of the workload off the CPU it makes no sense in my mind.... When they test it with all slots filled it gives almost no performance boost... but what if there's a slight botteneck? In theory it should take away some of the bottleneck with more Ram inside your rig.

 

Take Hyperthreading for example, a lot of CPU's these days have 4 cores with Hypertreading and those mainboards happen to have 4 slots for Dual channel memory, and the processor (in case of i7-6700k for example) clearly states that it supports Dual channel too... Isn't it safe to say that the ram Dual memory's function is there for the core and it's Hyper treading function? Wouldn't it be more logical to fill up all slots to take the load of all 4 cores?X99 boards for example have 8 slots and support Quad channel... and ontop of that each board clearly have 2 colors, 1 per 2 slots wich clearly indicates that you need 2 modules of ram to fill up 1 hypertreading channel, and that the other color stands for the other channnel (wich would seem logical since the Cpu is dual, and the memory too).

 

So if you only install 2 slots of Ram in 1 color that means your only using 1 channel on the CPU and not both. IF only 2 slots should be used to get better performance, it makes no sense why they'd add 4 and more... knowing that there's single memory modules of 128GB and the less modules you buy the cheaper they become...

 

It basicly boils down to the fact that either manufacturers are dumb "OR" they are smarter then the mainstream user "OR" those extra slots are put there for people that want to add more ram after having used too much low memory sticks.. but this last thought would seem idiotic for any company to take into account..

 

So please clarify why this statement is true or not and please don't just copy what everyone else is saying... but explain why what seems logical should somehow not be.

 

My thought "The colors of the ram modules stand for 1 channel per color and the CPU can use as many channels as it supports + it will only use the channels wich are filled up so yes it will be more efficient with less slots filled but at the cost of less workload capability" True or not? Explain why.

[Mushious]

Dual = 2

Quad = 4

 

Is it really that hard to understand?

[Atmos]

2 or 4 sticks doesn't matter, both will run dual channel and put the same "stress" on the board.

4 slots instead of 8 is the same thing, no difference to "stress"

 

The reason you typically see people use 2, or 4 slots instead of maxing it out, is so that they can better upgrade in the future if they so desire.

 

Cpu hyperthreading has nothing to do with ram running in 2x dual channel or 4x dual channel; likewise for 4x quad channel, or 8x quad channel.

 

Motherboards have 4, or 8 slots, so that people have the capability to upgrade to larger amounts of ram, without having to throw away the dims they already have to repopulate with larger capacity dims.

[SXTC]

You didn't read my post did you... seeing as your reply came when I just posted this and was still reading my own post to see if it wasn't too long...

 

The question is not "am I an idiot that can't count"

 

The question is wether it is indeed better to use less modules in your pc when mainboards seem to be made for you to use more (seeing as it appears 2 slots stand for 1 channel on the board, and it would seem unlogical for a pc to operate more stable with less channels used).

[JefferyD90]

1 minute ago, SXTC said:

You didn't read my post did you... seeing as your reply came when I just posted this and was still reading my own post to see if it wasn't too long...

 

The question is not "am I an idiot that can't count"

 

The question is wether it is indeed better to use less modules in your pc when mainboards seem to be made for you to use more (seeing as it appears 2 slots stand for 1 channel on the board, and it would seem unlogical for a pc to operate more stable with less channels used).

My advice is to make sure you get QVL rated memory.

[Mushious]

Just now, SXTC said:

You didn't read my post did you... seeing as your reply came when I just posted this and was still reading my own post to see if it wasn't too long...

 

The question is not "am I an idiot that can't count"

 

The question is wether it is indeed better to use less modules in your pc when mainboards seem to be made for you to use more (seeing as it appears 2 slots stand for 1 channel on the board, and it would seem unlogical for a pc to operate more stable with less channels used).

Use as much as you like. Some RAM just runs better in dual/quad channel, as that is what it's designed for. Doesn't matter how many sticks you have.

[SXTC]

Ah so basicly they just use those colors to tell people what channel it is, but the CPU uses the Dual channel from the memory through the same channel?

In that case it is less idiotic to assume they added more slots for people that want to upgrade their Ram lateron.

 

Sure is confusing knowing that 2 slots are needed to take use of Dual channel, and then add 4 slots with 2 colors.

[Glenwing]

29 minutes ago, SXTC said:

I've been doing a lot of research because I want to upgrade my pc with the best gear for the lowest price, wich is quite a hard task.

But by doing that I've read some doubtfull answers from a lot of users... I'm posting it here because I know the brainies are on this forum.

 

So here is the confusion I want cleared up:

 

When talking about Dual channel memory people keep saying to only use 2 slots instead of all 4 to put less load on the CPU/Mainboard, according to most users it should work (better) more efficient that way.

When talking about Quad channel memory people say the same, they say "use 4 slots instead of 8".

But considering I've learned that Ram is supposed to take some of the workload off the CPU it makes no sense in my mind.... When they test it with all slots filled it gives almost no performance boost... but what if there's a slight botteneck? In theory it should take away some of the bottleneck with more Ram inside your rig.

 

Take Hyperthreading for example, a lot of CPU's these days have 4 cores with Hypertreading and those mainboards happen to have 4 slots for Dual channel memory, and the processor (in case of i7-6700k for example) clearly states that it supports Dual channel too... Isn't it safe to say that the ram Dual memory's function is there for the core and it's Hyper treading function? Wouldn't it be more logical to fill up all slots to take the load of all 4 cores?X99 boards for example have 8 slots and support Quad channel... and ontop of that each board clearly have 2 colors, 1 per 2 slots wich clearly indicates that you need 2 modules of ram to fill up 1 hypertreading channel, and that the other color stands for the other channnel (wich would seem logical since the Cpu is dual, and the memory too).

 

So if you only install 2 slots of Ram in 1 color that means your only using 1 channel on the CPU and not both. IF only 2 slots should be used to get better performance, it makes no sense why they'd add 4 and more... knowing that there's single memory modules of 128GB and the less modules you buy the cheaper they become...

 

It basicly boils down to the fact that either manufacturers are dumb "OR" they are smarter then the mainstream user "OR" those extra slots are put there for people that want to add more ram after having used too much low memory sticks.. but this last thought would seem idiotic for any company to take into account..

 

So please clarify why this statement is true or not and please don't just copy what everyone else is saying... but explain why what seems logical should somehow not be.

 

My thought "The colors of the ram modules stand for 1 channel per color and the CPU can use as many channels as it supports + it will only use the channels wich are filled up so yes it will be more efficient with less slots filled but at the cost of less workload capability" True or not? Explain why.

Well, RAM doesn't take load off the CPU. The processor processes data, the RAM holds data. They can't perform each others' functions (unless you count the CPU cache, which is a tiny bit of RAM built into the CPU), so RAM can't take any of the CPU's workload or vice versa. The purpose of RAM is to act as temporary storage for any data that the CPU is actively using, because the CPU cache isn't nearly large enough to hold it all, and permanent storage devices like hard drives and even SSDs are hundreds of times slower than RAM, too slow to allow real-time operation if the CPU used it for active data.

 

CPUs these days have multiple memory controllers, not just one. These controllers are independent from each other, so the CPU can access data from more than one RAM module at a time by utilizing both memory controller simultaneously. This effectively doubles the bandwidth bandwidth for memory running in a dual-channel configuration, or quadruples for quad-channel. Each RAM slot on the motherboard is wired to one of the CPU's memory controllers, these are fixed in the wiring of the board and cannot change, so depending on which slots you fill up, if you have 2/4 slots filled you might have two sticks connected to the same memory controller, in which case the other controller is not being used at all, or you can split the sticks so that both memory controllers can be used.

 

In really high-target overclocking, sometimes it can be good to limit the number of memory controllers active, as it helps the CPU remain more stable, but for normal operation and normal overclocking, it doesn't really matter. And saying that only 2 sticks should be used on a 4-slot board is nonsense, they would still be running in dual channel, and would be no different with four sticks, unless you purposely connect only two to the same memory controller and leave the other empty, which almost nobody does. Same-colored slots mean they are connected to different memory channels; the point is that running in multi-channel configurations is optimum, so the board manufacturers color the slots so that you just need to fill two slots of the same color to connect RAM to separate memory controllers. If you have a board with black and blue slots, the first black and first blue slot are connected to the first memory controller, the second black and the second blue slot are connected to the second memory controller.

[TrifectaIII]

OP, I think you have some really core misconceptions about how RAM actually works here. 

25 minutes ago, SXTC said:

But considering I've learned that Ram is supposed to take some of the workload off the CPU it makes no sense in my mind

That isn't how ram works at all, the ram and the cpu perform functions so totally different you couldn't even really begin to compare them.

26 minutes ago, SXTC said:

Isn't it safe to say that the ram Dual memory's function is there for the core and it's Hyper treading function?

Ram channels and the way in which motherboard manufacturers set up the dimm slots has absolutely nothing to do with hyper-threading.

29 minutes ago, SXTC said:

My thought "The colors of the ram modules stand for 1 channel per color and the CPU can use as many channels as it supports + it will only use the channels wich are filled up so yes it will be more efficient with less slots filled but at the cost of less workload capability" True or not? Explain why.

No, a single color on the motherboard indicates the slots that work in tandem to give you the best performance by ensuring that you are in the proper dual-channel (in the case of say a z170 board) configuration. Dual channel is going to give you better performance than single channel. It doesn't matter whether you fill all 4 slots or only 2 slots, as long as you always fill the colors one at a time.

 

Here is an example: On my mobo I have 2 white slots and 2 black slots:

 

With 2 Black slots filled with 8GB ram each, I have 16GB of Ram in dual channel.

With 1 Black and 1 White slot filled with 8GB each, I have 16GB running in single channel only, and therefore with less performance than if I had both in black slots or white slots.

With all 4 slots filled with 8GB each, I have 32 GB of ram in Dual-channel.

[19_blackie_73]

29 minutes ago, Glenwing said:

Well, RAM doesn't take load off the CPU. The processor processes data, the RAM holds data. They can't perform each others' functions (unless you count the CPU cache, which is a tiny bit of RAM built into the CPU), so RAM can't take any of the CPU's workload or vice versa. The purpose of RAM is to act as temporary storage for any data that the CPU is actively using, because the CPU cache isn't nearly large enough to hold it all, and permanent storage devices like hard drives and even SSDs are hundreds of times slower than RAM, too slow to allow real-time operation if the CPU used it for active data.

 

CPUs these days have multiple memory controllers, not just one. These controllers are independent from each other, so the CPU can access data from more than one RAM module at a time by utilizing both memory controller simultaneously. This effectively doubles the bandwidth bandwidth for memory running in a dual-channel configuration, or quadruples for quad-channel. Each RAM slot on the motherboard is wired to one of the CPU's memory controllers, these are fixed in the wiring of the board and cannot change, so depending on which slots you fill up, if you have 2/4 slots filled you might have two sticks connected to the same memory controller, in which case the other controller is not being used at all, or you can split the sticks so that both memory controllers can be used.

 

In really high-target overclocking, sometimes it can be good to limit the number of memory controllers active, as it helps the CPU remain more stable, but for normal operation and normal overclocking, it doesn't really matter. And saying that only 2 sticks should be used on a 4-slot board is nonsense, they would still be running in dual channel, and would be no different with four sticks, unless you purposely connect only two to the same memory controller and leave the other empty, which almost nobody does. Same-colored slots mean they are connected to different memory channels; the point is that running in multi-channel configurations is optimum, so the board manufacturers color the slots so that you just need to fill two slots of the same color to connect RAM to separate memory controllers. If you have a board with black and blue slots, the first black and first blue slot are connected to the first memory controller, the second black and the second blue slot are connected to the second memory controller.

pretty much THIS^^^^^^

[SXTC]

Thank you all for your clarifying answers. I heard people say 2 modules were better but no one ever explained why.

 

I can see now that the boards are just made confusing, but shouldn't be used fully to get the same results.