3000 single channel vs 2133 dual channel

[stantheman123]

whats better? the faster single ram or the dual channel?

 

[bmockeg]

Dual channel

 

[slingsrat]

There is no RAM that will run at 3GHz in single channel configuration anyway.

 

[TJ Hooker]

@slingsrat uh, what? There are plenty that run that speed or higher. It's actually easier to run one stick at high speeds rather than two.

@stantheman123 what cpu and mobo? If you have a ryzen CPU, you may be better with the higher speed stick due to its effect on infinity fabric speed.

In general I'm not sure what would be faster. I mean, on paper dual channel doubles bandwidth but in reality the difference is much less.

 

[slingsrat]

@slingsrat uh, what? There are plenty that run that speed or higher. It's actually easier one stick at high speeds rather than two.

@stantheman123 what cpu and mobo? If you have a ryzen CPU, you may be better with the higher speed stick due to its effect on infinity fabric speed.

In general I'm not sure what would be faster. I mean, on paper dual channel doubles bandwidth but in reality the difference is much less.

Show me.

 

[stantheman123]

@slingsrat uh, what? There are plenty that run that speed or higher. It's actually easier one stick at high speeds rather than two.

@stantheman123 what cpu and mobo? If you have a ryzen CPU, you may be better with the higher speed stick due to its effect on infinity fabric speed.

In general I'm not sure what would be faster. I mean, on paper dual channel doubles bandwidth but in reality the difference is much less.

its a 6600k z170 gigabyte ultra durable (my sig build)

The reason i ask is because i recently bought a single stick 16gb 3000mhz ddr4 corsair
but i can add a 4gb stick of ddr4 2133 and run it in dual channel but it wont be 3000mhz anymore

 

[bmockeg]

A 16gb and 4gb won't run in dual channel. It has to be matched pairs.

Just run the 16gb stick, that's your best option.

I would look into selling the 16gb and buying a pair of 8gb

 

[slingsrat]

You cannot run a single stick at 3000MHz. It needs to be a dual channel kit to run that fast and it also needs to be overclocked to run that fast on your motherboard. Your board is 1066MHz.

 

[bmockeg]

False, XMP works with 1 stick of RAM.

 

[slingsrat]

False, XMP works with 1 stick of RAM.

Yes XMP will boost the speed but only to 1500MHz. You still need dual channel to get 3GHz.

 

[TJ Hooker]

@slingsrat I'm afraid you simply don't know what you're talking about. It kind of seems like you're confusing dual channel with double data rate (DDR). All DDR memory transmits data on both rising and falling edges of the clock. So 1066 MHz memory clock corresponds to 2133 MHz effective transfer rate (occasionally you'll see this made more explicit by using MT/s for effective speed rather than MHz). It is the effective transfer rate that is almost always used when describing RAM speed, so when someone says 3000 MHz RAM they mean 3000 MHz effective transfer rate.

All of that is completely independent and unrelated to the number of memory channels.

Here are numerous single stick kits that run at 3000+ MHz. https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007611%20601190328%20600006067%20600006074%20600082361%20600561668%20600561669%20601203949%20601203950

@bmockeg I believe the 16 + 4 GB setup would sort of run in partial dual channel, by way of Intel's flex memory technology. But yeah, I think I'd personally just go with the single stick.

 

[slingsrat]

@slingsrat I'm afraid you simply don't know what you're talking about. It kind of seems like you're confusing dual channel with double data rate (DDR). All DDR memory transmits data on both rising and falling edges of the clock. So 1066 MHz memory clock corresponds to 2133 MHz effective transfer rate (occasionally you'll see this made more explicit by using MT/s for effective speed rather than MHz). It is the effective transfer rate that is almost always used when describing RAM speed, so when someone says 3000 MHz RAM they mean 3000 MHz effective transfer rate.

All of that is completely independent and unrelated to the number of memory channels.

Here are numerous single stick kits that run at 3000+ MHz. https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007611%20601190328%20600006067%20600006074%20600082361%20600561668%20600561669%20601203949%20601203950

@bmockeg I believe the 16 + 4 GB setup would sort of run in partial dual channel, by way of Intel's flex memory technology. But yeah, I think I'd personally just go with the single stick.

I know exactly what I'm talking about and I'm not mixing DDR with dual channel. His motherboard is 1066Mhz which is the DDR speed. So what if you run two 3GHz sticks in dual channel? You get 6GHz? that is obviously impossible.

 

[slingsrat]

@TJHooker if you need more proof just check out the 3GHz memory from my own machine

 

[bmockeg]

Bro, you realize it is DOUBLE DATA RATE (DDR) all those numbers are doubled for effective rate. 2133 for the 1st three and the XMP profile will be 3000. As has already been stated, you don't know what you are talking about. If You don't believe us, start your own thread. You can actually just search for the many threads already explaining this. If You use CPU-Z it will also read 1066 or 1500. Actual speeds are DOUBLE the data rate of 1066 or 1500 which is 2133 or 3000.

 

[slingsrat]

Bro, you realize it is DOUBLE DATA RATE (DDR) all those numbers are doubled for effective rate. 2133 for the 1st three and the XMP profile will be 3000. As has already been stated, you don't know what you are talking about. If You don't believe us, start your own thread. You can actually just search for the many threads already explaining this. If You use CPU-Z it will also read 1066 or 1500. Actual speeds are DOUBLE the data rate of 1066 or 1500 which is 2133 or 3000.

Actual speeds are double when you use two sticks in dual channel configuration. Tell me why they even invented dual channel if one stick can run as fast as two? Use your brain.

 

[bmockeg]

As TJ stated, you are confusing 2 totally different technologies. DDR is one technology. Originally DDR operated in single channel, which is what the OP will do with one stick. Yes, he will have decreased memory bandwidth from the loss of dual channel operation. This is TOTALLY INDEPENDENT from his RAM speed of 3000mhz. Dual channel is 2 paired DDR modules working in sync. Think of it similar to a raid HDD configuration. Instead of one module using say 4GB during operation, 2 sticks would each use approximately 2GB, increasing the memory bandwidth due to dual channel capability. Memory bandwidth and memory frequency are two TOTALY INDEPENDENT technologies as well. His Memory frequency will be the same, 3000mhz. His Memory bandwidth will be less than with 2 modules.

 

[TJ Hooker]

Tell me why they even invented dual channel if one stick can run as fast as two?

Because more bandwidth is never a bad thing. DDR allows faster transfer in a serial fashion from a given channel. But there's limit to how fast you can clock the memory. An alternative approach to increasing bandwidth is adding more channels, which allows data to be transferred from each channel simultaneously in parallel. Dual channel effectively doubles the width of the memory data interface, from 64 bit to 128. Total (theoretical) memory bandwidth = bus width x effective transfer rate.

Adding additional channels does not change the memory clock/DDR transfer rate of the RAM. So if you have 3 GHz RAM in single channel and then add a 2nd stick to make it dual channel, both sticks are still running at 3 GHz.

And no, 1066 MHz is not the DDR speed. It's the memory clock, which is then doubled to 2133 MHz for the effective DDR speed.

 

[Pinhedd]

Bro, you realize it is DOUBLE DATA RATE (DDR) all those numbers are doubled for effective rate. 2133 for the 1st three and the XMP profile will be 3000. As has already been stated, you don't know what you are talking about. If You don't believe us, start your own thread. You can actually just search for the many threads already explaining this. If You use CPU-Z it will also read 1066 or 1500. Actual speeds are DOUBLE the data rate of 1066 or 1500 which is 2133 or 3000.

Actual speeds are double when you use two sticks in dual channel configuration. Tell me why they even invented dual channel if one stick can run as fast as two? Use your brain.

Each memory channel is an independent system. For a computer with a single system bus, the theoretical peak memory bandwidth is the number of memory channels multiplied by the configured bandwidth of a single channel.

This is an incredibly simplistic view of memory architecture, but it is a sufficient one for our purposes.

In most cases the IO clock on each channel will be the same. For example, DDR4-2400 has an IO clock of 1,200Mhz.

Peak bandwidth with one channel is 1.2E9 * 64 bits/transfer * 2 transfers per clock = 153.6 gigabits per second = 19.2 gigabytes per second

With two channels, the bandwidth doubles to 38.4 gigabytes per second. The IO clock is still 1,200Mhz and the DIMMs are still DDR4-2400.

With four channels, the bandwidth is 76.8 gigabytes per second. The IO clock is still 1,200Mhz and the DIMMs are still DDR4-2400.

This assumes that all channels are fully rank balanced which need not always be the case.