Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
I wouldn't even be surprised if running 3 offered more problems than 4...
Extremely unlikely.
I see a lot of people in general always recommending matching pairs, etc, which i 100% agree is best if possible.
But for those of you who have actually tried 3 dimms , you'd know it doesn't require voodoo magic or anything complicated
I guess no one ever tests out things here :laugh:
I've tried 3 dimms on a few different occasions, mainly for experimental purposes, but it works great on all your newer Intel boards (which the OP has).
I can't speak for AMD or old Intel boards personally.
Anyway, on my DFI which i've had some "fun" with running 4 dimms, i found three dimms to be alot easier to maintain stability actually, & no, this wasn't due to the fourth one being bad or something like that.
Also, i don't know how many prebuilts i've upgraded for clients in which the cheapest easiest route ends up being to add a third dimm.
I haven't personally encountered any issues there either.
Another interesting note is that i've seen a decent number of prebuilts come with 3x1 GB stock, especially on Vista x86 systems where the manufacturer is too scared to go with x64.
Again, no issues.
The performance hit from running asyncrounous dual channel isn't worth getting too excited about either, unless you're a benchmarker.
For most people, especially if running a pro-active OS like Vista, more [slightly slower] RAM will provide a better experience than less [faster] RAM.