I’ve compared 15 different RAM configurations in the exact same gaming laptop in 11 different
games to help you find out which RAM is the best for gaming!
All testing has been done with the Lenovo Legion 5 gaming laptop.
I chose this because it’s a good mid-range option with Ryzen 7 5800H processor and Nvidia
RTX 3060 graphics.
Along with the stock RAM that came with the Legion and my own kit of Crucial memory, all
testing has been done using a bunch of memory from TeamGroup.
They provided me with an 8 gig kit, two 16 gig kits with different timings, and 32 gig
and 64 gig kits.
TeamGroup also sent over their MP34Q, a 4TB M.2 NVMe SSD which was desperately needed
in order to fit all of my game installs for this testing.
Using all of that memory, these are the 15 different memory configurations that have
been tested.
Now I can only fit so much text on the screen in the upcoming graphs, so I first need to
explain what everything here means first.
The first number is the total amount of memory capacity installed in the system, so total
size in gigabytes.
After that I’ve listed either DC for dual channel, or SC for single channel.
Basically dual channel just means 2 sticks of memory installed in the laptop while single
channel means only one stick installed with the second slot empty.
Next we’ve got the speed that the memory ran at, so either DDR4-3200 or DDR4-2666 depending
on the configuration, followed by the timings, which are either CL22 or CL19.
In the brackets I’ve got information about the individual sticks themselves, including
the sizes of both sticks first followed by information about ranks.
1R means single rank and 2R means dual rank, basically dual rank memory is better than
single rank memory.
After this we’ve got information on the bank groups, either x8 or x16, and basically
x8 is better than x16, so there are definitely quite a few different aspects that will affect
results.
It’s worth noting the memory running at CL19 was actually with a DDR4-3200 CL16 stick,
but my laptop doesn’t support XMP which is required to use that, which is why it instead
ran at DDR4-2666 CL19 by default, so we still get lower timings but at the expense of lower
speeds.
This is an example of what can happen if you buy memory with low timings that needs XMP
if your laptop doesn’t support it.
In the first 11 upcoming games that we’re going to look at I’ve tested this laptop
with optimus enabled, despite the Legion 5 having a MUX switch, and this is because I
think it best represents most other gaming laptops.
Now it is important to note that with optimus enabled, 2 gigs of the memory will be dedicated
for the integrated graphics.
Basically that 2 gig just gets reserved for the iGPU, so if say you have 8 gigs of RAM
installed in this AMD laptop then you only get 6 gigs of usable memory.
So because the integrated graphics are literally relying on the system memory, I’m expecting
the results with optimus on to be a bit different compared to optimus off, which is why we’ll
also compare a game with optimus on and off a bit later.
Alright I think that’s enough explanation, let’s get into the game benchmarks.
Now results can vary quite a bit depending on the specific game, so even if all my graphs
do get a bit boring try not to just skip to the end, there’s a lot of important details
in there.
Let’s start out with Watch Dogs Legion, which was tested with the game’s benchmark.
There’s a lot of data here, but I’ve sorted it by average FPS with the best results up
the top and the lowest results down the bottom.
The most important thing to takeaway is that the best result is reaching an 80% higher
average frame rate compared to the last result, which is kind of crazy when you think about
it.
All tests were run in literally the exact same laptop, we’re just seeing how different
sticks of memory can affect the results.
The worst result is with a 16 gig stick in single channel.
Our other two single channel results were performing better, which must be because they’re
also dual rank.
I don’t think the FPS difference is down to the size of the sticks, because the 8 gig
stick is actually reaching higher frame rate than the 32 and 16 gig sticks, so I’d expect
the 16 gig stick to do better if it was also dual rank like the others.
Likewise the 16 gig stick still has x8 banks, so I’d expect an x16 stick in single channel
to probably do even worse.
I found it interesting that the best result was from an 8+8 configuration, so 16 gigs
total.
Sure we’ve got dual rank x8 memory which is nice, but it’s ahead of the 64gb kit
just below it, which has the same speed, timings and banks, just more capacity.
I’m not exactly sure why the 16 gig configuration is higher, but it clearly shows that games
care about more than just total amount of memory capacity.
Just below that there’s the 32 gig result, though the 16 gig sticks are single rank,
so I suspect the top two results are ahead due to them being dual rank.
I found it interesting that the 8 plus 8 configuration that consisted of an x8 and x16 stick had
notably lower 1% lows compared to most other results, so perhaps mixing these together
isn’t the best.
Far Cry 6 was also tested with the game’s benchmark, and is our first title where the
4 plus 4 configuration down the bottom wasn’t even able to run the game simply due to not
having enough space.
Again this was tested with optimus enabled, so 2 gigs were assigned to the integrated
graphics automatically, so basically if you have an optimus laptop, 8 gigs of memory will
simply prevent some games from even opening at all.
Obviously this isn’t always the case though, as our single channel 8 gig stick worked fine,
so the two 4 gig sticks seem to have a problem.
Again the three single channel results were all at the bottom of the graph, with the worst
being the 16 gig stick because it’s single rank and not dual rank like the other two.
Interestingly the 40 gig configuration was on the lower side here too, despite both sticks
being dual rank x8 memory.
I wasn’t expecting this, perhaps having the total capacity of both memory sticks differing
to such a large degree negatively hurts performance.
The best result here was again the 8 plus 8 dual rank x8 configuration, but this time
the 64 gig kit was a few spots lower, despite also being dual rank x8 sticks.
I found it interesting that the 2nd best result was with single rank memory, no dual rank
at all in this configuration yet still the 2nd best frame rate in this game.
Out of the other 8 plus 8 configurations, interestingly the DDR4-2666 one but with lower
CL19 timings was ahead of the two DDR4-3200 CL22 ones.
The two lower results each included x16 memory though, so I’m guessing this is why they’re
lower, and while we’re only talking about a couple of FPS difference in average frame
rate, the differences to the 1% lows were a little bigger.
It’s not all big differences though, take Cyberpunk 2077 for instance, where we’re
only seeing a 4 FPS difference between the best and worst case.
Some games like this are going to be GPU bound, so the RAM difference won’t matter anywhere
near as much as others.
I didn’t use max settings for this game, but even with high settings we’re not really
seeing a big change.
The single channel results were still the lowest, with that 40 gig combination still
nearby, and the 16 gig dual rank x8 was still giving us the best results, so similar story
as the previous games, just that the degree of the difference is smaller.
The differences in Shadow of the Tomb Raider were back to being relatively large, with
the top result reaching a 38% higher average frame rate than the bottom result.
Sure it’s no 80% like we saw in Watch Dogs Legion, but this is still pretty significant
from a component most people don’t even give any thought to when buying a laptop.
Again the single channel results are on the lower side, and that 40 gig configuration
too.
The 8 plus 8 with x16 sticks were pretty low too, which makes sense, I’ve shown in other
videos that this game can see big differences between x8 and x16 memory.
Despite that, if we pair an x8 and x16 stick together the results were actually pretty
decent compared to others, however the best results came from the dual rank x8 configurations
at the top once more.
I was interested in seeing how CS:GO handled different RAM configurations as it generally
depends more on processor performance.
Again those single channel results and the 40 gig one were all the lowest around 200
FPS, with all other results being at least 20 FPS higher, however the 1% lows were essentially
the same regardless.
Yet again the 8 plus 8 dual rank x8 combination was at the top, while the 32 plus 32 kit that
was otherwise the same was slightly lower.
Interestingly the 16 plus 16 kit was in between, despite that one being single rank memory,
so I guess in this game dual rank and single rank doesn’t matter too much, or at least
not with x8 memory banks.
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla was tested with the game’s benchmark, and is another game
where the 4 plus 4 gig configuration didn’t even load up the game.
Otherwise generally speaking the single channel results are again down the bottom, but interestingly
the 2nd place uses both single rank and also x16 memory in one of the slots, granted most
of these differences are 1 to 2 FPS apart which is margin of error, so it’s hard to
draw as solid conclusions from this one.
Red Dead Redemption 2 was also tested with the game’s benchmark.
Like Shadow of the Tomb Raider, this is another game I’ve found where x16 memory banks generally
do noticeably worse, which is probably why the 8 plus 8 single rank x16 configuration
is in the 2nd lowest spot.
Even the single channel but dual rank results were ahead.
Again though the best result is 8 plus 8 dual rank x8.
Rainbow Six Siege was tested with the game’s benchmark again, and was another where 4+4
gigs wasn’t enough to run the game properly.
Like most others, the single channel results and 32 plus 8 config were otherwise at the
bottom.
Once more, the best two results are the dual rank plus x8 sticks.
Capacity doesn’t seem to matter a whole lot once you’ve got at least 16 gig and
can actually open the game.
Well, 16 gig in dual channel that is.
F1 2021 was tested with the game’s benchmark too.
We’re able to boost average FPS by 30 frames or about 24% from our worst memory configuration
down the bottom to the best at the top.
This is another of the few where the largest memory kit was in the lead, and while the
third spot is also dual rank and x8, the kit above it was doing better despite being single
rank, presumably due to the lower timings, but despite the lower DDR4-2666 speed.
The 24 gig configuration wasn’t too bad, I tested this to kind of represent a laptop
with 16 gigs of memory soldered to the motherboard but you go to stick in a decent 8 gig stick.
Microsoft Flight Simulator was tested in the Sydney landing challenge.
We’ve only got very minor differences here so I’m going to speed up, but feel free
to pause the video if you want to analyse the results.
Control is a GPU heavy game, even at medium settings.
There’s basically no practical difference here between the bottom and top result, just
3 FPS, good luck distinguishing that while actually playing.
Despite the small differences though, the general trends that we’ve noticed so far
remain.
Alright now we’re going to look at the average results of all 11 games and draw some conclusions.
This is probably the most important part of the video, so if you were asleep it’s time
to wake up!
Here are the frame rates for each configuration if we take the average of all 11 games tested.
Now the 4 plus 4 configuration down the bottom was by far the lowest, however don’t forget
that three of the games didn’t run at all with it.
I’ve counted those as zero scores, so my average here is actually lower than it would
be if we only took into account games that ran.
I think that’s fair because not being able to run a game at all is a pretty big fail.
To be fair, in some games the 4 plus 4 config did perform quite well, I mean it’s dual
channel x8 memory, not bad, but the total capacity size is clearly an issue in some
cases.
I should note that the 8 gig single channel test still ran all the games fine though,
which leads me to believe the real problem is a combination of two 4 gig sticks, it’s
not as simple as saying that 8 gigs of total capacity isn’t enough.
Using a single 8 gig stick compared to two 4 gig sticks isn’t a great solution though,
because generally speaking single channel performance, or any time we used just one
stick of memory, was lower compared to most others.
It’s still possible to boost single channel performance with dual rank memory, as dual
rank is better than single rank, but yeah basically these results show that for optimal
performance, you’ll want to stay away from only using one stick of memory in single channel.
The results also seem to indicate staying away from weird capacity combinations.
Take the 32 gig plus 8 gig option for instance, although this gives us 40 gigs of memory in
total, which sounds great, it was constantly one of the slower results, despite both sticks
being dual rank x8 memory.
Separately these sticks are great, in fact if they’re each paired with the same size
stick in both slots we get the best performance at the top of the graph, but combining one
of each together consistently gives worse performance.
The 32 plus 16 gig configuration was usually better.
This gives us 48 gigs of total capacity despite the 16 gig stick being single rank, but it
still outperformed the 8 plus 32 combination.
Interestingly the 16 plus 8 combination did even better still, so the conclusion I can
draw from this is that if you’re going to mismatch memory capacity sizes, the larger
the difference the worse the performance.
I think we can also say that while dual rank is better than single rank, compared to the
other differences outlined so far it seems to mostly be icing on the cake - a bonus.
The third place result is only slightly below the two above with the main difference being
that we’re using single rank rather than dual rank.
Yeah the capacities are different, but we’ve already seen that this generally has the smallest
difference in terms of gaming performance once you’ve got 16 gigs in dual channel.
Now if we just compare all 5 16 gig dual channel results, the worst was the one with two x16
sticks paired together.
The next two results were very close together, and both still had one of the sticks with
x16 banks.
The other sticks were single rank or dual rank, but interestingly the dual rank one
was the slightly lower result, but again it’s close, so I think this helps further illustrate
that x8 and x16 memory bank groups are more important than dual rank or single rank.
After that the 16 gig kit with lower timings running at CL19 was reaching higher average
FPS, despite it running at the slower DDR4-2666 speed, so just goes to show that timings are
important too, even if at the expense of speed.
It would have been great if these actually ran at the advertised DDR4-3200 CL16 speeds,
but unfortunately my laptop doesn’t have XMP support, most don’t, so watch out for
that trap when buying memory.
The only other 16 gig result that was ahead was the one at the top, which used dual rank
x8 sticks in both slots.
Some of the differences were very surprising.
Sure RAM isn’t particularly cheap, but in some cases it’s going to be way cheaper
to upgrade the memory compared to upgrading the 3060 to say a 3070 or a 3080, and in many
cases the cheaper RAM upgrade will probably give you a bigger boost compared to going
to a higher tier GPU.
So far we’ve only looked at how games perform with optimus enabled, so now let’s disable
it and see what the differences are.
I’ve used Shadow of the Tomb Raider for this testing, and this graph is sorted by
the light purple bars, which are the optimus on results.
We can see that all memory configurations are receiving a speed boost with optimus off
in the darker purple bars.
Here are the same results but instead sorting by the optimus off results, as that might
better help you see the differences.
These are the improvements to average frame rate in this game that are possible by disabling
optimus as a percentage.
The best results at the top are from our single channel memory results, which would imply
that the best way to boost performance of single channel memory is to not use the iGPU
at all, of course assuming you can’t just add a second stick.
As we just saw, the single channel results were still on the lower side even with optimus
off, but the act of turning optimus off boosted these results the most.
In fact the results that saw the smallest gains from turning off optimus were the memory
configurations that were typically performing the best already.
There are definitely still gains, just not as big.
Outside of gaming, the Aida64 memory benchmark was also run on all of these memory configurations.
In terms of memory read speed, well what we’re seeing here kind of lines up with what we
were seeing in the games.
Likewise the memory write speed was the same, at least as far as the ordering of the results
goes from best to worst.
Memory latency gets slower with the better performing memory configurations though.
So to summarize, in order of importance, the first thing you’re going to want to do is
to make sure that you’re running with dual channel memory, so two sticks installed instead
of one, as this generally gives you the biggest improvement.
At least as far as DDR4 goes, I’m not sure how DDR5 will go next generation yet, but
make sure you’re subscribed for all of my upcoming DDR5 testing.
Alright so if you are looking to add a second stick for dual channel memory, it seems that
the best option is to pick one that’s the same size capacity.
In some cases like if we’re using an 8 and 16 gig stick or 16 and 32 gigs there’s not
that big of a difference, but at the extremes with like an 8 and a 32 gig stick the differences
could be quite large.
So now ideally you’re shopping for 2 sticks of memory that are the same capacity.
After that finding memory that supports lower timings will help.
You can of course run two different sticks with different timings as I’ve shown, it’s
just that if they have different timings and different speeds they’ll run at the lowest
that both sticks support.
So you might get some unexpected behaviour if you haven’t fully read all the specs
on the RAM sticks, and try not to get caught out buying expensive memory that needs XMP
in order to actually hit the lower timings, because in most laptops like this one, you
won’t be able to use it at its full capacity.
You’ll need a laptop with a fully unlocked BIOS that supports that, and I guess if you
know what that is then you probably know what you’re doing with regards to RAM anyway.
Next up ideally you’re going to want the memory to use x8 banks instead of x16, as
this is just another speed boost, and once all those things have been considered only
then would I consider the difference between single rank and dual rank memory.
Yeah dual rank was definitely better, but in many cases once all those other things
mentioned for were factored in first I didn’t find single and dual rank to make that big
of a difference.
Of course it would have been better if I had even more memory configurations to test for
this video, but honestly I think 15 is kind of enough, and given it takes about a full
day to test all 11 games with 1 configuration, that means this video took at least 15 days
just to do the game testing.
So it was an extreme amount of work, and my partner actually did all of the testing, so
massive thanks to her.
I’m not actually sure if she watches the entire video, so I guess I’ll find out.
Anyway there’s way more to picking a gaming laptop than just the memory, though that is
an important part as we’ve just seen.
You can check out the best gaming laptops that I’ve tested all year in these videos
next.
I’ve covered the top 5 best and worst laptops in this video and also given out awards in
17 different categories to different gaming laptops here, so I’ll see you in one of
those next.