Question Is it OK to populate all RAM slots with threadripper 1950x?

boing

Senior member
Sep 13, 2001
330
3
81
My system specs are as below, I thought going from 16GB on my last build to 32GB would future proof me for a while but almost straigth away my rendering is now still hitting memory limits so I need to double up again. I currently have 4 x 8GB sticks and was going to purchase another 4 but then read a couple of comments that Threadripper doesn't like all dimms to be populated, is there any truth to this? I can obviously do 64GB with 4 sticks but don't want the expense if it isn't needed.


CPU - Threadripper 1950X
MB - Gigabyte X399 AORUS Gaming 7
GPU - Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti
HDD C: - Samsung Evo 960 500GB
RAM - G Skill F4-3200C14-8GFX (32GB)
OS - Win 10 64 bit.
PSU - Seasonic SSR - 750 GD
 

Soulkeeper

Diamond Member
Nov 23, 2001
6,557
77
91
They wouldn't put that many dimm slots if it didn't work. Just check the specs page for max speeds officially supported. You might lose a little overclocking potential. Worst case scenario is you'll have to manually set a few bios settings.
 

boing

Senior member
Sep 13, 2001
330
3
81
yeah but some platforms have weird idiosyncrasies so I just thought I'd check before unlocking the wallet from its vault...
 

jrichrds

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,528
1
81
He's right in that some platforms do have issues trying to populate all RAM slots. My Gigabyte Intel Haswell boards (Z87 and B85) have issues resuming from sleep with all 4 RAM slots populated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: boing

KentState

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2001
7,791
178
106
It looks like you have quality CL14 rams right now. Typically the problems with TR memory come from overclocked or lower tier memory. I'd be more worried if you had 3600/18CL or something like that but it is still a crap shoot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: boing

boing

Senior member
Sep 13, 2001
330
3
81
I'm not big on hardware, I know my way around a system but at a pretty basic level but I'd always assumed spreading the RAM over more sticks would offer better bandwidth for accessing memory? it's weird it can actually cause problems.
 

Viper GTS

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
37,853
221
116
I'm not big on hardware, I know my way around a system but at a pretty basic level but I'd always assumed spreading the RAM over more sticks would offer better bandwidth for accessing memory? it's weird it can actually cause problems.
It's less about DIMM count and more about channels and ranks to max out the memory controller potential. In general more DIMMs = more ranks though so you are largely correct.

I have 8 DIMMs on a 1950X with no issues. Specifically I have 8x Samsung M391A2K43BB1-CRC for a total of 128 GB ECC which I run at 2933. Motherboard is X399 Designare.

Viper GTS
 
  • Like
Reactions: boing

ASK THE COMMUNITY