Question More Ram = Lower Clock?

[ethanwpick]

I recently upgraded to 32 GB skill ripjaw V 3200Mhz. I noticed that when having all 32 installed, my clock speed lowers below 2000Mhz and I cannot raise it back without my computer blue screening. I would like to use all 32GB on 2400 can someone help? PC Specs: ryzen 5 2600, Gigabyte aorus x470 ultra gaming mobo, gigabyte windforce RTX 2070, 650W evga PSU.

 

[Obakasama]

Hm... how did you upgrade? All new RAM kit replacement or bought additional RAM and installed it alongside the old?

Also what configuration is this 32GB? 1x32GB? 2x16GB? 4x8GB? Or other?

 

[ethanwpick]

Hm... how did you upgrade? All new RAM kit replacement or bought additional RAM and installed it alongside the old?

Also what configuration is this 32GB? 1x32GB? 2x16GB? 4x8GB? Or other?

I already had 16GB of the exact ram kit. I just added more. It is 4x8

 

[Calvin7]

Memory manufacturers, such as G. Skill, don't guarantee that use of multiple kits of memory will be compatible together. You can make any kind of combinations you want, but memory is only guaranteed in the form sold.

A memory module sold as a Single module is only guaranteed to work if used as a single module. There are no claims made as to how two, three, or four of them will run if you manage to get the system to boot up.

 

[ethanwpick]

hmm that is very unfortunate. the thing is my computer works fine until I try to raise to clock speed. It might not work even if I add the identical model I had originally?

 

[Ketchup79]

It's not the RAM per say, it's the added traces, or number of tracks, the CPU has to use the access that memory. When then are in two sticks, no sweat. Double that to 4, that means twice the total distance your data may have to travel between the CPU and RAM sticks. Now imagine you have your page file, Chrom with 20 tabs open, then decide to start a game. Well, you have enough RAM for none of that data to be pushed off to the side, but the CPU might have to process data on three separate sticks if RAM, so it only stands to reason that this us going to take more time. Sometimes you can work around this by increasing RAM voltage, but many times you would need to settle for the slightly lower speed. BUT, if you are maxing out 16 GB of RAM, the RAM upgrade upgrade should far surpass the frequency drop as far as performance goes.

 

[ethanwpick]

It's not the RAM per say, it's the added traces, or number of tracks, the CPU has to use the access that memory. When then are in two sticks, no sweat. Double that to 4, that means twice the total distance your data may have to travel between the CPU and RAM sticks. Now imagine you have your page file, Chrom with 20 tabs open, then decide to start a game. Well, you have enough RAM for none of that data to be pushed off to the side, but the CPU might have to process data on three separate sticks if RAM, so it only stands to reason that this us going to take more time. Sometimes you can work around this by increasing RAM voltage, but many times you would need to settle for the slightly lower speed. BUT, if you are maxing out 16 GB of RAM, the RAM upgrade upgrade should far surpass the frequency drop as far as performance goes.

That was a good way of explaining it. Thanks for the help