X79 and/or rampage IV OC'ing thread for those of us still left....

[Random Murderer]

@dalekdukesboy Nice OC, what kind of memory are you running? Would it happen to be Samsung Green 1600 1.35V 11-11-11-28? I ran four sticks of that at up to 2520MHz on my 3820, 2570MHz on my 4930k. I'm pretty sure I was limited by the IMC in both cases, as 2400 10-12-12-31 1t runs fine at 1.525V, 1.55V for 2500 runs, yet even 1.65V wouldn't allow me to break 2600 at 1t nor 2t.
Also worth noting: You'll see a pretty big improvement in your AIDA numbers across the board if you use the 125 CPU strap to reach the same RAM speeds (128.625 BCLK using the 1866 RAM divider will give 2400 exactly). For some odd reason, on X79 the 2400 RAM divider on 100 CPU strap gives lower performance numbers than it should. Cadaveca pointed this out to me when he was helping me get situated on the X79 platform, and sure enough, my own testing showed this pattern.
If you insist on using the 100 strap, or are simply limited to that strap by your CPU, try running the RAM at 2133 and really tightening those timings. Seeing that you are able to run C9 at 2400MHz, I wouldn't be surprised if you could run C8 at 2133MHz.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

Thanks on all your points, definitely makes me feel good about all those things technical I'm distracting and monkeying with as well as your kind words on my bad luck and untimely demises of 3 women in my life. Anyway I have an interview I am jetting out of door for so wish me luck and I'll reply to your points more fully later good day all!

 

[dalekdukesboy]

THis is the memory
for specs/reviews/price on Newegg, great stuff recommend highly!'

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148656

This is one of fans...80mm high volume...most of fans I got were relatively small biggest was 92 mm I believe...I got them for I don't have any fans in these size ranges and they are handy to cool small areas on a board/video card/etc that a 120 mm fan just is too big for and doesn't direct cooling onto small area that needs cooling or simply bigger fan doesn't fit into spot I want it etc.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835119136

https://images10.newegg.com/NeweggI...essAll1280/35-119-136-02.jpg?w=660&h=500&ex=2

90 mm high volume fan, again handy for certain areas.

And got 70 mm fans which are nice and small AND thin so these are the likely choice for over VRM and other small areas that you need a fan but can't get one close enough otherwise or won't fit directly on area.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835150064

So yeah you see I got 70, 80, and 90 mm fans now I got two of 70 and 90 and one of the 80 because it was fairly expensive and not sure being so thick it will be good for many areas I could use it.

But I have many vrms and heatsinks on this board and future boards I'm sure that really could use these compact fans like these to fit in spots nicely so that is why I got several sizes...I may even get somne 40 and 50 mm really tiny ones if I can get some non-screamers that move enough air for really tiny spots if I find none of my current fans will fit in.

Anyway, just more options and more flexibility for me depending on how I want to cool an area or device in my PC so never can have enough fans, particularly of varying sizes!

I'm glad you've taken it that well man, admirable. Life is never easy, but this... no one can hope to encounter things that bad, but you seem to be a strong and positive person and this is a truly good thing.


I sincerely hope so. AMD has to be back, on both fronts, CPU and GPU. It's odd the same company is responsible on two fronts to make things better for us consumers. I think Ryzen will be a great success, and Vega will be good too, just not as succesful as Ryzen will be. I think Nvidia will still be faster.


Nice stuff, which fans are these exactly, and what exactly are you planning to do with them?


Buying low voltage memory to overclock is a great idea. 2400 MHz is DDR4 level of bandwidth, great!


Truly impressive. No one should say ever again X79 is old or outdated. With that kind of bandwidth it is still to stay for a long time!

Ok back, went pretty well they have to interview few more people so all I can do now is keep looking and hope for the best on results there. Yes, I admit I wasn't sure if my gamble of buying low voltage 1.35 volt 1600 mhz memory would get me good overclocks or just give me low voltage with tight timings. My main concern is they would scale well to a point and be very intolerant of higher voltages and just not work properly, I have seen some modules that behave that way. But yeah this stuff out of the 3 different brands/types of memory I've paired with this system is by far the best. Yes the bandwidth is insanely good...I should print chart of the standard bandwidths attained by x79/x99 etc in Aida64 and this stomps all over both of them...only the 16-20 core examples listed beat it as a matter of fact lol.

@dalekdukesboy Nice OC, what kind of memory are you running? Would it happen to be Samsung Green 1600 1.35V 11-11-11-28? I ran four sticks of that at up to 2520MHz on my 3820, 2570MHz on my 4930k. I'm pretty sure I was limited by the IMC in both cases, as 2400 10-12-12-31 1t runs fine at 1.525V, 1.55V for 2500 runs, yet even 1.65V wouldn't allow me to break 2600 at 1t nor 2t.
Also worth noting: You'll see a pretty big improvement in your AIDA numbers across the board if you use the 125 CPU strap to reach the same RAM speeds (128.625 BCLK using the 1866 RAM divider will give 2400 exactly). For some odd reason, on X79 the 2400 RAM divider on 100 CPU strap gives lower performance numbers than it should. Cadaveca pointed this out to me when he was helping me get situated on the X79 platform, and sure enough, my own testing showed this pattern.
If you insist on using the 100 strap, or are simply limited to that strap by your CPU, try running the RAM at 2133 and really tightening those timings. Seeing that you are able to run C9 at 2400MHz, I wouldn't be surprised if you could run C8 at 2133MHz.

So far my setup is what insists on 100 strap, I've gotten some success booting with 125 strap in past but seemed way less stable and not something either cpu particularly liked...also I'd be rather surprised if I'd get significant if any better bandwidth on that strap...if I did it would be far beyond what I even thought this platform was capable of producing, but that said, of course now you say that I will try it. I am pretty sure I posted a picture somewhere of memory but I will post one now, actually better yet here's the newegg link to the Crucial ballistix 1600 mhz 1.35 Cas 9 memory...

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148656
Also your IMC is almost always the limiting factor on Sandy bridge over 2400 mhz...however for me I'm having issues with booting into windows or even into Bios when I run memory over 2400 and/or push FSB. I can push fsb no problem if I don't push memory, but when I do both booting into windows has given me issues...yet while in windows I have passed burntest all the way to 2480 mhz in dual channel and 104 fsb on this cpu. However cold booting anything over 2440 or so simply won't happen, least not so far. So as Kanan pointed out I Think it's just an issue with the boot process not the CPU or memory, for it happily passed stress tests far above what it would boot at....annoying!

I will play around and see if the 125 strap cooperates and also push FSB and memory timings on 100 mhz strap and see how much better I can do, it's obvious there's more in the tank here so might as well keep going.

 

[Random Murderer]

THis is the memory
for specs/reviews/price on Newegg, great stuff recommend highly!'

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148656

This is one of fans...80mm high volume...most of fans I got were relatively small biggest was 92 mm I believe...I got them for I don't have any fans in these size ranges and they are handy to cool small areas on a board/video card/etc that a 120 mm fan just is too big for and doesn't direct cooling onto small area that needs cooling or simply bigger fan doesn't fit into spot I want it etc.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835119136

https://images10.newegg.com/NeweggI...essAll1280/35-119-136-02.jpg?w=660&h=500&ex=2

90 mm high volume fan, again handy for certain areas.

And got 70 mm fans which are nice and small AND thin so these are the likely choice for over VRM and other small areas that you need a fan but can't get one close enough otherwise or won't fit directly on area.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835150064

So yeah you see I got 70, 80, and 90 mm fans now I got two of 70 and 90 and one of the 80 because it was fairly expensive and not sure being so thick it will be good for many areas I could use it.

But I have many vrms and heatsinks on this board and future boards I'm sure that really could use these compact fans like these to fit in spots nicely so that is why I got several sizes...I may even get somne 40 and 50 mm really tiny ones if I can get some non-screamers that move enough air for really tiny spots if I find none of my current fans will fit in.

Anyway, just more options and more flexibility for me depending on how I want to cool an area or device in my PC so never can have enough fans, particularly of varying sizes!



Ok back, went pretty well they have to interview few more people so all I can do now is keep looking and hope for the best on results there. Yes, I admit I wasn't sure if my gamble of buying low voltage 1.35 volt 1600 mhz memory would get me good overclocks or just give me low voltage with tight timings. My main concern is they would scale well to a point and be very intolerant of higher voltages and just not work properly, I have seen some modules that behave that way. But yeah this stuff out of the 3 different brands/types of memory I've paired with this system is by far the best. Yes the bandwidth is insanely good...I should print chart of the standard bandwidths attained by x79/x99 etc in Aida64 and this stomps all over both of them...only the 16-20 core examples listed beat it as a matter of fact lol.



So far my setup is what insists on 100 strap, I've gotten some success booting with 125 strap in past but seemed way less stable and not something either cpu particularly liked...also I'd be rather surprised if I'd get significant if any better bandwidth on that strap...if I did it would be far beyond what I even thought this platform was capable of producing, but that said, of course now you say that I will try it. I am pretty sure I posted a picture somewhere of memory but I will post one now, actually better yet here's the newegg link to the Crucial ballistix 1600 mhz 1.35 Cas 9 memory...

Also your IMC is almost always the limiting factor on Sandy bridge over 2400 mhz...however for me I'm having issues with booting into windows or even into Bios when I run memory over 2400 and/or push FSB. I can push fsb no problem if I don't push memory, but when I do both booting into windows has given me issues...yet while in windows I have passed burntest all the way to 2480 mhz in dual channel and 104 fsb on this cpu. However cold booting anything over 2440 or so simply won't happen, least not so far. So as Kanan pointed out I Think it's just an issue with the boot process not the CPU or memory, for it happily passed stress tests far above what it would boot at....annoying!

I will play around and see if the 125 strap cooperates and also push FSB and memory timings on 100 mhz strap and see how much better I can do, it's obvious there's more in the tank here so might as well keep going.

Those aren't the Samsung Greens I was referring to, but if you removed the heatspreaders then they would be the same size as the Sammies, and I'd be willing to bet they use the same chips, Samsung HYK0.
As far as the IMC goes, I expected 2400-2500 to be the limit for my 3820 as it is Sandy Bridge, but I expected at least 2600 out of the 4930K. I'm not going to say I was disappointed, because it still churns out memory bandwidth numbers that are very respectable, but it would have been nice to at least tinker above 2600 if for no other reason than benches.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Those aren't the Samsung Greens I was referring to, but if you removed the heatspreaders then they would be the same size as the Sammies, and I'd be willing to bet they use the same chips, Samsung HYK0

I would be surprised if they were. Crucial is the in house sales front for Micron. All the Crucial memory on RAM and their SSD's is made by Micron.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

Those aren't the Samsung Greens I was referring to, but if you removed the heatspreaders then they would be the same size as the Sammies, and I'd be willing to bet they use the same chips, Samsung HYK0.
As far as the IMC goes, I expected 2400-2500 to be the limit for my 3820 as it is Sandy Bridge, but I expected at least 2600 out of the 4930K. I'm not going to say I was disappointed, because it still churns out memory bandwidth numbers that are very respectable, but it would have been nice to at least tinker above 2600 if for no other reason than benches.

Yes the Sandy doesn't surprise me they don't even all cooperate at 2400...but Ivy should be good to 2600 and beyond especially at low OC's, so I am a bit surprised that is all your ivy will do but from what I've heard IF you don't OC the CPU at all you'd get much higher Ram speed on it. For some reason often at least on IVY-E the memory controller works very well at relatively low CPU speeds but once you get the CPU overclocked it really cuts the memory IMC down to size and it doesn't do nearly as well. I haven't got one to test this with obviously and haven't (yet) but I read that often on forums and from people who know of them. Also I don't know if these are Samsung but I am pretty sure I read somewhere someone identified these as Micron chips on these modules, however I forget where I believe it was somewhere on the reviews of this memory on Newegg.

Also you are still using those Samsung greens right? What voltage/speed/timings are you running at? If you have Aida or other benchies for memory I'd be interested to see what you are getting for bandwidth etc to compare with what I am getting with possibly the same or at least similar memory but with Sandy-E and the 100 mhz divider. I will take a try at the 125 divider and see if this thing cooperates.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

I would be surprised if they were. Crucial is the in house sales front for Micron. All the Crucial memory on RAM and their SSD's is made by Micron.

Yeah I didn't see your post I was posting exactly that point though as you posted that, I know I saw in multiple places that these are Micron chips. Honestly I'd prefer they are, Microns have been legendary clockers since....forever really in PC terms. So far these modules prove that, I have them at very tight secondary timings etc at the moment but with looser but reasonable timings preset in my old bios I could run these with like 1.4 volts @ 2400 mhz and I believe it was cas 10 or 11. I think I still have screenies of that so these things sip voltage for what they will do...so far I had only 1 module that was only fair at OC'ing and even that one flew way beyond the specs it just can't keep up with the rest of them. Anyway I had some Tridents that were rated for 2400 mhz and some Super talent modules and they were terrible compared to these, I couldn't even get them to run 2400 mhz stable on this platform.

 

[Random Murderer]

Also you are still using those Samsung greens right? What voltage/speed/timings are you running at? If you have Aida or other benchies for memory I'd be interested to see what you are getting for bandwidth etc to compare with what I am getting with possibly the same or at least similar memory but with Sandy-E and the 100 mhz divider. I will take a try at the 125 divider and see if this thing cooperates.

I'm not using them anymore, but I still have them. I'll never give them up, they never let me down.
If you want, I could get you some benchies with the current RAM I'm running, it's the exact kit used in this review by Dave. And when I say it's that exact kit, I don't mean the same model number, I mean that the kit Dave used in the review is now mine.
I'd also be willing to swap back in the Sammies at some point and clock them back up to 2400, or, if you want a direct SB-E to SB-E comparison, I still have my 3820 and all of the BIOS settings for it on a spare BIOS chip, I could take time this weekend to find that box and swap back in the 3820, Sammy Greens, and matching BIOS chip. If I do that, it should boot already at 4.9GHz with the RAM at 2407 MHz, CAS10.
Just let me know.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

I'm not using them anymore, but I still have them. I'll never give them up, they never let me down.
If you want, I could get you some benchies with the current RAM I'm running, it's the exact kit used in this review by Dave. And when I say it's that exact kit, I don't mean the same model number, I mean that the kit Dave used in the review is now mine.
I'd also be willing to swap back in the Sammies at some point and clock them back up to 2400, or, if you want a direct SB-E to SB-E comparison, I still have my 3820 and all of the BIOS settings for it on a spare BIOS chip, I could take time this weekend to find that box and swap back in the 3820, Sammy Greens, and matching BIOS chip. If I do that, it should boot already at 4.9GHz with the RAM at 2407 MHz, CAS10.
Just let me know.

Funny you have that Trident Memory, I had exact same memory at one point...same heatspreader etc but was the dual channel 4 gig modules so I had 2 of them rated at 2400 I forget what the CAS timings were. I can tell you what I have now blows that kit away, I sold it in a build I had with an x58 setup I had. I have to ask, why not using the old ram? Also funny you got same exact kit that was reviewed lol nice to have connections. Also thanks for offer but that's a hassle for you just to get me some numbers, but yeah that'd be cool. However if you remember speed/timings and voltages that's really my biggest interest for reference, and also the benchies of course to see where I stand vs. you. Also I have 16 gigs of memory 4 gig modules...obviously your tridents are 8 gig density and 32 gigs, what are the specs on your Sammy Greens?

 

[dalekdukesboy]

Would it happen to be Samsung Green 1600 1.35V 11-11-11-28?

Yeah not to put down the Sammies but these Crucial modules are 1600 mhz 1.35 volts...but the timings are 8-8-8-24. So yeah they were highest speed and timings I could find at the lowest relative voltage...that's exactly why I bought them.

 

[Kanan]

Great stuff, have fun tinkering around, maybe the extra cooling will help you get better OC results.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

I just played around a bit....125 strap no go, won't even boot. I have no idea why it hates it so much but that's exactly what the ES did so not sure what the deal is but I'd be surprised if there's a way with this system to do much higher on memory scores...I saw someone actually test that theory by using 100 vs 125 strap and running identical settings and the memory scores were literally all but identical, on an x79 system. I will have to find that article for you I'm pretty sure I saved in in my favorites somewhere. Anyway also the system will not boot over 101 fsb...but as I said will pass every stress test on earth if you adjust in windows so somewhere there is a booting glitch here I think which may also be why it won't boot at 125 strap, for almost every cpu for Sandy could do 125 or most I thought could. Also I tried tightening my memory settings a bit more and I am on the edge of what will boot...got a few I can change slightly but not much headroom there. More later.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

I managed to tighten the Dram REf cycle time to 94 from 96 and I think (was last night I changed settings did test this A.M.) I trimmed another setting or two still stable and happy...with highest results on Aida and highest gflops I've seen to back up that whole system is churning through computations rather nicely! I'm going to see if I can set the fsb higher in the saved profile in the Asus program and just have that automatically "kick in" when I boot and not crash, be unstable etc and I may have a fairly neat non-clumsy workaround for the FSB issue.

Oh, you mentioned CAS 8, yeah I did that yesterday at 2133 mhz just to see what I could boot at so yes it is willing to do that, I think Memory can do a lot more with right CPU IMC but this 3930k is decent but only can go so far I think it is weak link in all of this. Anyway pretty cool to see my write speeds now approaching 71k and read now just a hair under 69k and copy is literally all but 65k...if I can keep this up I also will take that 48.1 latency and get it under 48 which is really nice considering stock for these systems is in the 60's for latency.

 

[Random Murderer]

I just played around a bit....125 strap no go, won't even boot. I have no idea why it hates it so much but that's exactly what the ES did so not sure what the deal is but I'd be surprised if there's a way with this system to do much higher on memory scores...I saw someone actually test that theory by using 100 vs 125 strap and running identical settings and the memory scores were literally all but identical, on an x79 system. I will have to find that article for you I'm pretty sure I saved in in my favorites somewhere. Anyway also the system will not boot over 101 fsb...but as I said will pass every stress test on earth if you adjust in windows so somewhere there is a booting glitch here I think which may also be why it won't boot at 125 strap, for almost every cpu for Sandy could do 125 or most I thought could. Also I tried tightening my memory settings a bit more and I am on the edge of what will boot...got a few I can change slightly but not much headroom there. More later.

Not having known that an article like that existed, I performed the same tests on my own a good while back. Both AIDA and WPrime saw marked improvement with RAM at 2400 on the 125 strap vs the 100 strap. I really need to dig through my old OC folders and see if I can find those screenshots.
Oh well, at the very least, I could run this 32GB kit at 2400 and the CPU at 4.5GHz using the 100 strap and then again on the 125 strap and show you the results, it will just have to wait until Saturday when I'll have time.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

I used preset values in bios and it booted 125 fine....shrug. No idea what I was doing wrong but obviously something. However one thing I recalled and I looked up on Intel's Ark site the 3930 k and I believe both have a max of 51.2 gigs Max Memory bandwidth, which is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored into a semiconductor memory by the processor (in GB/s) and the 4930 k is listed as 59.7 as well as the e5-1680 v2. So I'm not sure if that means anything over that max for given processor is essentially unusable by the processor and is just theoretical number, or if there is a way to use the "extra" bandwidth or it's totally useless. Anyway, definitely makes me wonder. Also I will try 100 strap vs 125 strap with exact same speed and settings for cpu and memory though I have a feeling they will be essentially the same within random test variation.

 

[Random Murderer]

I used preset values in bios and it booted 125 fine....shrug. No idea what I was doing wrong but obviously something. However one thing I recalled and I looked up on Intel's Ark site the 3930 k and I believe both have a max of 51.2 gigs Max Memory bandwidth, which is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored into a semiconductor memory by the processor (in GB/s) and the 4930 k is listed as 59.7 as well as the e5-1680 v2. So I'm not sure if that means anything over that max for given processor is essentially unusable by the processor and is just theoretical number, or if there is a way to use the "extra" bandwidth or it's totally useless. Anyway, definitely makes me wonder. Also I will try 100 strap vs 125 strap with exact same speed and settings for cpu and memory though I have a feeling they will be essentially the same within random test variation.

The difference in max bandwidth has to do with the fact that the 4930K supports a faster memory divider out of the box in comparison to the 3930K; the 3930K officially supports up to DDR3-1600, the 4930K officially supports up to DDR3-1866. Of course, you can set higher dividers than this, but those are the max officially supported speeds.
At 2400MHz on the RAM, both theoretically have 76.8 GB/s bandwidth.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

The difference in max bandwidth has to do with the fact that the 4930K supports a faster memory divider out of the box in comparison to the 3930K; the 3930K officially supports up to DDR3-1600, the 4930K officially supports up to DDR3-1866. Of course, you can set higher dividers than this, but those are the max officially supported speeds.
At 2400MHz on the RAM, both theoretically have 76.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Yes "theoretical" but can the CPU actually use it? That is basically my question. Heck, I'm not that far from that 76 gig mark but I've never seen x79 get that high anyway. I haven't seen your numbers or checked others' numbers in a while but first 70k mark I saw was when I did it yesterday lol. I'm sure it's done and then some but I just haven't seen it.

 

[Kanan]

Yes "theoretical" but can the CPU actually use it? That is basically my question. Heck, I'm not that far from that 76 gig mark but I've never seen x79 get that high anyway. I haven't seen your numbers or checked others' numbers in a while but first 70k mark I saw was when I did it yesterday lol. I'm sure it's done and then some but I just haven't seen it.

Ofc, if AIDA reports higher bandwidth, it's tested and proven by it. Don't let yourself be confused by Intel official supported numbers based on 1600 RAM, they are pretty irrelevant for overclockers.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

This is part of article I had it saved to my pc but don't have original link was easiest just to take screenie of the 1 page of a 30 page article about OC'ing x79 where author tested the two straps with identical settings...and got statistically identical results.

Ofc, if AIDA reports higher bandwidth, it's tested and
proven by it. Don't let yourself be confused by Intel official supported numbers based on 1600 RAM, they are pretty irrelevant for overclockers.

What you said was kindof what I suspected, I only considered "perhaps" that there was a limit as to how much bandwidth certain processors could even use no matter how much the memory could generate. I found a few articles I will have to post here that are relevant to all of this with bandwidth and real life vs. benchmarks etc.

ALSO this is directly in relation to Random murderer's assertion that he saw significant improvements on 125 strap vs 100 strap, I managed to get my cpu to boot at 125 strap and tested it with settings as close to 100 mhz strap that I have posted earlier and I actually found the numbers slightly lower. The memory was clocked higher and cpu was slightly slower just due to using different strap but if anything expected it may be slightly higher but not only that but it wasn't really stable either...So at least for my cpu/setup it appears the 100 strap is more cooperative although at the 125 strap I had it running the FSB at 116 mhz or so and at 100 strap it whines if you go over 101...so I may play around with it a bit and I may get some good results if I just give it more time. But as a few articles I have read have basically concluded the straps are merely there to get you different range of settings for CPU and Memory etc but don't impact performance either way.

My thought is when Cadaveca did his tests probably way back when the platform probably had bugs and was simply an issue with the bios which caused bad numbers at certain settings...and I say that because I literally saw my bandwidth numbers jump a 30-50% just by updating to a new bios. So my guess is at that time it was bios related bugs causing inconsistent numbers at different straps but same mhz settings.

 

[Random Murderer]

View attachment 84494My thought is when Cadaveca did his tests probably way back when the platform probably had bugs and was simply an issue with the bios which caused bad numbers at certain settings...and I say that because I literally saw my bandwidth numbers jump a 30-50% just by updating to a new bios. So my guess is at that time it was bios related bugs causing inconsistent numbers at different straps but same mhz settings.

This is entirely possible, I haven't done any 100 vs 125 strap comparisons in almost two years now. Also keep in mind that the testing you posted was specifically at a RAM speed of 1333, the only divider with which I saw performance lower than it should have been was 2400 with the BCLK strap at 100, vs 2400 using the 125 strap and BCLK tweaking to achieve 2400.
Now I'm very interested in trying again.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

True, it was at 1333 mhz, but I did it at 2400 and slightly above and saw no difference or even that the 125 divider if anything performed very slightly worse. But yeah anything is possible and everything changes as tweaks to bioses etc are applied.

 

[johnspack]

This is bugging me a bit... anyone here with an 8 ram slot mobo? Is it true you can only get quad channel with all 8 dimms in? I was going to get 2 more dimms anyways, but
thought I could at least try quad channel with 4.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

This is bugging me a bit... anyone here with an 8 ram slot mobo? Is it true you can only get quad channel with all 8 dimms in? I was going to get 2 more dimms anyways, but
thought I could at least try quad channel with 4.

Quad channel is it. As far as I know there is nothing beyond quad channel. Only reason for more megs of memory is just for really memory hungry apps but that is why I have 4 dimms equaling 16gigs which is probably still way more than I'll ever need in the near future. Unless you run things that need tons of ram I'd stick to 4 dimms with as few gigs a piece as you can get away with, ideally I'd have been happier if I could have had 8 gigs with 2 gig dimms but that is very uncommon configuration for x79 etc and it is a bit minimalist for those who run multiple things at once and have fifty windows open in Explorer/firefox etc. But long story short, yeah do 4 dimms and unless you are the type who opens everything at once and leaves it open or uses video encoding or other software that would find ram helpful, just do the 4 dimms with 4 gigs a piece. Also I think many of the boards are 8 slot, I can tell you the RIVE is and I think most of Asus' boards are for x79.

 

[johnspack]

Nah, my mobo manual says that 4 sticks constitutes 2 sets of dual channel. 6 is 2 sets of triple, and 8 is pure quad. Weird. And I need the ram, I run vms and transcode ect, I've run out at 24gigs.
I have 24 right now so I guess I'm stuck in triple channel until I get 2 more sticks.

 

[Kanan]

Nah, my mobo manual says that 4 sticks constitutes 2 sets of dual channel. 6 is 2 sets of triple, and 8 is pure quad. Weird. And I need the ram, I run vms and transcode ect, I've run out at 24gigs.
I have 24 right now so I guess I'm stuck in triple channel until I get 2 more sticks.

Yep, but DDR3 is cheap now anyway, at least those 1866 you would want (if not, look for them on ebay or so). That said, I will upgrade to 8x4 GB or 4x4 + 4x8 (48 GB total), if my 16 GB are not enough anymore. It took over 2-3 years for 16 GB to matter, I guess 32 GB or 24 GB will start to matter in 2018 or 2019 by that assumption. Games + background apps that is.