4x4gb vs 2x8gb of DDR4

[*Insert Name Here*]

I got 4x4gb of DDR4 at 2133mhz for my z170 motherboard and now I am wondering: What are the pros and cons of running these two options in dual channel? Should I have even bothered doing it this way?

[Chasem121]

There would be no difference between the two configs in the vast, vast majority of situations

[r4tch3t]

Practically no difference, 8x2 is preferred as you can upgrade later.

[pyrojoe34]

The advantage of 2x8 is that you have room to add more RAM in the future without having to replace the entire kit.

 

The advantage of 4x4 is only seen in systems that can do quad-channel memory (X99) but those usually have 8 ram slots so you still have room to upgrade anyway.

[DrM]

smaller gb sticks tend to oc better and 4 sticks are slightly faster in quad channel (only if its supported).

otherwise, 2 sticks are preferred because it allows room for upgrading

[Imakuni]

5 minutes ago, wrathoftheturkey said:

No noticeable difference, quad channel is (I think) technically a tad faster, but really it's just upgradeability.

Quad channel is only faster if it's actually quad channel. But Z170 doesn't support that, it only runs at dual channel at max.

10 minutes ago, *Insert Name Here* said:

I got 4x4gb of DDR4 at 2133mhz for my z170 motherboard and now I am wondering: What are the pros and cons of running these two options in dual channel? Should I have even bothered doing it this way?

Pros: 4x4 looks better.

 

For everything else, 2x8 is the superior choice. Less power consumption, easier to OC, offers upgrade path, it's cheaper... seriously, there's absolutely no reason to get 4x4 in a Skylake system other than looks. Get yourself some 2x8 3000mhz goodness and call it a day.

[*Insert Name Here*]

1 minute ago, Imakuni said:

Quad channel is only faster if it's actually quad channel. But Z170 doesn't support that, it only runs at dual channel at max.

Pros: 4x4 looks better.

 

For everything else, 2x8 is the superior choice. Less power consumption, easier to OC, offers upgrade path, it's cheaper... seriously, there's absolutely no reason to get 4x4 in a Skylake system other than looks. Get yourself some 2x8 3000mhz goodness and call it a day.

I overclocked to a 4.4Ghz with a 6600k, what would the  amount of ram, have to do with how easy it is to overclock.

[Imakuni]

1 minute ago, *Insert Name Here* said:

I overclocked to a 4.4Ghz with a 6600k, what would the  amount of ram, have to do with how easy it is to overclock.

If you don't want to deal with it, just buy your kit and enable XMP. Will work 9/10 times.

 

If you want to do manual RAM OCing, however... then it's harder. Aside for speed, you also have to relax timings. Relax too much and you'll actually lose performance, even though you are increasing frequency; don't relax, however, and you won't get far on your OC. You also have to worry about your CPU not handling it if going for very high frequencies, as well as dealing with 3 different voltages at once.

 

In sum, if you found CPU OCing a hassle, then manual RAM OC will just be worse. Don't bother with it and just go for the XMP. But if you did like tinkering with your CPU for hours on end to get the best you can, then I'm sure you'll find RAM OCing fun fun fun!

[Bkriks]

My recommendation, always use the least ram sticks as possible in a build you can upgrade in the future.