1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

needs help to understand the PC RAM dual/single channel for Gaming...

Discussion in 'Motherboards & Memory' started by alivehunter, May 31, 2014.

  1. alivehunter

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Messages:
    23 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4
    I have 2 RAM Sticks .. [1] G Skill 4Gb DDR3-1600 and [2] Corsair 4Gb DDR3-1333
    MOBO - ASUS M5A97 R2.0

    I am trying and install these 2 stick and understand which combimation will give me best performace while playing games..
    btw... i am playing Watch Dogs..

    things are not clear to me abt the Dual channel and single channel .. so i was trying different combination...
    My mobo have RAM channels as DIMM_A1(Black Colour),DIMM_A2(Blue Colour), DIMM_B1(Black Colour),DIMM_B2(Blue Colour).

    1st Config: I have installed installed both the RAM in the Slots DIMM_A1(Black Colour) & DIMM_A2(Blue Colour).. and I ran the MaxxMEM2 Test for RAM performace...
    it gave :
    Memory Copy : 9305 MB/s
    Memory Read : 10038 MB/s
    Memory Write : 6884 MB/s
    Memory Latency : 150 ns

    2nd Config: Iinstalled both the RAM in the Slots DIMM_A1(Black Colour) & DIMM_B1(Black Colour).. and I ran the MaxxMEM2 Test for RAM performace...
    it gave :
    Memory Copy : 10488 MB/s
    Memory Read : 10914 MB/s
    Memory Write : 5298 MB/s
    Memory Latency : 66.3 ns

    please let me know which one is the better config to play game...

    AH
     

    Attached Files:

    • 1.jpg
      1.jpg
      File size:
      57.2 KB
      Views:
      170
    • 2.jpg
      2.jpg
      File size:
      58.7 KB
      Views:
      91
  2. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    8,091 (2.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,851
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    If you had dual channel 1600 it'd be better for starters...1333 is mediocre DDR3 speeds. 1600-1866 is a good sweet spot for gaming and media imho.

    The latency (response time) and overall throughput are better with dual channel (try AIDA64 tests as well). You want your largest cache of volatile memory (RAM) to be at its fastest...the faster the response time (the lower the milliseconds), the better. This helps with everything in memory, as everything takes cycles to read, write, transfer, copy, move, clear...so the shorter time in between these turns the smoother the overall experience will be. Will it be noticeable? Should be...considering dual channel has a more than 50% improvement...will it be worth any FPS? Probably not. Gaming isn't just about frames and neither is smooth gameplay.

    The faster things get done in ram, the faster you get your game on and the smoother the experience can be. The slowest piece of the puzzle will always be the data disk drive...be it HDD, SSD, SSHD (barring you have any games that still run off of CD/DVD...lol). The slower things are...the longer everything else down the line has to wait.

    I would imagine the write performance should have stayed the same or increased...that's a noticeable difference. How many times did you run the test? I recommend no less than 3 and average the results...I also prefer AIDA, though I have a license so I get all the data too.

    I would go with the 2nd config judging by what you have provided. Care to share the rest of your system specs with us? Any chance you can match that 1600 stick of ram? Do that in dual channel and come back with results. Should be worth a nice upgrade. I want to say upper teens to lower 20's depending on MCH, chipset, CPU, etc.

    I hope that helps, that's how I've come to understand memory. Everything that runs must be loaded to RAM to be executed (at least from what I've learned), so the faster it is OVERALL, the better. If it comes to speed vs. capacity, well that's a whole different can of worms...I'd go for capacity every time. Fast memory is only helpful when you have enough of it to suit your needs. So running 4GB of 1600 vs 8GB 1333 for a gaming rig, I'd tell you to go 8GB 1333 so you don't run out and have to start caching on the page file (RAM cache and overflow on disk drive). Things will get slow, start hitching, and lessen the overall experience at that rate.

    Welcome to TPU. :toast:
     
    alivehunter says thanks.
  3. james888

    james888

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    4,954 (3.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,179
    I would take dual channel over single channel any day. Even just desktop performance feels more responsive with dual channel, and I can't imagine gaming.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  4. Arjai

    Arjai

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,357 (2.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,913
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    Here is what I would do. Open up a For Sale thread. Sell the DIMMS you have.

    Then, buy a matched set of 2x4GB 1600, or even 1866 (there are some competitive pricing on the 1866's), set them in Dual Channel and...Game On!! After you do that, you will only need more if you start Video Editing or CAD designing or you want to build a RAM Disk.

    At that point you can get another set of 2x 4GB's, same speed, and then set them up in the other slots for more dual Channel!!

    I have an Ultrabook that came with mismatched 4GB and 2GB sticks. I replaced them with a set of 2x4GB Kingston HyperX and have never looked back!! Vast improvement, across the board!

    Good Luck!!

    And Welcome!!

    And Please fill in your System Specs, from your Profile page. It greatly helps us all answer any questions you have, regarding performance or other questions.

    :lovetpu:
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  5. alivehunter

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Messages:
    23 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Thanks for ur details reply...
    System Specs updated in Profile.

    As us suggested ... Config 2 is better than the Config 1..... So will be keeping the Config 2 as of now...
    as i am not planing to Purchase / Sell the Ram....

    thanks Again
     
  6. johnspack

    johnspack

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Messages:
    4,400 (1.65/day)
    Thanks Received:
    872
    Location:
    Nelson B.C. Canada
    Typically, on Asus boards, the blue ram slots are master. You want to populate those first. The black slots are slaves if you have 4 modules. It probably doesn't matter, but you may get higher performance in the blue slots.
    Correct me if I'm wrong anyone?
     
  7. Frick

    Frick Fishfaced Nincompoop

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    10,925 (3.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,441
    That has got to be some sort of confirmation bias, I can't imagine why it would "feel" snappier with dual channel.
     
  8. james888

    james888

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    4,954 (3.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,179
    @Frick I first noticed it on my old laptop. A 2.2 ghz i3, 4gb single channel, with and hdd. Not at every moment, sometimes opening applications would seem slow. Being used to an ssd at the time, I thought it was the hdd. The memory went bad in the laptop so I had to replace it, and I replaced it with same timing, 2x2gb dual channel ram. I was surprised how snappy the laptop suddenly was. I no longer had a little stutter when opening applications.

    At this moment I am on a 2.7ghz celeron, with 8gb of single channel, and an ssd. It used to be on an hdd. It had this stutter, and more frequent than i3 did. So I replaced the hdd with an ssd. The stutter didn't go away. I then thought it is probably the cpu. Remembering how dual channel improved the feel of my laptop I put 2x2gb sticks in instead of the 8gb stick from another computer and put them in to see what would happen. The stutter was gone. I am now back on the single 8gb stick, because I want to use those 2x2gb elsewhere and the stutter is here.

    I agree this doesn't sound right, maybe confirmation bias. I have tested with two computers and I can see/feel a difference. I say feel because it may just be subjective, and I have no way of objectively testing this. The stutter does not happen every time I open something, and but often enough to be annoying. It really feels like there is just a half second delay where there shouldnt be, which I don't think I would notice if I wasn't used to more powerful machines like a 4.5ghz 2500k, 1866mhz ram, and ssd.
     
    Frick says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  9. johnlehi1991 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2014
    Messages:
    1 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
  10. P4-630

    P4-630

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,360 (0.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    158
    Location:
    C:\Program Files\P4-630\
    Can you play Watch Dogs with your hardware?
    What is your screen resolution and what settings are you using? How many fps do you get?
     
  11. OneMoar

    OneMoar

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    4,200 (2.39/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,446
    Location:
    Rochester area
    none with a 5670 it won't matter either way slow gpu is slow
     
  12. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,055 (6.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,599
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    That benchmark is single-threaded, so dual-channel doesn't really show where it shines. I'm grabbing two MaxxMem multi-threaded benchmark images from another thread:

    This (kind of) shows how memory scales to the number of cores being utilized for a particular case. As you can see, more channels yeilds better results for each subsequent thread that you're using, but generally speaking, the i3 isn't much faster than SB-E i7 when it comes to a single thread, but shines when it comes to 2 and three threads. Take a close look at the Avg. Gain section near the bottom right. This is the improvement for adding each thread. Notice how more channels yields better gains when you add more running threads.
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Also if you look here, you can see that bandwidth on the single-threaded version doesn't change between 2, 3, and 4 channels with the same hardware (aka. my 3820).
    MAXXMEM Benchmark Results Thread, Aquinus' comparison.
     
    james888 says thanks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page