F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop No, Intel CPUs do not support a triple-rank DDR4 configuration.

No, Intel CPUs do not support a triple-rank DDR4 configuration.

No, Intel CPUs do not support a triple-rank DDR4 configuration.

L
loltribo
Posting Freak
870
07-16-2016, 06:57 AM
#1
You're wondering about a memory configuration with a 2x16GB kit and replacing two 8GB sticks. This setup sounds like a triplet-rank memory arrangement, which can be supported on AMD CPUs due to the logical channel structure. However, it's important to note that Intel doesn't officially support this exact configuration. The key is ensuring your total capacity stays within the limits of your system. If you're unsure, double-check compatibility with your specific CPU and motherboard.
L
loltribo
07-16-2016, 06:57 AM #1

You're wondering about a memory configuration with a 2x16GB kit and replacing two 8GB sticks. This setup sounds like a triplet-rank memory arrangement, which can be supported on AMD CPUs due to the logical channel structure. However, it's important to note that Intel doesn't officially support this exact configuration. The key is ensuring your total capacity stays within the limits of your system. If you're unsure, double-check compatibility with your specific CPU and motherboard.

D
Diipper_Pines
Junior Member
49
07-28-2016, 03:58 PM
#2
You're interpreting the setup correctly. On Channel A you have 32GB and on Channel B 16GB. Each DDR4 board follows a consistent layout: channel A occupies slots 1 and 2, while channel B takes slots 3 and 4. The configurations you mention are swapped. Most modern sticks are dual-rank, so both setups work well. Intel tends to handle this arrangement better than AMD, and balancing the channels is generally advantageous for speed.
D
Diipper_Pines
07-28-2016, 03:58 PM #2

You're interpreting the setup correctly. On Channel A you have 32GB and on Channel B 16GB. Each DDR4 board follows a consistent layout: channel A occupies slots 1 and 2, while channel B takes slots 3 and 4. The configurations you mention are swapped. Most modern sticks are dual-rank, so both setups work well. Intel tends to handle this arrangement better than AMD, and balancing the channels is generally advantageous for speed.

S
Sunahh
Posting Freak
863
07-28-2016, 10:19 PM
#3
It seems the BIOS update caused issues with your ASUS B460, possibly making your DDR4 guide outdated. You might need to refresh that resource.
S
Sunahh
07-28-2016, 10:19 PM #3

It seems the BIOS update caused issues with your ASUS B460, possibly making your DDR4 guide outdated. You might need to refresh that resource.

B
Blureux
Posting Freak
797
07-29-2016, 11:41 AM
#4
The manual indeed has some problems. Even the "Do Not Do This" part isn't completely correct, since certain boards—like Gigabyte Z390 models—have identical clock memory regardless of slot placement (2/4 vs 1/3).
B
Blureux
07-29-2016, 11:41 AM #4

The manual indeed has some problems. Even the "Do Not Do This" part isn't completely correct, since certain boards—like Gigabyte Z390 models—have identical clock memory regardless of slot placement (2/4 vs 1/3).

E
eojeoj1
Member
168
08-17-2016, 12:59 PM
#5
I've been checking online and it looks like the format doesn't really change much—whether you're using 8+16 or 8+8 with two channels, they both end up at 32GB before slowing down. So the final 16GB should always be the same rank. The main difference seems to be between FLEX and asynchronous dual channel, but it doesn't seem to cause a big performance drop.
E
eojeoj1
08-17-2016, 12:59 PM #5

I've been checking online and it looks like the format doesn't really change much—whether you're using 8+16 or 8+8 with two channels, they both end up at 32GB before slowing down. So the final 16GB should always be the same rank. The main difference seems to be between FLEX and asynchronous dual channel, but it doesn't seem to cause a big performance drop.

D
128
08-17-2016, 01:57 PM
#6
When channels are balanced, it delivers the full 48GB in dual-channel setup without noticeable lag. If they're unbalanced, you'd switch to flex mode. These two modes are essentially the same. Flex mode refers to the memory controller's state during asynchronous dual-channel operation. The performance drop is minimal and only relevant when using more than 32GB.
D
DiamondDasher3
08-17-2016, 01:57 PM #6

When channels are balanced, it delivers the full 48GB in dual-channel setup without noticeable lag. If they're unbalanced, you'd switch to flex mode. These two modes are essentially the same. Flex mode refers to the memory controller's state during asynchronous dual-channel operation. The performance drop is minimal and only relevant when using more than 32GB.

K
Krzywy
Member
150
08-19-2016, 06:06 PM
#7
Memory typically boosts performance by around 5%, which means the losses you observed align with that level, effectively bringing results back to normal.
K
Krzywy
08-19-2016, 06:06 PM #7

Memory typically boosts performance by around 5%, which means the losses you observed align with that level, effectively bringing results back to normal.

D
Donut__Gamer
Junior Member
49
08-19-2016, 08:23 PM
#8
Flex mode performs better than memory rank drops. Using over 32GB shifts to single channel mode, cutting your speed in half. I think it doesn’t really count much because most people don’t run more than 32GB RAM, and when they do, speed depends more on availability than raw performance.
D
Donut__Gamer
08-19-2016, 08:23 PM #8

Flex mode performs better than memory rank drops. Using over 32GB shifts to single channel mode, cutting your speed in half. I think it doesn’t really count much because most people don’t run more than 32GB RAM, and when they do, speed depends more on availability than raw performance.