# Ganged vs. Unganged Mode



## Darkvette

I've seen a lot floating around the internet about Ganged and Unganged modes for PC RAM. I don't think I'm the only one that has questions about it, but being that info on it is scarce, I thought I would start a thread so that others could post info about it (Unfortunately I don't know a whole lot about it, so that's another reason too







)

What is Ganged Mode?

What is Unganged Mode?

Which Mode is Better?

What exactly does it do?


----------



## danewfie

It is amd's version of Nvidia's Locked vs unlocked architecture.

basically allowing you to use your ram in dual channel vs single channel.

Ganged = dual channel mode for ram. All cores get access to 100% of the ram.

unganged = single channel. Each core gets access to a stick of ram.

In theory, the unganged mode is better as each core will get access to data quicker. In theory.

Some limitations apply... and i dont know muchelse.

Edit: sorry, it also alows you to control the clocks indipendantly from eachother.


----------



## Darkvette

Quote:


Originally Posted by *danewfie* 
It is amd's version of Nvidia's Locked vs unlocked architecture.

basically allowing you to use your ram in dual channel vs single channel.

Ganged = dual channel mode for ram. All cores get access to 100% of the ram.

unganged = single channel. Each core gets access to a stick of ram.

In theory, the unganged mode is better as each core will get access to data quicker. In theory.

Some limitations apply... and i dont know muchelse.

Edit: sorry, it also alows you to control the clocks indipendantly from eachother.

Good deal. Thank you for the answer







. I'll have to play around with it. Might have to wait until I get 4 stix of RAM to be able to use it properly with my Phenom.


----------



## Xx_xBLADEx_xX

Is this an option in the bios, or do I just stick one stick in slot 1 and the other in slot 2. I have 4 Gigs. 2 x 2gig SLi sticks. Never heard of this. Good question darkvette


----------



## Xx_xBLADEx_xX

I might be wrong but I think this only applies to the Phenoms so I think I'm out of the equation.


----------



## By-Tor

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Xx_xBLADEx_xX* 
Is this an option in the bios, or do I just stick one stick in slot 1 and the other in slot 2. I have 4 Gigs. 2 x 2gig SLi sticks. Never heard of this. Good question darkvette

I know its an option in the bios of my MB, but not sure if it only works with Quads.


----------



## gsk3rd

so having four cores will i need four sticks of ram? I currently have 2x2gb sticks.


----------



## winginit

Quote:


Originally Posted by *gsk3rd* 
so having four cores will i need four sticks of ram? I currently have 2x2gb sticks.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you need four sticks.... I believe it also works with two.


----------



## Darkvette

Quote:


Originally Posted by *gsk3rd* 
so having four cores will i need four sticks of ram? I currently have 2x2gb sticks.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *winginit* 
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you need four sticks.... I believe it also works with two.

It will work with only 2. I was running 2 stix of Crucial Ballistix with a 9850BE before one of the stix went up on me. But, yes - It will work with only 2 sticks. 4 work better though, especially if it's 4x2GB - 8GB???


----------



## OpticWaves

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Darkvette* 
It will work with only 2. I was running 2 stix of Crucial Ballistix with a 9850BE before one of the stix went up on me. But, yes - It will work with only 2 sticks. 4 work better though, especially if it's 4x2GB - 8GB???























I've heard from a few people that having 8G of ram will result in slower performance, although there is more ram? Is this true?


----------



## IcedEarth

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OpticWaves* 
I've heard from a few people that having 8G of ram will result in slower performance, although there is more ram? Is this true?

I'm not sure if this has been proven or if it is just a theory.

The reason people will give you is because it will take longer for the pc to search 8gb of RAM compared to 4GB.

Whether it holds any truth or not is another matter


----------



## Darkvette

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IcedEarth* 
I'm not sure if this has been proven or if it is just a theory.

The reason people will give you is because it will take longer for the pc to search 8gb of RAM compared to 4GB.

Whether it holds any truth or not is another matter









It's worth a shot to find out though.


----------



## SgtHawker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OpticWaves* 
I've heard from a few people that having 8G of ram will result in slower performance, although there is more ram? Is this true?


One thing I have heard is that 4 sticks of memory tax the bus and power of the controller, effectively slowing down the memory. Increasing the memory voltage in BIOS can possibly prevent this slowdown, allowing the 4 sticks of memory to run at the fastest settings they are capable of. Matched memory should help this issue, that is why you are seeing 4 matched memory sticks in kits now, so they all run the same.


----------



## Darkvette

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OpticWaves* 
I've heard from a few people that having 8G of ram will result in slower performance, although there is more ram? Is this true?

It can. I've heard that as well, especially with Vista. Microsoft actually has a patch out for users running more than 4GB of RAM in Vista. Eventually I'd like to test the theory, but $$ are short right now.


----------



## BrightSide

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OpticWaves* 
I've heard from a few people that having 8G of ram will result in slower performance, although there is more ram? Is this true?

Having 8GB of RAM wouldnt result in slower performance, but having 4 sticks instead of 2 would, if your using 1066 Mhz sticks at least. The CPU can only handle 1 stick of 1066 Mhz per channel, giving a maksimum of 2 sticks. If you add more than that, the memory will be slowed down to 800 Mhz to maintain stability.


----------



## xeeki

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BrightSide* 
Having 8GB of RAM wouldnt result in slower performance, but having 4 sticks instead of 2 would, if your using 1066 Mhz sticks at least. The CPU can only handle 1 stick of 1066 Mhz per channel, giving a maksimum of 2 sticks. If you add more than that, the memory will be slowed down to 800 Mhz to maintain stability.

Really? I didn't know that, could've been really frustrating if you bought 8 GB of 1066 MHz RAM, and it didn't work fully.


----------



## Darkvette

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xeeki* 
Really? I didn't know that, could've been really frustrating if you bought 8 GB of 1066 MHz RAM, and it didn't work fully.










Quote:


Originally Posted by *BrightSide* 
Having 8GB of RAM wouldnt result in slower performance, but having 4 sticks instead of 2 would, if your using 1066 Mhz sticks at least. The CPU can only handle 1 stick of 1066 Mhz per channel, giving a maksimum of 2 sticks. If you add more than that, the memory will be slowed down to 800 Mhz to maintain stability.

BrightSide is right. I bought 2 different kits to test that out (all G.Skill), and here's what I found.

-- 8GB(4x2GB) of DDR2-1066
-- 8GB(4x2GB) of DDR2-800

With the 1066 RAM and 4GB in 1 channel, worked fine at 1066. With all 8GB in dual channel mode, like he said, it went down to 800MHz. Now, the interesting thing is that the Phenom chips have their own internal memory controller. I tried running the 8GB of the 1066 in single channel mode, and it ran fine for about 10 minutes at 1066MHz - before it BSOD'd on me, maybe a bad set of chips, I don't know - but something you might want to try.

With the 800 RAM, I was able to OC both 4GB in channel 1 and all 8GB in single and dual channel modes up to 1066 without any hassles. It's still running stable as can be.

Kind of interesting. I ended up returning the 1066 kit, esp since I wasn't gonna use it anymore anyway.


----------



## Enigma8750

So what is the Answer? Which is Better? Ganged or UnGanged? Which is faster? Which would be the best for Overclocking?


----------



## PepsiLove

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Enigma8750* 
So what is the Answer? Which is Better? Ganged or UnGanged? Which is faster? Which would be the best for Overclocking?

I don't think either would be better, its just an option for letting you overclock your cpu without overclocking your ram. If your ram can oc then leave it ganged, if it can't then stick it on unganged


----------



## pixie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PepsiLove* 
I don't think either would be better, its just an option for letting you overclock your cpu without overclocking your ram. If your ram can oc then leave it ganged, if it can't then stick it on unganged

umm, no. it'll OC your ram whether you have it Ganged or UnGanged.

Ganged is just forced Dual Channel (128bit) and UnGanged is forced Single Channel (64bit).


----------



## Darkvette

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pixie* 
umm, no. it'll OC your ram whether you have it Ganged or UnGanged.

Ganged is just forced Dual Channel (128bit) and UnGanged is forced Single Channel (64bit).

I'll do some tests on it over the next few days to see whether there are any performance differences between the two and let you all know.


----------



## Pao

Hey really old thread how are you? Wanna bump? Ok!

Darkvette, did you get a chance to test things out in the last 2 months?


----------



## volto

I was just wondering about this myself, if what you all say is true, that Ganged is dual channel and Unganged is single channel, it would probably be faster to have two sticks, run them in 2 controllers, on single channel. I would like to know if you came up with any results though, Darkvette.


----------



## noobdown

ungange is for example. if you have 4x1g sticks in your computer. each stick is alocated to a core on the cpu. stick 1 to core1, stick 2 to core 2,...
now they are both dual channel aslong as they are matching stick in the correct dimm spots.
gange is none of the ram is allocated to a core. each core/ram is uses them all and none is allocated. also it runs in dual chanel aswell.


----------



## Cdpkook132

Ganged means that the ram is running in dual channel which also requires the ram to be put in the proper channel slots (Every other Channel) This also combines or ties the memory controllers into 1x128bit. When running in unganged mode it splits the memory controllers into it's two separate contollers and allows seperate cores to access mulitple sticks. If you are running software that is mainly working on one core. Ganged mode is great becuase there is plently of room on the 1x128bit highway. If the multiple cores are accessing the ram you might want to split the lanes into 2x64bit so that although slower in speed there are two lanes working. Same principle sorta applies to the PCIex16 splitting with crossfire. is 2x8 better or worse then 1x16 or in this case is 2x64 better or worse then 1x128. Depends on how many cpus or gpus are actually working with the software being used. P.S. I am new here and need some reps (WINK)


----------



## Cdpkook132

On a second not whether it is ganged or unganged they are both still duel channel. Just because you have your memory unganged does not put it in single channel. To do this you must put them in physically separate channel slots on the mobo, in most cases side by side.


----------



## Joe22369

so....

i have a phenom x3......does that mean i SHOULD get best performance with 3 sticks???

also......does it really matter what ram bays you have your sticks plugged in to?

when i set up i chose the 2 slots farthest away from my cpu heatsink...... they turned out to be slot 3 and 4....

is that an idiot move or am i ok?


----------



## Cdpkook132

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Joe22369* 
so....

i have a phenom x3......does that mean i SHOULD get best performance with 3 sticks???

also......does it really matter what ram bays you have your sticks plugged in to?

when i set up i chose the 2 slots farthest away from my cpu heatsink...... they turned out to be slot 3 and 4....

is that an idiot move or am i ok?

Move ram into opposite slots. Last and second or first and third. Now you are duel channel. If you are using software that only really uses one core for for ganged mode. If you are using software that is utilizes multiple cores. I would go unganged mode. 3 cores doesnt mean you need 3 sticks and 4 cores doesnt mean you need 4 sticks.


----------



## RawZ

Thought i'd do a few tests, always been curious. Basic tests with Everest Benchies.

a.) Memory Copy

http://i41.tinypic.com/30jmrkn.jpg

It appears that with unganged mode, its slower than ganged. All top 6 tests of mine were with ganged.

b.) Memory Write

http://i41.tinypic.com/mw7clu.jpg

Memory is faster with unganged than ganged mode it appears. The 2 7750 tests near the bottom were ganged, the top 2 were unganged.

c.) Memory Read

http://i39.tinypic.com/25fpsus.jpg

It looks as if ganged is better than unganged. The top 2 7750 tests were ganged. The 3rd was unganged.

I did memory latency, but it was pretty much the same, just ganged just beat unganged by like .2. Nothing really in it. So 3/4 makes ganged the winner lol. Though unganged is a lot faster than ganged with memory write.


----------



## RawZ

Thought since its about CPU performance increase, i better do the CPU benchies too.

http://i42.tinypic.com/2ynj9qh.jpg
http://i42.tinypic.com/2db1p9s.jpg
http://i39.tinypic.com/dy2cr6.jpg
http://i40.tinypic.com/2vmtyio.jpg

Looks like unganged mode is better than ganged mode for dual cores (i have 2x1GB). All test results are similar, although there was a big difference in 1 of the 4 tests, the CPU PhotoWorxx.


----------



## Pao

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Cdpkook132* 
Move ram into opposite slots. Last and second or first and third. Now you are duel channel. If you are using software that only really uses one core for for ganged mode. If you are using software that is utilizes multiple cores. I would go unganged mode. 3 cores doesnt mean you need 3 sticks and 4 cores doesnt mean you need 4 sticks.

Be careful just generally assuming that. I have an M3A78-T, so a relatively new board and my channels are dimms 1+2 and 3+4. The board screen printing and even the manual say it's as you mention, but my own testing has confirmed that not even Asus knows how they set up their own boards.

You gotta do your own testing on your board.


----------



## Cdpkook132

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Pao* 
Be careful just generally assuming that. I have an M3A78-T, so a relatively new board and my channels are dimms 1+2 and 3+4. The board screen printing and even the manual say it's as you mention, but my own testing has confirmed that not even Asus knows how they set up their own boards.

You gotta do your own testing on your board.

Special case though. in MOST cases channels are set up to be opposite dimms. In your case its different though. I was just saying in most cases its like this but all mobos are a little different.


----------



## noobdown

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Joe22369* 
so....

i have a phenom x3......does that mean i SHOULD get best performance with 3 sticks???

also......does it really matter what ram bays you have your sticks plugged in to?

when i set up i chose the 2 slots farthest away from my cpu heatsink...... they turned out to be slot 3 and 4....

is that an idiot move or am i ok?

no the reason is you will loose dual channel. use ganged


----------



## sweet_3025

Here is my Everest Cache and memory bench. It seems Ganged mode increases memory read significantly.

Unganged









Ganged


----------



## OrphanShadow

Its not a case of the options switching you from Dual to Single channel at all.

Its is an option that affects how the memory is addressed by the CPU.

When running ganged mode your memory controller will operate in 128-bit mode. This has the benefit of giving the whole CPU a massive memory bandwidth. When handling one application that greatly benefits from higher memory performance this is the option you want to be sticking with.

Unganged basically will split that 128-bit memory bus into 2 x 64-bit, so you will essentially have two memory buses. Because of this, Unganged is particularly useful If you are a heavy multitasker, as you are packing 2 memory controllers effectively.

It will not force single or dual channel setups. *Your memory will always be dual channel regardless of which configuration you choose.*

It is simply a case of how you wish your system to be tuned. If you are using your PC for a live audio take, handling multiple tracks, then ganged will benefit you with the higher memory bandwidth.

If you are wanting to do some encoding of some movies while you have a quick blast on CS:S, however, go with unganged, as then one half of the memory controller will be dedicated to each running app.


----------



## Darkvette

Hey guys, I've been really sick the past few weeks, otherwise I would've responded sooner. I did do testing and got no where with it. I tried both settings and didn't notice any difference in speed. There were slight differences in the speed that basic office programs opened, but nothing major. So, I believe that OrphanShadow is right, it doesn't matter what setting you choose, dual-channel mode is always enabled.


----------



## V12

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IcedEarth* 
I'm not sure if this has been proven or if it is just a theory.

The reason people will give you is because it will take longer for the pc to search 8gb of RAM compared to 4GB.

Whether it holds any truth or not is another matter









I had 2x2gb ballistix ddr2-800 CL4, added a 2nd kit, identical - WOW - Vista 64 just loads its up fine ---

will be testing with ganged mode tonight as all 4 banks are identically filled.


----------



## Melcar

Ganged mode is faster for single apps. However, these are quad cores dammit; you multitask on them







. Unganged offers the best performance overall.


----------



## Dodgy D

xp 32 bit will only see less than 4gb but with 64 bit there arn't such limitations


----------



## Dodgy D

sorry wrong thread


----------



## panorama-monk

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Cdpkook132* 
Move ram into opposite slots. Last and second or first and third. Now you are duel channel. If you are using software that only really uses one core for for ganged mode. If you are using software that is utilizes multiple cores. I would go unganged mode. 3 cores doesnt mean you need 3 sticks and 4 cores doesnt mean you need 4 sticks.

I just built a PC from ECS A780GMA, an ATI chipset based MO which is far better than ECS GF8200A which like the XFX, its Nvidia chipset had lots of problems in setting up drivers. My CPU is AMD Quad 9500 running XP32 which are good enough as I'm not a gamer. Not aware of 32 bit OS can't address RAMS over 4GB, I bought 2 pairs of Cosair 2x2GB RAMS in two separate orders, and they are 1.8v and 1.9v respectively.

Now I inserted 2 sticks into slots 3 and 4. On initial start up, I can see that they are set to "unganged" unless I disable it, per manual.

Questions:
(1) I don't know how to disable "ungaged" as it was not mentioned in the manual.
(2) does the voltage difference (1.8 vs 1.9) matter?
(3) Having read posts here, does it mean I better have 4x1GB and to fill all the 4 slots?
(4) I assigned 1GB to the video, from the system info, I still have 2.25GB available.
(5) I have tried with 4 sticks, the available memory reported was 3.25 GB. In other words, the video shared memory was taken away before the OS has it.
(6) In having all 4 sticks of 2GB in the slots, ignoring their voltage difference, would each of the 4 cores "use"(access) 1/2 of each stick?
(7) In my case, (ganged / dual channel) or (unganged / single channel), which is fastest and best for me?
(8) I'm behind the trend now, how can I see the CPU and RAM status/performing?


----------



## Melcar

1) Your BIOS should have the option to change between modes somewhere in there

2) The BIOS will only set a general set of timings and voltage for all the RAM. Since they are different pairs, it's best if you set both voltage and timings yourself. For voltage use the highest (1.9V in your case), and for timings the loosest ones out of all your RAM. This is so that the you run all RAM sticks at a setting that won't cause a problem

3) Doesn't matter. For overclocking it's generally better just to have two sticks because populating all the slots may stress the memory controller more, possibly reducing overclocking potential.

4) You shouldn't need that much RAM for video, specially with an IGP. Lower it to 512MB (hell, even 256MB would be overkill).

5) A 32bit OS will only read 3.25GB of RAM. Since you set 1 whole GB for video, you will be left with 2.25GB for the system.

6) & 7) Phenoms have 2 memory controllers. Ganged mode combines them into a single 128bit controller; in this mode applications have to wait in que to access the memory controller. Unganged mode splits the memory controller into 2 64bit lanes; applications now have to wait less time in que to access the controller since there are two now. Unganged offers the best overall performance since having two memory controllers instead of one makes it easier to multitask. Of course, if all you do is run single threaded applications (games) and don't multitask much, Ganged mode should work better.

8) For monitoring and stuff, there is Coretemp for CPU temperatures and CPU-Z for reading frequencies. For performance you should run benchmarks (3DMark) and/or Sissoft sandra


----------



## Darkvette

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Melcar* 
1) Your BIOS should have the option to change between modes somewhere in there

2) The BIOS will only set a general set of timings and voltage for all the RAM. Since they are different pairs, it's best if you set both voltage and timings yourself. For voltage use the highest (1.9V in your case), and for timings the loosest ones out of all your RAM. This is so that the you run all RAM sticks at a setting that won't cause a problem

3) Doesn't matter. For overclocking it's generally better just to have two sticks because populating all the slots may stress the memory controller more, possibly reducing overclocking potential.

4) You shouldn't need that much RAM for video, specially with an IGP. Lower it to 512MB (hell, even 256MB would be overkill).

5) A 32bit OS will only read 3.25GB of RAM. Since you set 1 whole GB for video, you will be left with 2.25GB for the system.

6) & 7) Phenoms have 2 memory controllers. Ganged mode combines them into a single 128bit controller; in this mode applications have to wait in que to access the memory controller. Unganged mode splits the memory controller into 2 64bit lanes; applications now have to wait less time in que to access the controller since there are two now. Unganged offers the best overall performance since having two memory controllers instead of one makes it easier to multitask. Of course, if all you do is run single threaded applications (games) and don't multitask much, Ganged mode should work better.

8) For monitoring and stuff, there is Coretemp for CPU temperatures and CPU-Z for reading frequencies. For performance you should run benchmarks (3DMark) and/or Sissoft sandra

Good call on that all Melcar.

For anyone with questions about the XP 32-bit memory limitation, the following website explains what the limitations are for ALL the M$ Windows OS (XP, Vista, etc.)

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...its_windows_xp

The odd thing is, where XP will only see 3.25GB, Vista 32-bit will see all 4GB. I had a friend install 4GB of RAM in his Vista 32-bit laptop and it read all 4GB. Who knows though. Hope this helps.


----------



## alwaysAMD

I've done some pretty extensive testing on this because I was unable to find a definitive answer, but ganged and unganged are pretty much equal for everyday usage. If you use more single threaded apps, ganged will shine, but if you do alot of multithreading, you will gain performance with unganged. The difference, however, usually equates to a couple fps gained in games, and a couple seconds in video encoding over ganged. Hope that helps.


----------



## Jamar16

Basically its as simple as this for multi threading use unganged for single threading use ganged mode.

Programs that benefit from unganged mode are programs like from adobe ranging from photoshop to on aftereffects along with some games like crysis i think and a few others which use all the cores on tris and quad core cpus.

other types of programs perform better on single thread.

here is my ram bench mark with unganged and ganged mode, NOTHING ELSE WAS CHANGED!!

Attachment 99540

Attachment 99541

hope that helped


----------



## Grandlo

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IcedEarth* 
I'm not sure if this has been proven or if it is just a theory.

The reason people will give you is because it will take longer for the pc to search 8gb of RAM compared to 4GB.

Whether it holds any truth or not is another matter 









ram doesn't get searched it's random/direct access..

exculsive access of a core to a stick might not be the best thing if there is a lot of shared memory across the cores. This is one of those things that depend on how the app is coded more then if the app is multithreaded or not. I'd just keep it normal(ie every core access to all sticks at same time) unless you're willing to test each game you play and get a setting for each lol. kinda overkill.

edit: apparently it's splitting the memory buss in 2 as someone on this post mentioned.. interesting. it's hard to understand how that would effect things in theory. im going to wrap my head around it for a while. exculsive access to a memory stick didn't make sense to me at all as that would require mirroring of shared memory to work properly.


----------



## Darkvette

All, think of it this way. You have one 4 lane highway (128-bit Ganged Mem Controller) splitting to two exits (Both Mem Channels). Only so much traffic can get through at once. However, if each exit has it's own dedicated highway (ie, two 2 lane highways or 2x64-bit Unganged Mem Controllers, each to its own exit or Mem Channel), then you can (in theory) get more traffic through because each highway is dedicated to an exit.

It's almost like 6 of one and 1/2 a dozen of the other. Personal Preference almost...


----------



## xandypx

There is actually an additional benefit to unganged vs. ganged.... At least according to AMD's release notes.

The reason the memory benchmarks come in better unganged is that with two memory controllers running at 2x64, as opposed to 1-128bit, the processor can both read and write to seperate memory addresses at the same time during each clock cycle. with 128bit, it's either a read or a write.

AMD also claims an additional benefit... when multi-tasking each controller reads and writes to it's own RAM module (or modules depending on how many sticks are configured on your Mobo), and since they "claim" that the different applications "should be running on different cores", this lessens the chance of the controller overwriting data that is already stored in RAM for application 1 with new data for Application 2, requiring this information to be re-read from the HDD when Application 1 needs it.

Does it work?... who knows but that is AMD's claim.


----------



## Pao

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xandypx* 
There is actually an additional benefit to unganged vs. ganged.... At least according to AMD's release notes.

The reason the memory benchmarks come in better unganged is that with two memory controllers running at 2x64, as opposed to 1-128bit, the processor can both read and write to seperate memory addresses at the same time during each clock cycle. with 128bit, it's either a read or a write.

AMD also claims an additional benefit... when multi-tasking each controller reads and writes to it's own RAM module (or modules depending on how many sticks are configured on your Mobo), and since they "claim" that the different applications "should be running on different cores", this lessens the chance of the controller overwriting data that is already stored in RAM for application 1 with new data for Application 2, requiring this information to be re-read from the HDD when Application 1 needs it.

Does it work?... who knows but that is AMD's claim.

Interesting to see a new source of information for this topic. You my sir have earned your first rep, and I'm glad to give it.


----------



## Darkvette

Quote:


Originally Posted by *xandypx* 
There is actually an additional benefit to unganged vs. ganged.... At least according to AMD's release notes.

The reason the memory benchmarks come in better unganged is that with two memory controllers running at 2x64, as opposed to 1-128bit, the processor can both read and write to seperate memory addresses at the same time during each clock cycle. with 128bit, it's either a read or a write.

AMD also claims an additional benefit... when multi-tasking each controller reads and writes to it's own RAM module (or modules depending on how many sticks are configured on your Mobo), and since they "claim" that the different applications "should be running on different cores", this lessens the chance of the controller overwriting data that is already stored in RAM for application 1 with new data for Application 2, requiring this information to be re-read from the HDD when Application 1 needs it.

Does it work?... who knows but that is AMD's claim.

Good call, + Rep.


----------



## brkbeatjunkie

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Cdpkook132* 
Move ram into opposite slots. Last and second or first and third. Now you are duel channel. If you are using software that only really uses one core for for ganged mode. If you are using software that is utilizes multiple cores. I would go unganged mode. 3 cores doesnt mean you need 3 sticks and 4 cores doesnt mean you need 4 sticks.

I'm wondering about my ram now. If you look at my rig pics, are my sticks in the correct slots for running unganged (1stick per core)?


----------



## ciber

In My GA-MA770-S3 i cant change unganged mode to ganged, help me please


----------



## laurie

So I have a question.
I have 3 sticks of 1GB DDR3. Which would be the better option 2x ganged or 3x unganged?


----------



## jimibgood

Quote:



Originally Posted by *danewfie*


It is amd's version of Nvidia's Locked vs unlocked architecture.

basically allowing you to use your ram in dual channel vs single channel.

Ganged = dual channel mode for ram. All cores get access to 100% of the ram.

unganged = single channel. Each core gets access to a stick of ram.

In theory, the unganged mode is better as each core will get access to data quicker. In theory.

Some limitations apply... and i dont know muchelse.

Edit: sorry, it also alows you to control the clocks indipendantly from eachother.



This has nothing to do with dual or single channel. it has to do with the cores accessing both sticks. You still run in dual channel.


----------



## sLowEnd

Ganged = 1x 128-bit

Unganged = 2x 64-bit

If my memory serves me right


----------



## jimibgood

Look guys, you are making a mountain out of a mo hill. Even with vista 32 or 64 bit, more than 4G is a waste unless you are running intense applications like Cat. 2 X 2G is plenty of Ram. Unganged gives you better performance depending on app and neither has anything to do with single or dual channel. If you overclock, 1 stick of 2G will probably get ya a slightly higher overclock. Most overclockers use 2 x 2G in DDR2.


----------



## joe2d

So is ganged or unganged better for overclocking?


----------



## MRHANDS

I don't think it makes a difference when OCing


----------



## joe2d

I mean not just performance after overclocking, but stability in overclocking the CPU? Would ganged or unganged overclock better, stability-wise reaching higher overclock? Or no difference at all. Thanks for the benchmark btw.


----------



## Melcar

Doesn't affect overclocking at all. All it does is change how your applications access your system RAM. All this "letting each core use one stick" and stuff is really just confusing the issue.
The CPU has a 128bit memory lane which you can split in 2x64bit lanes. In single lane mode only one app. at a time can use the lane, but since it's wide enough the app. can go through it fast; this is great if you run single big applications at a time. If you use the 2x64bit mode, you get two lanes that can be used by two apps. at the same time; since they are narrower the lanes can become saturated faster, but you get the ability to run 2 apps. simultaneously (multitasking awesomeness).
Now, all this happens quickly and you really can't measure it. Additionally, you really can't fully saturate 2 64bit lanes, let alone a 128bit one, under normal desktop usage.
Technically running unganged is better overall since it gives you good single app. performance and the best multitastink performance at the same time. However, if you don't multitask often and spend most of your time running single big apps. (games), then ganged technically works better (which begs the question, why do you have more than 2 cores if you're not multitasking?







).


----------



## Gill..

Wow, Melcar provides another killer answer yet again...Ubuntu, RAM - where's this guy's limits!

Thanks man...again!


----------



## brkbeatjunkie

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Melcar*


Doesn't affect overclocking at all. All it does is change how your applications access your system RAM. All this "letting each core use one stick" and stuff is really just confusing the issue.
The CPU has a 128bit memory lane which you can split in 2x64bit lanes. In single lane mode only one app. at a time can use the lane, but since it's wide enough the app. can go through it fast; this is great if you run single big applications at a time. If you use the 2x64bit mode, you get two lanes that can be used by two apps. at the same time; since they are narrower the lanes can become saturated faster, but you get the ability to run 2 apps. simultaneously (multitasking awesomeness).
Now, all this happens quickly and you really can't measure it. Additionally, you really can't fully saturate 2 64bit lanes, let alone a 128bit one, under normal desktop usage. 
Technically running unganged is better overall since it gives you good single app. performance and the best multitastink performance at the same time. However, if you don't multitask often and spend most of your time running single big apps. (games), then ganged technically works better (which begs the question, why do you have more than 2 cores if you're not multitasking?







).


I was wondering if the unganged mode, which provides 2x64bit pathways uses one pathway to write and one pathway to read all during one cycle. What im trying to get at is that ram has the capability to read and write at the same time? that is neat


----------



## sgr215

My G.Skill ram will error in Prime95 after only five minutes in ganged mode. In unganged I've got no issues whatsoever. I asked G.Skill about this and was told my ram, F2-8500CL5D-4GBPK, only supports 1066Mhz in unganged mode. I'm not sure if G.Skill was just BS'ing me though. Numerous other people have mentioned this on Newegg reviews and gotten replies telling them to switch to unganged too.

If this is correct though you may want to verify your RAM supports both ganged and unganged before messing with it.


----------



## Jamar16

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sgr215*


My G.Skill ram will error in Prime95 after only five minutes in ganged mode. In unganged I've got no issues whatsoever. I asked G.Skill about this and was told my ram, F2-8500CL5D-4GBPK, only supports 1066Mhz in unganged mode. I'm not sure if G.Skill was just BS'ing me though. Numerous other people have mentioned this on Newegg reviews and gotten replies telling them to switch to unganged too.

If this is correct though you may want to verify your RAM supports both ganged and unganged before messing with it.


Mine works fine either way and i have it running at 1104mhz up from 1067mhz
with 5-5-5-15-11 timings (CL-TRCD-TRP-TRAS-TRC) so i see no reason why you shouldn't be able to run the sticks in ganged mode

Attachment 117501

Attachment 117502


----------



## sgr215

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Jamar16*


Mine works fine either way and i have it running at 1104mhz up from 1067mhz
with 5-5-5-15-11 timings (CL-TRCD-TRP-TRAS-TRC) so i see no reason why you shouldn't be able to run the sticks in ganged mode


Weird, no matter what I've tried it would error on Prime95 if at 1066 yet was rock stable at 800. There's a ton of people posting about this issue on the Gskill forums. Only thing I can figure is maybe its a compatibility issue between Gigabyte and this RAM. I noticed a new sticky there advising some Gigabyte users to use unganged.


----------



## Jamar16

Quote:



Originally Posted by *sgr215*


Weird, no matter what I've tried it would error on Prime95 if at 1066 yet was rock stable at 800. There's a ton of people posting about this issue on the Gskill forums. Only thing I can figure is maybe its a compatibility issue between Gigabyte and this RAM. I noticed a new sticky there advising some Gigabyte users to use unganged.










never bugged me, but i use unganged now tho, as i multitask a lot with "heavy" programs such as adobe after effects etc


----------



## sgr215

I do a lot of multitasking too so I guess its not a major issue. Although it makes me think my ram may be faulty. I really don't feel like doing a RMA though so I'll probably just keep it unganged.


----------



## brkbeatjunkie

i wasn't asking which was stable for OC'ing or better for performance I was asking does ram read and write in the same cycle because of 2x64bit pathways in stead of one single 128bit pathway.

Thanks,
Andrew


----------



## razor_amd

LOL I knew about Ganged and Unganged modes and what do they do, but didn't know unganged is faster, always thought Ganged is faster because of 128-bit bandwidth. Great thread guys, keep it up...

Cheers


----------



## Sekkusu

I notice a very big difference between ganged and unganged. Ok not huge but enough for me to notice. Maybe a half second or less. Ganged for me is faster. It also seems more stable.


----------



## Miked270

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Sekkusu*


I notice a very big difference between ganged and unganged. Ok not huge but enough for me to notice. Maybe a half second or less. Ganged for me is faster. It also seems more stable.


faster using which benchmark? thanks


----------



## Asus Mobile

Look at this link on ganged/unganged. A lot of comments on this thread are reiterations of marketing dribble. As such still dribble. Several posters have posted good comments to clarify what it is and is not.

But this illusion that each core gets it's own RAM DIMM is beyond logic. I admit I have not read the tech specs but fellows use a little common sense. Your distribution is wack! OK you have a choice 1x128 or 2x64? How do you ever get 4 out of that? Be it cores, DIMM's or applications? At best you get 2. But remember 2x64=128, 128 is 128? Results are equal, yes I know distribution/utilization can effect performance but when the cumulative is equal you can only expect minor improvement.

Look at my link at the beginning, it clearly shows very little to no difference. Games do get a boost it seems. But the level is hardly worth comment or recognition.

While posts have cleared up, this has nothing to do with "Dual Channel". If the memory bus is 64bit. 128bit by definition is Dual Channel. Regardless of if 2x64 or straight 128.

This feature while does have an effect on how the hardware works. The results clearly indicate it is irrelevant to performance. As such the choice of which to use is also irrelevant.

Use either it really makes little to no difference. It is marketing and does not deliver the promised results. But it sure does look good on paper.

Incorrect info in this thread:

This has nothing to do with giving cores access to their own DIMM.

4 Cores has nothing to do with having 4 DIMM's. I mean come on you only at best get 2x64? How does that translate to 4? It doesn't. And in fact would present the same issue 128 does?


----------



## markg1106

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Darkvette* 
It will work with only 2. I was running 2 stix of Crucial Ballistix with a 9850BE before one of the stix went up on me. But, yes - It will work with only 2 sticks. 4 work better though, especially if it's 4x2GB - 8GB???























I use 4x2GB OCR Ram, have used in both Ganged and Unganged, but not sure which is best. On start up PC recognises 8gb of memory, but in system information shows only 4GB? any ideas?


----------



## eclipseaudio4

markg1106 are you using a 64 bit OS?

In case no one has posted some benches showing the difference. These were done with identical settings other than ganged vs Unganged.
Ganged









Unganged









I have been told that multi-thread apps will show an even bigger difference.


----------



## jimibgood

Quote:


Originally Posted by *danewfie* 
It is amd's version of Nvidia's Locked vs unlocked architecture.

basically allowing you to use your ram in dual channel vs single channel.

Ganged = dual channel mode for ram. All cores get access to 100% of the ram.

unganged = single channel. Each core gets access to a stick of ram.

In theory, the unganged mode is better as each core will get access to data quicker. In theory.

Some limitations apply... and i dont know muchelse.

Edit: sorry, it also alows you to control the clocks indipendantly from eachother.


This is not right. It has nothing to do with single channel or dual channel. I think you have ganged and unganged mixed up too.


----------



## jimibgood

Quote:



Originally Posted by *markg1106*


I use 4x2GB OCR Ram, have used in both Ganged and Unganged, but not sure which is best. On start up PC recognises 8gb of memory, but in system information shows only 4GB? any ideas?



If you are using 32 bit XP, it will only recognize about 3G Ram. Take your other 4G and send it to me.....LOL

When they developed 32 bit, the OS is not stable with more than 4G so Microsoft engineered it to only utilize about 3G. You have to take in consideration other harware too.

More than 4G is a waste anyhow unless you use cat or do serious video encoding or editing.

Ganged will yield more performance but like mentioned above, has nothing to do with dual or single channel. As long as you have the sticks in the right slots, you are in dual channel.


----------



## jimibgood

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Asus Mobile*


A lot of comments on this thread are reiterations of marketing dribble. As such still dribble. Several posters have posted good comments to clarify what it is and is not.

Look at my link at the beginning, it clearly shows very little to no difference. Games do get a boost it seems. But the level is hardly worth comment or recognition.

The results clearly indicate it is irrelevant to performance. As such the choice of which to use is also irrelevant.

Use either it really makes little to no difference. It is marketing and does not deliver the promised results. But it sure does look good on paper.










Ummmm...... Ganged will yeild better performance as shown above.....


----------



## Tatakai All

My 2x2gb mushkins says one per channel and I only have four slots (two channels) so could I do unganged?


----------



## eclipseaudio4

Quote:



Originally Posted by *jimibgood*


If you are using 32 bit XP, it will only recognize about 3G Ram. Take your other 4G and send it to me.....LOL

When they developed 32 bit, the OS is not stable with more than 4G so Microsoft engineered it to only utilize about 3G. You have to take in consideration other harware too.

More than 4G is a waste anyhow unless you use cat or do serious video encoding or editing.

Ganged will yield more performance but like mentioned above, has nothing to do with dual or single channel. As long as you have the sticks in the right slots, you are in dual channel.


I think you have that backwards unganged yields more performance as shown by my SS's. Unless that changes with only two sticks.(not sure)

And more then 4GB's is not a waste If you load games into your ram.


----------



## jimibgood

Quote:



Originally Posted by *eclipseaudio4*


I think you have that backwards unganged yields more performance as shown by my SS's. Unless that changes with only two sticks.(not sure)

And more then 4GB's is not a waste If you load games into your ram.











Ohhhh didn't see the unganged at bottom.. Thanx........ yes I stand corrected on both but for the average user 8G not neccesary.


----------



## eclipseaudio4

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jimibgood* 
Ohhhh didn't see the unganged at bottom.. Thanx........ yes I stand corrected on both but for the average user 8G not neccesary.

NP!
and very true most people will never use 3GB's.


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jimibgood* 
This has nothing to do with dual or single channel. it has to do with the cores accessing both sticks. You still run in dual channel.

Just to clarify, since it seems this thread has been resurrected. As posted in my original post way back when. Ganged/Unganged has nothing to do with Dual/Single channel, or the number of Cores the processor has.

AMD Processors have 2 *MEMORY CONTROLLERS* each capable of transferring 64bits of data to/from memory during a processor clock cycle.

Ganged mode *combines* the 2 controllers ("Ganges") them to create one 128 bit data "lane" to memory that will either read or write to memory during a processor clock.

Unganged does just what it says... It keeps the memory controllers separate (unganged), so that there are two 64 bit lanes to memory, with each controller, "in control" of one lane, and associated memory bank. During a clock cycle each controller can either read or write to memory.

To answer another question in one of the above posts; yes, one controller can be reading and the other writing during the same clock cycle. This is the reason benchmarking tests show better memory performance Unganged. And also the necessity for each controller to utilize only one bank of memory. Controller #1 can't, and dosen't keep track of where Controller #2 wrote data on a stick of RAM. If both controllers wrote to the same RAM modules... think of the mess it would make!

Ganged vs. Unganged in the real world..... YMMV... no, "YOUR MILEAGE WILL VARY"... based on the applications that you run; whether the application is multi-threaded, designed to run on multiple processor cores, how the programmers of the application handled memory access, along with any multitude of other factors that can and will affect memory access, on any computer running multiple applications.


----------



## Asus Mobile

On AMD vs Intel, AMD cores have their own L2. That is what it is about. That is really what it is all about. My AMD mobile ran two 64bit on a Turion TL-52. So I guess that is unganged? Now you guys have 4 cores. How you split two between four and think an obvious advantage? It does not happen. To be honest if you run a dual threaded application ganged likely better.

I would allow ganged and let the MC's fight over it. As said on a Quad you have four how you think dividing four into two is great is beyond me. If already dividing why not four into one?

Just to make clear this unganged vs ganged. Ganged is better for single threaded, unganged is best for dual threaded, tri or quad threaded? Anyones guess. Also throw in running multiple apps. Once you cross the the two channels what does it matter?

This is complicated stuff and at the end of the day it does not matter. Why you guys want to stress is beyond me?


----------



## Vencedor

Thanks this really helped me out, because i had a hard time trying to find, sources to tell me what it was.


----------



## Darkvette

Contrary to popular belief, it's actually not that difficult of a concept, once you learn how it works. I've attached a pic to help better explain it.

Here's a good analogy that was used to describe it to me by a co-worker:

You have 4 cities and a single 2-lane road out of each city. With Ganged mode, all 4 2-lane roads combine into 1 8-lane road to get to one single MC, i.e. Single Channel Memory. Here, you're bound to run into some traffic issues.

With Unganged mode, you have the 4 2-lane roads combining into 2 4-lane roads, each going to its own MC, i.e. Dual Channel Memory.

Here's where it gets interesting though, because the new thing now is Quad Channel Memory, where each CPU Core has its own dedicated path to its own MC. There is a huge performance increase with this, especially on multi-threaded apps. I hope this helps everyone a little.


----------



## eclipseaudio4

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Darkvette* 
Contrary to popular belief, it's actually not that difficult of a concept, once you learn how it works. I've attached a pic to help better explain it.

Here's a good analogy that was used to describe it to me by a co-worker:

You have 4 cities and a single 2-lane road out of each city. With Ganged mode, all 4 2-lane roads combine into 1 8-lane road to get to one single MC, i.e. Single Channel Memory. Here, you're bound to run into some traffic issues.

With Unganged mode, you have the 4 2-lane roads combining into 2 4-lane roads, each going to its own MC, i.e. Dual Channel Memory.

Here's where it gets interesting though, because the new thing now is Quad Channel Memory, where each CPU Core has its own dedicated path to its own MC. There is a huge performance increase with this, especially on multi-threaded apps. I hope this helps everyone a little.

Great analogy!


----------



## GWARslave

I just built a computer last after several years. I got the M4N78 Asus board and some OCZ 1150mhz Reaper 4gb (2x2) memory. The board 2 different colored memory slots in the order Y-Y-R-R. In the same order they are labeled A1-B1-A2-B2. Currently it says unganged mode, with my memory being in A1 and B1. Do I put the sticks next to each other so they are in separate channels to enable dual channel? Or do they leapfrog so they are in the same channel. I noticed my computer takes about 10 seconds on the BIOS load screen before it goes to windows...


----------



## eclipseaudio4

IIRC same color on Asus boards for dual channel. but you need to go into the bios to pick either ganged or unganged.


----------



## Asus Mobile

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Darkvette* 
Contrary to popular belief, it's actually not that difficult of a concept, once you learn how it works. I've attached a pic to help better explain it.

Here's a good analogy that was used to describe it to me by a co-worker:

You have 4 cities and a single 2-lane road out of each city. With Ganged mode, all 4 2-lane roads combine into 1 8-lane road to get to one single MC, *i.e. Single Channel Memory. Here, you're bound to run into some traffic issues.*

With Unganged mode, you have the 4 2-lane roads combining into 2 4-lane roads, each going to its own MC, i.e. Dual Channel Memory.

Here's where it gets interesting though, because the new thing now is Quad Channel Memory, where each CPU Core has its own dedicated path to its own MC. There is a huge performance increase with this, especially on multi-threaded apps. I hope this helps everyone a little.

Overall good description but what is bold is wrong. It is not single channel. I understand your descriptive conceptual reason for using that. But since Dual Channel already is a defined term/function you cannot for simplicity and trying to use standard non technical terms just make up your own.

Single channel is very specific 64bit width, dual 128bit width, tri 192bit width, quad 256bit width and so on.

Quote:

Here, you're bound to run into some traffic issues.
This was about an 8 lane highway vs 2 4 lane highways. How an 8 lane would have obvious issues vs 2 4 lane highways? Both would have the same theoretical capacity to move cars/s. This is more critical of the analogy and comment. Not even about ganged or unganged.

If you want to use an analogy likely some thing like on a 8 lane highway any accident affects all traffic. On two 4 lane highways an accident on one has no slow down effect on the others. If probability is the equal then you have just reduced the traffic jam suffered by all 50%?


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Asus Mobile* 

If you want to use an analogy likely some thing like on a 8 lane highway any accident affects all traffic. On two 4 lane highways an accident on one has no slow down effect on the others. If probability is the equal then you have just reduced the traffic jam suffered by all 50%?

Not to delve into semantics, but the additional benefit to two (2) "4 lane highways vs. one (1) eight lane highway" is traffic flow. I have described the concept of ganged vs. unganged using the "roadway" analogy myself in another post in this forum.

The benefit really comes down to what was started to be described above, but not really made clear by the poster.

Ganged is a one way road, that switches directions as needed. Meaning that all 8 lanes, (using the desciption above) always travel in the same direction, and the road is capable of allowing 128 bits of (data) cars to pass from one end to the other during a processor clock cycle. Travel in one direction, must be stopped to allow travel in the other direction.

Unganged, uses the two - "4 lane highway approach" where you have 4 lanes traveling in each direction, each capable of allowing 64 bits of cars to move from one end to the other, or all 8 lanes travelling in the same direction, (as if they were ganged).

You don't need to shut down the entire 8 lane highway to allow just a handfull of cars (data) to go "east", when everything else wants to travel "west". You can shut down just 1/2 of the road as needed. 64 bits can still travel "west", while the information going "east" gets there too. That way, the "back-up" remains minimal in either direction, because you have never actually stopped travel in either direction... just slowed it down.

An importantant concept to remember, the architechture of the AMD x4, (or any of the AMD multi-core) processors do not dictate which cores use which of the 2 memory controllers, all cores have access to both controllers....

so I state again...

Unganged vs. ganged has *nothing* to do with number of cores in the processors...

*It is strictly the configuration setting for the memory controllers and their connection to the memory DIMMs.*

It is *not* the cores to the memory controllers, or the processor to anything. The processor should not even come into the conversation of Ganged vs. Unganged, other than to maybe state that the Memory Controllers are part of the CPU die, and that the CPU Cores wait in queue for access to the memory controller (one in Ganged, or two in unganged). Anything more just confuses the issue. The setting does not change what happens here, other than the cores having access to two potential memory controllers in unganged mode.

*DARKVETTE:* The pictures you posted is not actually correct for what the Ganged vs. Unganged setting does.

If you changed your cities from CPU cores to Memory DIMMS... then it would be correct.


----------



## TheDevilsWaffle

so if i'm running 3x2Gb of ram, then i'm not running properly for the settings of my system, am i?

would i be better off pulling one of the 2gb out while i'm waiting for my other stick?


----------



## eclipseaudio4

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TheDevilsWaffle* 
so if i'm running 3x2Gb of ram, then i'm not running properly for the settings of my system, am i?

would i be better off pulling one of the 2gb out while i'm waiting for my other stick?

Yes!


----------



## Cncrcmoto

Now are there any ideas to how it works with a tri-core?


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Cncrcmoto* 
Now are there any ideas to how it works with a tri-core?

Read my post above... nothing changes in a dual core, tri core, or quad core... The setting has nothing to do with the number of cores.


----------



## sevenhills

Ok, what about me.
I have a nice AMD tri core Black edition, and win 7 64 bit. Since only 64 bit versions of windows can see more than 4 gb of ram. and only Vista and over can use Hybrid Crossfire, combining my onboard grahics card with my discreet graphics card.
Ok I have
Gigabyte MA785GMT-UD2H -ATi hd 4200 VGA,Cfire,DDR3. mobo
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition AM3. Processor.
1Gb ATi Radeon HD 4650. discreet VGA Card
6Gb (3X2Gb) Tri Channel DDR3 1333Mhz. Memory

For this purpose I understand that each processor should have 2gb each to work with.
For the reason that I use After Effects CS4 which is specifically designed to utilise multiple cores for rendering.

Now what Im trying to figure is- is it better for rendering speeds if my ram is unganged, or if it is ganged?


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sevenhills* 
Ok I have
Gigabyte MA785GMT-UD2H -ATi hd 4200 VGA,Cfire,DDR3. mobo
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition AM3. Processor.
1Gb ATi Radeon HD 4650. discreet VGA Card
*6Gb (3X2Gb) Tri Channel DDR3 1333Mhz. Memory*

Actually, you still have dual channel memory, only the Intel "_i_" processors support tri channel memory. Adding a third RAM module dosen't give you tri channel memory. On your MOBO, it give you 2 gigs in one memory bank, and 4 gigs in the other bank.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sevenhills* 
For this purpose I understand that each processor should have 2gb each to work with.

I think you may be a little confused on how this works with CS4 programs.

The (processors as you call them) cores, don't work with the memory.. The memory controllers do... and you still only have two of them. Your confusing the ability to allocate memory space to the processor cores for their exclusive use in your CS4 Application, with dedecating a RAM module to a processor core. This is not how it works. CS4 programs don't allocate a DIMM, just a reserved memory size (1Gb, 2Gb) whatever you set it to in your Preferences. This reserved memory space can be on any DIMM module, or spread across multiple DIMMs. But to get there, the data still needs to pass through the memory controllers.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sevenhills* 
For the reason that I use After Effects CS4 which is specifically designed to utilise multiple cores for rendering.

Now what Im trying to figure is- is it better for rendering speeds if my ram is unganged, or if it is ganged?









For Adobe CS4 programs, Unganged/Ganged has a lot to do with how you have your CS4 Application configured. ie, How many cores you are actually using... have you left cores for other applications, are you rendering in the backround, or the foreground? How much memory have you allocated to each core, etc.

So your question does not have a simple answer.

And sorry for this sounding like a broken record... Cores have nothing to do with Ganged/Unganged.


----------



## Gill..

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sevenhills* 
Ok, what about me.
I have a nice AMD tri core Black edition, and win 7 64 bit. Since only 64 bit versions of windows can see more than 4 gb of ram. and only Vista and over can use Hybrid Crossfire, combining my onboard grahics card with my discreet graphics card.
Ok I have
Gigabyte MA785GMT-UD2H -ATi hd 4200 VGA,Cfire,DDR3. mobo
AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition AM3. Processor.
1Gb ATi Radeon HD 4650. discreet VGA Card
6Gb (3X2Gb) Tri Channel DDR3 1333Mhz. Memory

For this purpose I understand that each processor should have 2gb each to work with.
For the reason that I use After Effects CS4 which is specifically designed to utilise multiple cores for rendering.

Now what Im trying to figure is- is it better for rendering speeds if my ram is unganged, or if it is ganged?









Also don't want to harp - but you can't use that 4670 for Hybrid crossfire either - see ATI's compatibility chart - 3870 is the highest you can go - it's still a joke..maybe new chipsets and 5800 generation series will have better compatibility.

Don't want to hijack, so I'll leave it there..point is - take everything people are telling you to go and learn more...


----------



## sevenhills

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! all my birthday money!!!!!! I thought I had done all the research. lol at my naivety.
Well I read the 4670 compatibility on a 3d guru.com review of the Mobo, but ill take a look at what you put forward.
as for the application it is a box tick to use multiple processors on rendering in the 'preferences'.
your 4:2 ram thing would explain why i have 6 ram installed on the my computer section, but only 4.333 something usable in a read out somewhere else. I assumed it was because a processor was using the rest to run win 7.

Ok.
as far as I'm aware I have no control over the way the cores are controlled and used other than that box check in Premiere.
I was assuming that unless a program has the coding to do so, its data could only be processed by one core. so multiple apps can have a core each rather than sharing thier data processing with other apps, slowing down programs individual response.

Seriously. I need schooling.


----------



## Gill..

ATI Hybrid crossfire:
http://www.amd.com/us/products/techn...-graphics.aspx

Yup, I was right - although laptops have it better!


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sevenhills* 
as far as I'm aware I have no control over the way the cores are controlled and used other than that box check in Premiere.
I was assuming that unless a program has the coding to do so, its data could only be processed by one core. so multiple apps can have a core each rather than sharing thier data processing with other apps, slowing down programs individual response.

You are almost correct here, when discussing CS4 Programs. But if you look at the preferences in the individual programs, you will see that you have more control than you think. In After Affects, make sure you have the most recent update to see all the options available in the preferences.

After Effects CS4 does have the ability to take exclusive control of selective cores of your processor. But there is always one core that it cannot take control of. One core is always reserved for your OS, so After affects can take control of 2 cores of your X3 processor, and force all other programs... OS. AV, etc., to run on only one core.

My sugestion to you, rather than worring whether to run in ganged or unganged mode would be to invest in that extra 2 Gig DIMM and fill your memory slots, for a total of 8 Gigs.

Adobe Premier is a memory hog... and given what it does, needs to be.

Consider a typical workflow in CS4 Production, where at any given time you might be performing several tasks in parallel:

Compositing in After Effects
Editing HD content in Adobe Premiere Pro
Using compositions created with After Effects in Adobe Premiere Pro timeline using a Dynamic Link
Encoding a sequence from Adobe Premiere Pro in the background with Adobe Media Encoder

These four concurrent activities initiate approximately 8 processes, each of which could use about 4 Gigs of memory each. So a large amounts of memory is key to these programs productivity. Less memory, and you wait for data to page into, or back in from your Hard disk, which takes time. A lot of time, by comparison to data stored in RAM.

With more memory available for frame caching, played content is available in the cache longer, or from a faster DIMM module, rather than the HDD as it gets swapped out for more recently played frames. This translates into better editing interactivity, particularly for detail work on high-resolution content or when editing complex projects.

And to answer your original question, if you multi-task your CS4 programs, you would be better off unganged so that you can have data traveling in both directions from Memory Controller to Memory on each processor clock cycle.

And as you have indicated... Adobe's CS4 programs are very complex... Go out and Learn their capabilities... you may actually be suprised at what a powerfull suite of programs you own.


----------



## pt4n

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Darkvette* 
I've seen a lot floating around the internet about Ganged and Unganged modes for PC RAM. I don't think I'm the only one that has questions about it, but being that info on it is scarce, I thought I would start a thread so that others could post info about it (Unfortunately I don't know a whole lot about it, so that's another reason too







)

What is Ganged Mode?

What is Unganged Mode?

Which Mode is Better?

What exactly does it do?

Hi,

I own a phenom 9950 cpu matched with a Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H matx motherboard and 2 x 2Gb Corsair XMS 800MHz Ram.

My bios indicates 64bit unganged.

A Q and A from Gigabytes Website under the above mother board.

Q: _I have installed Phenom CPU and memory modules according to the Dual Channel Memory Configuration table in user's manual, but system shows "unganged mode, 64-bit" during POST. How do I enable 128bit dual memory channel?
_

A: _Phenom CPU have two individual memory controllers (DCTs), each one of them controls single memory channel (64 bit). These two DCTs can work simultaneously when memory modules are installed on different memory channels. It is called "unganged mode".

You can switch to "ganged mode, 128bit" when you are using two or four of the same memory modules. Please kindly enter BIOS setup program, to press CTRL+F1 key to enable advanced BIOS setup features then enter "MB Intelligent Tweaker(M.I.T.)\\ DRAM Configuration", to set the "DCTs Mode" as "Ganged"._

http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Support/M...ProductID=2814

I guess ganged mode is better as it works off 128bit.

Hope this helps.


----------



## eclipseaudio4

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pt4n* 

I guess ganged mode is better as it works off 128bit.

Hope this helps.

They are both technically 128bit as 2 X 64bit = 128 bit.


----------



## toyz72

will someone clear this up.mine is 720x3 unlocked to x4.my board memory 1,2 yellow then 3,4 black.my mb book said to run in same color slots.so does this mean i should be running ganged?because its set to auto and running unganged.


----------



## jimibgood

Quote:


Originally Posted by *danewfie* 
It is amd's version of Nvidia's Locked vs unlocked architecture.

basically allowing you to use your ram in dual channel vs single channel.

Ganged = dual channel mode for ram. All cores get access to 100% of the ram.

unganged = single channel. Each core gets access to a stick of ram.

In theory, the unganged mode is better as each core will get access to data quicker. In theory.

Some limitations apply... and *i dont know muchelse.*

Edit: sorry, it also alows you to control the clocks indipendantly from eachother.

























This is wrong. Who told you this???? Ganged and unganged have absolutely nothing to do with single and dual channel.


----------



## toyz72

Quote:


Originally Posted by *toyz72* 
will someone clear this up.mine is 720x3 unlocked to x4.my board memory 1,2 yellow then 3,4 black.my mb book said to run in same color slots.so does this mean i should be running ganged?because its set to auto and running unganged.

needs an answer plz!


----------



## H-man

You need to set it in the bios manually.


----------



## jimibgood

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Idiot* 
You need to set it in the bios manually.

No like he said auto makes it unganged. Just leave it on auto. Unganged give much better performance thatn ganged.


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *toyz72* 
will someone clear this up.mine is 720x3 unlocked to x4.my board memory 1,2 yellow then 3,4 black.my mb book said to run in same color slots.so does this mean i should be running ganged?because its set to auto and running unganged.

In this senario, you should be running in Ganged mode. Leaving one bank of memory unpopulated dosen't give one of the memory controllers anything to work with, therefore you basically get one 64bit lane to memory, and waste the other.

As I had mentioned in my previous posts, besides unganging the memory controllers, the bios also sets access to memory DIMM slots (or Banks of memory) when you change the setting to Unganged.

I am very suprised that your Bios does not notice that you have an unpopulated Memory Bank in the "Auto" setting.

I finally found what I was looking for on this topic, I assume I couldn't find it originally, since it was re-released on Sept 9, 2009.

I had read this and other tech documents on AMD's website in the past. This is a copy of the AMD BIOS developers specification. You don't need to read the whole thing, but ganged vs. unganged is specifically described in section 2.8, and the internal doc link to "ganged vs. unganged considerations".

AMD Bios and Kernal development guide


----------



## Darkvette

Alright guys, this link explains it pretty well. http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=166222

Ganged Mode is 1x128bit Dual Channel
Unganged is 2x64bit Dual Channel

Unless I'm mistaken, Single channel usually only applies when you're running one stick of RAM.


----------



## Yukss

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/am...ganged-p2.html


----------



## Ellis456

Quote:

we can't state an obvious advantage of either mode.
I just use unganged with 4 sticks of ram, until better benchmarks come out just use either, but I cant see a difference.


----------



## -=*HERO*=-

went to delete this didnt kno how, sry for the blank msg


----------



## rapid1

This has actually perplexed me to some sense as well. My 790FX-GD70 Bios says I am running unganged, but cpu-z, and everything else utility wise I have used says I am running in dual channel mode. I have 2 sticks of 2 Gigabytes of Mushkin Blackline enhanced ddr3 1600 running at 7,7,7,20 @1600. I did have to up my voltage slightly to accomplish these settings with stability. Either way the ganged unganged to me seems to matter more in your choice of ram than anything. I also know that memory channel 1 and 2 should be separate channels as generally 1 and 3 is one channel and 2 and 4 would be the other.


----------



## Gen

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rapid1* 
This has actually perplexed me to some sense as well. My 790FX-GD70 Bios says I am running unganged, but cpu-z, and everything else utility wise I have used says I am running in dual channel mode. I have 2 sticks of 2 Gigabytes of Mushkin Blackline enhanced ddr3 1600 running at 7,7,7,20 @1600. I did have to up my voltage slightly to accomplish these settings with stability. Either way the ganged unganged to me seems to matter more in your choice of ram than anything. I also know that memory channel 1 and 2 should be separate channels as generally 1 and 3 is one channel and 2 and 4 would be the other.

Ganged and unganged both are dual channel. I posted a couple links here that should answer your questions.


----------



## hobosrock696

Easy explanation K10/10.5 has 2 IMCs and ganged locks them to work together while unganged "unlocks" them and allows them to work completely seperate of each other. Therefore in theory unganged is better but may be slightly more unstable for an OC


----------



## bulletbeast

I've scoured this post over, a whole lot of info, and helped me a lot. I get it that AMD has 2 memory controlers, and with ganged they run together, unganged still running dual channel they run seperate. My situation is this...
i have a Gigabyte ma770 ud3, KUMA 7750, 3x1gb of corsair running unganged at 1066. Would i be better off with the 2x1gb?
Otherwise if I run ganged, I only achieve 800...


----------



## asumtnman

Still haven't answered my question. 2x2gb.... go in MoBo side x side or leapfrog? I have 4 slots, 2 red and 2 yellow.


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *asumtnman* 
Still haven't answered my question. 2x2gb.... go in MoBo side x side or leapfrog? I have 4 slots, 2 red and 2 yellow.

In general, dual channel should be activated automatically as long as you have memory in the proper slots. You'll need to check for the exact configuration your motherboard needs.

Usually you would use different colored slots so that the DIMMs are on different memory banks.


----------



## tlxxxsracer

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eclipseaudio4* 
markg1106 are you using a 64 bit OS?

In case no one has posted some benches showing the difference. These were done with identical settings other than ganged vs Unganged.
Ganged









Unganged









I have been told that multi-thread apps will show an even bigger difference.

This post is wrong. you have Ganged above the pic with the unganged results..
I cant find the option in my BIOS to choose ganged or unganged. So then placing the RAM sticks in 3,4 make it unganged and 1,3 ganged?


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tlxxxsracer* 
This post is wrong. you have Ganged above the pic with the unganged results..
I cant find the option in my BIOS to choose ganged or unganged. So then placing the RAM sticks in 3,4 make it unganged and 1,3 ganged?

No, using two DIMM slots of the same color just signifies that the RAM should run in Dual Channel mode.

The Ganged or Unganged mode tells the Memory Controllers on your CPU to either act as a single 128bit controller (the two controllers are "ganged" together), or to opperate as two independant 64bit controllers, ("unganged")

The setting for Ganged/Unganged is usually in the same place as the "manual" memory configuration section of your BIOS, and may just be hidden due to a DRAM setting that is set to "Auto".


----------



## tlxxxsracer

The ganged setting was under my chipset-North bridge settings


----------



## sublime-1

Guys, you should really go back and read the 1st 3 pages of this thread.

It's all laid out pretty well.

Ganged - 1 x 128-bit path for memory
advantage for intensive, single threaded memory hawgs
*comp/decomp
*real time capture / recording of media
*lowest latency for single threaded, memory intensive apps.

unganged 2 x 64-bit path for memory
*multi-tasked, SMP aware apps
*several simulataneous memory reads and writes
*lowest latency for multi-tasking

As for dual channel vs. single channel.

Some mobo's have the slots arranged odd/even, and some have them Bank1 = Channel 1 and Bank2 = Channel 2.

For instance, on my MSI 790GX-G65, the 4 slots are ch1.ch1 ch2.ch2

In order to run "dual channeled" I have to put either 2 sticks in Ch1 or 2 stick in Ch.2..Otherwise, if I go every other slot, I end up Single Channel Mode, per CPU-ID.

Channel Operation Mode of the RAM and Ganged vs. Unganged are two different topics, and should not be confused with one another.

HTH


----------



## Mastiffman

YES! This is Correct! I find it funny how something "gets out" and sounds easy to understand and spreads like WILD FIRE, correct or not!

TTBOMK, there are few few if any motherboards at all that can switch from Dual Channel Mode to Single Channel Mode by the switch of BIOS setting.

Typically, you have to literally CHange the Physical Configuration of the Dimms in the Dimm Slots on the motherboard to yield a single channel memory operation mode!

Wasn't it you, Sublime, that started this thread? Is there any way that you can Change the OP to reflect in big letters that tell the different between Ganged and Unganged?


----------



## AwfulSmokey

Who needs a quad







Write is faster and read is slower. I have 2 sticks of 1GB.

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e6...mokey/Test.jpg

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e6...okey/Test2.jpg


----------



## Mastiffman

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AwfulSmokey* 
Who needs a quad







Write is faster and read is slower. I have 2 sticks of 1GB.

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e6...mokey/Test.jpg

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e6...okey/Test2.jpg

Huh?


----------



## AwfulSmokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mastiffman* 
Huh?

read the benchmarks?? OPEN yo eyes! lol unganged vs ganged. Me(unganged) beat a BIGGER quad(ganged)


----------



## Indosia

I get lower latency and higher reads with *GANGED*
Low latency is the most important thing if you play online games so im thinking ganged is best. But if amd says unganged is better I would think they know best.
I honestly dont know which one to go with and it bugs me.
I have a 2 gig kit so 2 dimms populated with identicle ram sticks.
I know one day i had it set to ganged and was kickin ass at street fighter 4.


----------



## PROBN4LYFE

So with 2 sticks of RAM...ganged would be better
With 3 or more sticks....unganged would be better?


----------



## contain

Alright let me clear this up.

Ganged is better for single threaded code as the 2 64 bit paths are merged into one 128 bit.

Unganged is better for multi threaded code as it uses 2 seperate 64 bit paths.

HOWEVER, the difference between then is so small that it could only possibly affect you by a couple of MB on your memory bandwidth. The difference is hardly seen or able to see in benchmarks.

If you were to ask any major brand of Memory they could explain it to you. Or you could ask AMD.

Ganged mode however I have seen is useful when your memory is clocked really high.


----------



## Prommy

Hey contain.ive just done my system up to a THUBAN...what sort of temps are you running at those specs ?


----------



## Dirtyworks

I havent read much of this thread, but I thought it'd be interesting to post these:
4 sticks Ganged:








4 sticks Unganged:









It may be different with only 2 sticks, but when all 4 slots are occupied I saw a significant bandwidth increase in Ganged mode.


----------



## angeluszero

I have a Dual channel motherboard...MSI 790FX-GD70 AM3 and use 6GB of memory Corsair DD3 MSI 790FX-GD70 AM3(3 sticks) Right now it's in unganged mode 64bit by default.... could i set it to ganged or is unganged what i want to be at with 6GB? My cpu is Phenom II 955 X-4 3.2GHZ and stock speed and memory i set it to 1600MHZ using the bios options.


----------



## hesho

@ Dirtyworks

hmmm.. that's interesting.... although.. i don't know if i really want test for stability.. again...

did u have other programs to test? I don't really know much about memory benchmarks besides maxxmem and everest.


----------



## coonmanx

This is from a different forum but I believe that it is correct.

From what I heard ganged gives you a single 128 bit channel while unganged gives you a dual 64 bit channels.And that ganged is better for single threaded apps and unganged for multithreaded.

So if your CPU has two IMCs they can either operate as a single 128 bit stream or two 64 bit streams.


----------



## Dirtyworks

I can download and test again with Everest :]
EDIT:
Tested again with Everest:















Write/Copy speeds & latency differences were almost negligible. Read speeds increased a fair bit in ganged, though.
Mind you, for people who haven't read my other post: This is with all 4 memory slots occupied. Its likely very different if you're just using 2.


----------



## hesho

i wonder now... sigh.. maybe i'll go test this out too now...

hmm.. i changed it and ran maxxmem and...

i lost about 30% in my copy speed, but gained about 10% in read speed. Everything else was within 1% so they r a toss up.


----------



## nagle3092

Ok so I have been following this thread for a little bit and I got some questions. So I got the difference between ganged and unganged but I'm wondering what the extra cores would be doing. For example if you have 2 sticks running in unganged would the 2 extra cores allocate themselves to whichever sticks have the most work load, or would they just be assigned 2 cores per stick? The same goes with the hexacores, say Im running 4 sticks of ram in unganged would the 2 extra cores dynamically allocate themselves where they are needed or would they just be assigned to certain sticks? Any info would be helpful, thanks.


----------



## coonmanx

I think that it is probably wrong to think of it as cores "assigning themselves" to memory sticks. It really is just a matter of the configuration of the memory bus as 2 64 bit busses or a single 128 bit bus. I'm not exactly sure how the cores take advantage of that configuration. But if you run a single threaded app it will probably run better in ganged while the multi-threaded app should run better in unganged. Although that tends to be in synthetic benchmarks and the difference may be negligible.


----------



## MrPeregrine

nagle, it seems you haven't really "followed" this thread. If you did, you wouldn't be asking this question. In particular, I found the abundant info posted by xandypx really helpful. Although one of his posts confused me a bit. My question is about running 6GB (3 sticks) of ram in dual channel, unganged. Can someone that actually understands this concept (like xandypx) explain a little more on that?
The way I understand it, 2GB are in bank1 and 4GB in bank2, making it dual channel. Are there any considerations with mismatched memory size in each channel? Does performance of ganged vs unganged change in respect to having an unequal amount of memory per bank? Are there any considerations in respect to the actual CPU?

The reason I'm asking is because I have the following specs, and I've had some CPU problems in relation to memory speed.

Gigabyte GA-MA790GPT-UD3H
Chipset: AMD 790GX
Southbridge: ATI SB750
IGP: Radeon HD 3300 @ 700MHz Core Clock (D-Sub to Monitor 2)
BIOS: v.F3

Phenom II X2 555 BE "Callisto" AM3 3.2GHz HDZ555WFK2DGM
OPN: HDZ555WFGMBOX
unlocked by ACC: Phenom II X4 B55 BE "Denab"

Corsair XMS3 6GB (3x2GB) DDR3-1600 (PC3-12800) CL8 Memory Kit
TR3X6G1600C8 (CM3X2G1600C8 x3)
8-8-8-24-41-2T (CL-tRCD-tRP-tRAS-tRC-CR) @ 1.65v

Sapphire 100283-3L GDDR5 1GB 128-bit
Radeon HD 5770 (RV840 "Juniper") PCI-E 2.0 x16; DirectX 11
Core Clock: 850MHz; Mem.Clock: 4800MHz
DVI-to-VGA to Monitor 1; HDMI to Samsung LCD TV

PSU: OCZ ModXStream Pro
700W, Active PFC, Modular, 135mm fan

Windows 7 Ultimate x64

This memory runs in dual channel, unganged, and passes memtest86+ with flying colors. However, the CPU is throwing off calculation test errors on each core. If I lower the memory speed to 667MHz (DDR3-1333) with: 9-9-9-24-34-1T (CL-tRCD-tRP-tRAS-tRC-CR) @ 1.65v then the CPU is no longer having any problems. I spoke to AMD support, and they weren't really concerned about the mismatched size of memory per each bank, but they said they officially don't support anything higher than DDR3-1333. But I know people are running Phenoms at DDR3-1600 (or at least I heard from other forums) without errors. SO why am I getting them?


----------



## Baskt_Case

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MrPeregrine* 
My question is about running 6GB (3 sticks) of ram in dual channel, unganged.

This may help you and/or lend insight. The manual for my Asus motherboard states the following, and I quote in entirety...

"You may install varying memory sizes in Channel A and Channel B. The system maps the total size of the lower-sized channel for the dual-channel configuration. Any excess memory from the higher-sized channel is then mapped for single-channel operation."


----------



## MrPeregrine

that helps, thank you, so it sounds like 4GB of my mem is running in dual channel, and 2GB in single... interesting. Would that be a cause for the CPU having problems working with the memory at 800MHz ? And how does ganged vs unganged handle the cooperation of dual and single channel memory?


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MrPeregrine* 
that helps, thank you, so it sounds like 4GB of my mem is running in dual channel, and 2GB in single... interesting. Would that be a cause for the CPU having problems working with the memory at 800MHz ? And how does ganged vs unganged handle the cooperation of dual and single channel memory?


OK TLDR; I'll say it first... I actually want to say Too Long didn't Write.

Let's try to answer the easy part. Ganged vs. Unganged has no trouble handling the memory space allocated as dual vs. single channel operation.

Quick explanation of Dual vs. Single Channel is in order. Dual Channel operation of Memory means that a Memory Controller can access Memory twice during a Processor Clock Cycle. This is done basically because the BIOS after reading the memory in your system told the CPU/IMC's that 4GB of memory could be mapped for Dual Channel Access, and two parallel channels to that memory are created to be used by the DCTs. The Memory controllers use one of these channels during the "Rise" of the Processor Cycle, and the other during the "Fall", effectively doubling the bandwidth of the Memory (533/667 memory effectively running 1066/1333). The remaining 2GB of memory is set up with a single channel, and a memory operation can only happen once during a clock cycle. Even though the memory "effectively" is running at 1066/1333, the memory is still only 533/667. It is the operation of the memory controller, and the Mobo that allows the memory to "appear" faster (two memory operations in Dual Channel vs. one in Single Channel per Processor Clock), and the memory controller doesn't care if it performs one or two operations. 1333 memory is really 667memory, and is only 1333 due to its capability to run "Dual Data Rate' (DDR).

Now the harder part, as you are asking a question that is very technical, and not easy to explain in "laymen" terms. So for those with an in-depth technical background, some detail is going to be left out.

Using 1333 memory in my example: during POST, the BIOS of a Motherboard sets up the memory channels with the CPU/Memory, based on the settings programmed on the CPU/IMCs, and the SPD info on the DIMMs, and then tests these settings. Your AMD CPU tells the BIOS that it has a memory controller that can operate at a maximum of 667Mhz. The BIOS looks at your Memory configuration, JDEC information, and then sees bank 0 populated with 2x2GB 1333mhz DIMMs, and Bank 1 populated with 1x2GB 1333mhz DIMM and sets up dual channel (2-667mhz "lanes") for the 1st 4GB of RAM, and a single 667mhz lane for the remaining 2GB.

Now, here is where the problem occurs. The BIOS needs to set ODT (On Die Terminations), (and since you have DDR3), write leveling information, for the processor and the DIMMs.

You have a Mobo with 4 DIMM slots, so it goes like this.

For Bank 0 with both slots populated, the BIOS would like to set Processor ODT/DIMM ODT(Rtt_Nom)/DIMM Dynamic ODT (Rtt_Wr) as 60ohms/30ohms/120ohms, and a write leveling ODT Pattern for Bank 0 (because of the two DIMMs).

When the BIOS looks at Bank 1 with only one slot populated, optimum settings of 60/60/Disabled, and no write leveling whould be the prefference.

So what does the BIOS actually set?... There can be only one setting, so only your BIOS programmer would know for sure, but either way, one of the two Memory controllers is not going to be happy. These ODT settings (in short) basically determine how/when information is written/read, to/from a DIMM.

The BIOS then re-runs the same tests at the "target" settings (the ones you have actually set in your BIOS, regardless of what the CPU/Memory has "told" the BIOS they are capable of.)
Since manual changes in BIOS settings take precedence, these settings are then overwritten in the CPU's instructions for the current session, and combined with the information the BIOS determined was common in the first test. These settings are then tested again, and if the settings pass, POST continues.

Having two slots of a memory bank populated, puts additional strain on the Memory Controller by comparison to having only one slot populated. Although this mis-match of memory population is supported in AMD Processors (as well as Intel), this configuration places additional, significant strain on your memory controller. Often, much of this can be overcome through tweaks of the BIOS settings.

This doesn't completely explain your CPU errors with the memory at 1600, but I believe it may be partially responsible. I would also tend to believe that the errors may be due in part to your unlocked cores. Only about 70% of the PII X2s actually have just the cores locked, for the sake of locking them. The other 30% actually have problems on the Die itself, which is how they ended up as X2s in the first place. Maybe your CPU falls into this category? Although within these 30%, sometimes if a core can actually be unlocked, it takes a bunch of tweaking just to get the core (or cores) to remain stable, even at stock settings. Add to that, tweaking to get a memory controller to run at a speed higher than native, and all kinds of things can happen, (usually not good things).

Someone else may be able to help you get your memory stable at 1600, but I would suggest that you try it running just the two cores, to see if the CPU errors disappear.


----------



## MrPeregrine

THANK YOU !!!
Yes, this does explain a lot. I knew i could count on xandy







You got repped.
I failed to mention, but I actually did run tests of the CPU with ACC disabled (with OEM firmware in the original x2 config only) and it was also creating errors (here is another thread I have on this). Right now, at 667MHz only core #3 is showing calculation test errors, so it's safe to assume it was locked for a reason. But it's nowhere as bad as when I had it with 800MHz. During normal use, the PC only froze twice so far, but it hasn't BSOD'd at all and no file corruptions. Before, at 800MHz it was really bad.
So all in all, sounds like I need to get the 4th matching mem stick and see what happens then. Or I could just take 1 stick out and test the performance at 800MHz.

Does ganged/unganged settings change anything in respect to setting the ODT and leveling info for the CPU and DIMMs?


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MrPeregrine* 
So all in all, sounds like I need to get the 4th matching mem stick and see what happens then. Or I could just take 1 stick out and test the performance at 800MHz.

Before buying a 4th stick, try with just 2. As mentioned above, all slots populated in itself creates additional "stress" on the Memory controller, so removing the 1 extra stick will allow you to test with the least amount of effort required of the Controller.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MrPeregrine* 
Does ganged/unganged settings change anything in respect to setting the ODT and leveling info for the CPU and DIMMs?

No, the setting doesn't change anything. Just to clarify, write leveling for DDR3 is only set when more than one DIMM is installed in a memory Bank. This ensures that both sticks are written to equally, and that data is aligned and reaches the DIMMs and Controllers utilizing the dual channels at the same time.


----------



## MrPeregrine

Thank you


----------



## p30n

I am having a hard time seeing any performance gains or losses from running unganged/ganged mode on my setup, I believe this has something to do with me running 4 sticks of ram with a total of 8Gb....correct me if I'm wrong?

Also, can someone hint to me why I cannot run my 4x2Gb of RAM @ 1333Mhz?
Even with stock timings and voltage it BSODs when I stress the system with Prime95.
As you can see I'm running 8-8-8-22 timings on 100Mhz lower than stock frequency and at this setting everything is 12h-stress-test-stable.
What could be the problem here?

Im trying to fine tune my system to get the most performance out of it for allround usage and if someone here have any ideas on what I could change, please don't hesitate to tell me!









Thank you all in advance and thanks for a great thread and forum!








(I had an account years back but it got lost somehow, and now I'm finally back)

..::can I say::..


----------



## hinton4

Keep in mind that the AMD CPU has 2 Memory controlers weather it is Dual Core that supports DDR2 or a quad core CPU or a 6 Core CPU, the number of memory controlers in the cpu is not paired to the number of processors that the CPU has. After that being said, the following applies:

If your processor only supports single channel memory or if you are only running single channel memory, then you must run the memory in
*Ganged Mode* Ganged mode pairs the memory togeather and interleaves memory writes and reads.

If you are running a CPU, motherboard and memory and have DDR2 (dual channel) or DDR3 (triple channel) memory installed then you want to run the memory in *Unganged mode* for best performance, because each memory controller gets its own channel and dosent have to fight with another memory controller to interleave the memory reads and writes.

Adding more memory will only give you the sole benifit of more memory, nothing more, it is not necessary.

And if you have triple channel memory with a cpu and motherboard that supports triple channel memory that has 3 memory controlers in the cpu,
you allready have the memory installed for each memory controler and each memory channel. So once again, Adding more memory will only give you the sole benifit of more memory, nothing more, it is not necessary.

Only if you have a very small amount of memory installed should you switch from *Unganged Mode* back to *Ganged Moded* due to the risk of one memory controller filling up the memory bank of the memory channel it controls and forceing virtual memory writes and reads from your hard drive, causeing the system to now run slower as a result of the hard disk being used for memory storage and retrival rather then the RAM.


----------



## Nephiruss

Before i start... hello guys, goodnight

Im new here and i really need your help with something... sooo lets begin with this:



This is a pic of my dxdiag on win 7 64 that i run just right now...

i have been to tremendous effort to assembly this machine... have walked long miles and costed me like pretty much ( im from brazil... everything is far way far worse to buy here... like 200% worse then for you guys in usa that can probably buy this for what? 400 dollars?? or less?? well took me almost like 2k in brazilian currency)

But my problem is the following: even with 16 gb ram memory ddr3 running at 1333... my pc seems a bit slow... not slow like OMG THATS FREAKY SLOW... but slow like... " i didnt expect a 16gb ram machine to run like a 4gb one kinda of slow"

Is there anything i can do to make it run faster the way a 16gb ram pc should be? ( by that i mean running fast like a rocket.... since that IS the general idea when you pay that kind of ammount to put 16gb ram)

So please help me guys ^^


----------



## Khmor

In theory 16 isen't faster than 4. It will only make a difference if you need that ammount of memory with very RAM demmanding application.


----------



## aesthetics1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nephiruss*
> 
> Before i start... hello guys, goodnight
> Im new here and i really need your help with something... sooo lets begin with this:
> 
> This is a pic of my dxdiag on win 7 64 that i run just right now...
> i have been to tremendous effort to assembly this machine... have walked long miles and costed me like pretty much ( im from brazil... everything is far way far worse to buy here... like 200% worse then for you guys in usa that can probably buy this for what? 400 dollars?? or less?? well took me almost like 2k in brazilian currency)
> But my problem is the following: even with 16 gb ram memory ddr3 running at 1333... my pc seems a bit slow... not slow like OMG THATS FREAKY SLOW... but slow like... " i didnt expect a 16gb ram machine to run like a 4gb one kinda of slow"
> Is there anything i can do to make it run faster the way a 16gb ram pc should be? ( by that i mean running fast like a rocket.... since that IS the general idea when you pay that kind of ammount to put 16gb ram)
> So please help me guys ^^


More RAM does not equal more speed. You can make it run faster by upgrading your other core components - namely CPU/Motherboard, and possibly an SSD.


----------



## xandypx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aesthetics1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Nephiruss*
> 
> Before i start... hello guys, goodnight
> Im new here and i really need your help with something... sooo lets begin with this:
> 
> This is a pic of my dxdiag on win 7 64 that i run just right now...
> i have been to tremendous effort to assembly this machine... have walked long miles and costed me like pretty much ( im from brazil... everything is far way far worse to buy here... like 200% worse then for you guys in usa that can probably buy this for what? 400 dollars?? or less?? well took me almost like 2k in brazilian currency)
> But my problem is the following: even with 16 gb ram memory ddr3 running at 1333... my pc seems a bit slow... not slow like OMG THATS FREAKY SLOW... but slow like... " i didnt expect a 16gb ram machine to run like a 4gb one kinda of slow"
> Is there anything i can do to make it run faster the way a 16gb ram pc should be? ( by that i mean running fast like a rocket.... since that IS the general idea when you pay that kind of ammount to put 16gb ram)
> So please help me guys ^^
> 
> 
> 
> More RAM does not equal more speed. You can make it run faster by upgrading your other core components - namely CPU/Motherboard, and possibly an SSD.
Click to expand...

He's got an 1100T. it shouldn't be real slow. I mean it's not SB fast, but still a really good CPU.

And BTW, whoever did it. Nice Necro. this was the first thread I ever posted in after joining OCN.

@Nephiruss, post a new thread in the AMD CPU section. You will get more responses on how to speed up your system there, than you will get replys here.


----------



## Nephiruss

Hi, thanks for the quick answer.

But i am already using the highest end cpu known to us here... the amd phenom IIX6 1100-T Black Edition.

There is no higher for us yet... and of course the mobo can support it since i bought from the same place stating that i wanted to put 16gb on the mobo and that i needed it to use a six-core cpu... hence the guy named this mobo for me and i brought from him.

Honestly i cant think of anything more that i can do.


----------



## Nephiruss

thx xandy... will copy this thread there for the cpu section


----------



## bobcarrizal

NAH!! My 1100T Was Fine


----------



## PlayKitten

doesn't the system use a sort of database that it searches to find data stored in ram? 4GB, 8GB, even 16GB (like my system) shouldn't make much of a difference, since the system would just search the one database like file for the information it needs?


----------



## peaceful1

witch one has a higher bandwidth ?
my mobo : asrock 890 etreme 3
ram 4*2 GB 1333 kingmax
cpu: 1075T

I'm looking for the highest bandwidth for my ram


----------



## Schmuckley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peaceful1*
> 
> witch one has a higher bandwidth ?
> my mobo : asrock 890 etreme 3
> ram 4*2 GB 1333 kingmax
> cpu: 1075T
> I'm looking for the highest bandwidth for my ram


You should be looking for a board with more power phases..and higher bandwidth RAM.


----------



## peaceful1

I agree but my question is in unganged mode will the two dual ram bandwidth rejoin ?
will it increase to 1333*4 or the bandwidth will stand as 1333*2 in the unganded mode?


----------



## guard41

Hello and Merry Christmas. I have a Gigabyte . GA-970A-D3 motherboard with a AMD Phenom II X4 945
Deneb 45nm Technology CPU and 16.0 GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 805MHz (11-11-11-28) 4 sticks of 4 gig ram in unganged mode!

My old Asus M5A78L-M/USB3 AMD Socket AM3+ 8 Channel HD Audio mATX Motherboard, same as above cpu, with 2 sticks of 4 gig ram, totaling 8 gig was much faster than the above gigabyte set up.

I think if you run programs like 64 bit solid works or cad then you will benefit from the unganged mode as it will access all the 16 gig but other wise even on a 64 bit operating system it doesn't matter.

Fast 8 gig ram memory and a hard drive with as much cache as possible is better.


----------



## PlayKitten

merry Christmas to you too







I think the reason your 16gb setup seemed slow may be down to the timings (11-11-11-28). overclocked system? I would try lower ram clock speed with tighter timings if thats what it takes for stability?

I use corsair vengeance ddr3 1600mhz with the stock speed and timings (9-9-9-24) along with my phenom x4 965be. but the phenoms are only supposed to support ddr3 1333, which might explain why your timings are so high?


----------



## Fear of Oneself

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OpticWaves*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Darkvette*
> 
> 
> _It will work with only 2. I was running 2 stix of Crucial Ballistix with a 9850BE before one of the stix went up on me. But, yes - It will work with only 2 sticks. 4 work better though, especially if it's 4x2GB - 8GB???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> I've heard from a few people that having 8G of ram will result in slower performance, although there is more ram? Is this true?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *IcedEarth*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *OpticWaves*
> 
> 
> _I've heard from a few people that having 8G of ram will result in slower performance, although there is more ram? Is this true?_
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if this has been proven or if it is just a theory.
> 
> The reason people will give you is because it will take longer for the pc to search 8gb of RAM compared to 4GB.
> 
> Whether it holds any truth or not is another matter


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SgtHawker*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *OpticWaves*
> 
> 
> _I've heard from a few people that having 8G of ram will result in slower performance, although there is more ram? Is this true?_
> 
> 
> One thing I have heard is that 4 sticks of memory tax the bus and power of the controller, effectively slowing down the memory. Increasing the memory voltage in BIOS can possibly prevent this slowdown, allowing the 4 sticks of memory to run at the fastest settings they are capable of. Matched memory should help this issue, that is why you are seeing 4 matched memory sticks in kits now, so they all run the same.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkvette*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *OpticWaves*
> 
> 
> _I've heard from a few people that having 8G of ram will result in slower performance, although there is more ram? Is this true?_
> 
> 
> It can. I've heard that as well, especially with Vista. Microsoft actually has a patch out for users running more than 4GB of RAM in Vista. Eventually I'd like to test the theory, but $$ are short right now.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BrightSide*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *OpticWaves*
> 
> 
> _I've heard from a few people that having 8G of ram will result in slower performance, although there is more ram? Is this true?_
> 
> 
> Having 8GB of RAM wouldnt result in slower performance, but having 4 sticks instead of 2 would, if your using 1066 Mhz sticks at least. The CPU can only handle 1 stick of 1066 Mhz per channel, giving a maksimum of 2 sticks. If you add more than that, the memory will be slowed down to 800 Mhz to maintain stability.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xeeki*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *BrightSide*
> 
> 
> _Having 8GB of RAM wouldnt result in slower performance, but having 4 sticks instead of 2 would, if your using 1066 Mhz sticks at least. The CPU can only handle 1 stick of 1066 Mhz per channel, giving a maksimum of 2 sticks. If you add more than that, the memory will be slowed down to 800 Mhz to maintain stability._
> 
> 
> Really? I didn't know that, could've been really frustrating if you bought 8 GB of 1066 MHz RAM, and it didn't work fully.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pixie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PepsiLove*
> 
> 
> _I don't think either would be better, its just an option for letting you overclock your cpu without overclocking your ram. If your ram can oc then leave it ganged, if it can't then stick it on unganged_
> 
> 
> umm, no. it'll OC your ram whether you have it Ganged or UnGanged.
> 
> Ganged is just forced Dual Channel (128bit) and UnGanged is forced Single Channel (64bit).


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cdpkook132*
> 
> On a second not whether it is ganged or unganged they are both still duel channel. Just because you have your memory unganged does not put it in single channel. To do this you must put them in physically separate channel slots on the mobo, in most cases side by side.


A lot of information here; let's clear some of it up.

With all AMD sockets from AM2 and above, the memory controller is built into the CPU. Also, the memory controller will likely be the slowest part of your computer. (other than hard drives of course)
There are actually two memory controllers which, in Unganged mode, will run in interleave. In Ganged mode, they are linked together, and will operate in tandem. Normally, Unganged mode provides greater performance, hence it's the default setting. However, in my overclocking escapades, I have found that Ganged mode will let me run a higher NB (IMC) frequencies and maintain stability. This has nothing to do with whether the RAM is running in dual channel or single channel mode. It solely refers to how the memory controllers behave with respect to each other.

As for performance lose with more DIMMs. Yes, this is true, by default the Phenom II chips will automagically underclock the RAM to maintain stability. You can obviously increase the speed yourself. If you force a multiplier instead of leaving as "Auto" in your BIOS, you'll really be running that RAM clock. This underclock is just so the memory controller does not get overloaded. Just for stability, but I've never had an issue running 1066Mhz+ DDR2 on 4 DIMMs


----------



## vermin8tor

i am using amd phenom quad core black edition. and i use 16 gig ddr3.









unganged mode and ganged..
on my system i use ganged and i actualy have not noticed any diffrence between the two..








ganged will work on two sticks of ram if they are paired. if they are not it wont work.

my windows rating is 7.2 due to me having a ssd drive. was 5.4 when using hdd..speed up your pc by 200% by installing ssd as operating system drive.









handles anygame at full specs. ie: tome raider 2013, far cry 3, ect i allso dont use virtual memory its not needed with 16gig ram.


----------



## ColonelPanic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fear of Oneself*
> 
> There are actually two memory controllers which, in Unganged mode, will run in interleave. In Ganged mode, they are linked together, and will operate in tandem. Normally, Unganged mode provides greater performance, hence it's the default setting. However, in my overclocking escapades, I have found that Ganged mode will let me run a higher NB (IMC) frequencies and maintain stability. This has nothing to do with whether the RAM is running in dual channel or single channel mode. It solely refers to how the memory controllers behave with respect to each other.


Would the default Unganged mode be better for multi-threaded application performance such as ffmpeg or Handbrake encoding?


----------



## Noviets

I tested Guaged and Unguaged mode with MaxMemm last week, when I was heavily tweaking all aspects of my memory.
It may or may not help but these were my results.
Note: Everything was exactly identical in both tests, except the Guage/Unguaged modes


----------



## ColonelPanic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noviets*
> 
> I tested Guaged and Unguaged mode with MaxMemm last week, when I was heavily tweaking all aspects of my memory.
> It may or may not help but these were my results.
> Note: Everything was exactly identical in both tests, except the Guage/Unguaged modes


Thanks for posting that







I think I will stick with the default "unganged" mode right now until there is a tangible reason to change.


----------



## georgeleus

Hi there,

Long story short:
AMD Phenom II X4 965
ASUS M2N32-SLi Deluxe
RAM Slot 1 : ADATA Vitesta Extreme DDR2 800+ 2GB
RAM Slot 2 : ADATA Vitesta Extreme DDR2 800+ 2GB
RAM Slot 3 : ADATA Vitesta Extreme DDR2 800+ 2GB
RAM Slot 4 : ADATA Vitesta Extreme DDR2 800+ *1GB*
Timings: 4-4-4-12-22-2T, 2.05V

Don't mock me, I've already spent many resources trying to find the 2GB sticks, so I have to manage with only 3 of them; the 1GB is from my old set, but identical in specs (all Micron D9).

1) Does *ganged mode strictly mean Dual Channel* ?
Or can the memory work in *Dual Channel but not necessarily be ganged* ?

If I'm right and these are separate things, can this configuration prove stable over time?
I mean, with only the 3x2GB my PC recognized the memory as Unganged and working at *64bits*.
With this config on the other hand, it recognizes Unganged mode but working at *128bits*.

2) *Can different size of the same technology memory work perfect in Dual Channel?* Or do they need to be not only timing and voltage correspondant, but STRICTLY capacity correspondant too ?

Sorry for the long queue of questions but I'm confused.
I've ran multiple stability tests with this 7GB config and all works fine. But does the system suffer from assymetrical memory distribution? Am I loosing some memory MTBF because of this?

Thank you for your patience.


----------

