WE TACKLE TOUGH READER QUESTIONS ON...

> RAM Latency

> NZXT AIO Pricing

> Windows Licenses

4 sticks vs 2?

Can I please get you to clarify something for me?

In the final critiques of your many great builds, you often include a line to the effect that “going from two to four RAM modules would look nicer”, par ticularly when RGB is involved.

Now, I‘ve long had the impression that fully populating all four DIMM slots will lead to reduced performance (it’s just not possible to achieve high speeds or low latency using all slots, especially if using higher-capacity modules). Is this still accurate?

If so, might I suggest you include that disclaimer and make more explicit that you're favoring visually appealing symmetr y/ lighting over ultimate per formance?

Thanks, and keep up the great work! –K. Weppler

GUEST HARDWARE EDITOR, ZAK STOREY, RESPONDS: This is quite an interesting question, and it sort of harkens back to a time before, when quad-channel kits were all the rage on more premium solutions, such as Intel’s enthusiast platforms, and eventually AMD’s Threadripper series as well.

For those that don’t know, It’s less to do with a drop in performance, and more to do with identical performance. So you might expect if you add two additional RAM sticks into the mix, that you’ll get twice the bandwidth, better latency, and so on. The reality is you don’t. This is because most modern CPUs are locked into that dual-channel specification (basically, any Ryzen or Intel series of the last five gens or so), so it can only read and write data to two of those sticks at any one time.