6 minutes ago, europrodave said:

Would you go 2 X 16 or 4 X 8?

Difficult choice. Using 2x16 gives you the option of adding more RAM in the future. Another reason for going for 2x16 is that, in the past, using less modules increased stability and performance. However, according to this article that doesn't seem to hold true anymore. There are some interesting comments below that article about stability and whether the test was actually valid.

Personally, I would prefer having just 2 sticks, mostly for stability reasons but since I have seen MSFS using up to 27GB of RAM having an option to add more RAM modules if required seems wise too. There is no telling what the move to DirectX12 means in this regard. After several world- and simupdates the memory requirements seems to have gone up in the mean time.

 

2 hours ago, orchestra_nl said:

Because unfortunately my AMD system is impossible to get stable with MSFS. It is rockstable even with heavy use (encoding video for 24 hours is painless but for MSFS it is not. Sofar I have nearly 160 CTD's logged for MSFS and have spend weeks troubleshooting. It looks like it could be USB related but sometimes MSFS crashes even with only keyboard and mouse connected.

I am nearly done with this system. Have tried most if not all suggestions on severa fora, disabled PBO entirely, switched back to PCIe 3.0, different bioses, drivers, videocards etc. but it keeps CTD'ing, but only with MSFS. Reinstalling MSFS and even Windows did not help either. Memory checks out OK.

I have built several systems myself but mostly Intel systems. My last AMD build was 15 years ago and it gave me headaches. I hoped it would be different this time around...

I have no guarantee though that spending money on a new Intel built will solve my issues but I am out of options. With 90% of my flights ending in a CTD and after months of troubleshooting I am quite out of patience.
Right now I am nearly at the point of buying Intel now, or wait for Alderlake and stop flightsimming in the mean time. I could also go back to FSX off course, but I haven't tried it on this AMD built yet and it seems like going backwards.

Strange.  I swapped over from an 8700k system in November.  I've not had one single crash since

1 hour ago, europrodave said:

Would you go 2 X 16 or 4 X 8?

 

In theory, 2 modules are better for overclocking.

Depends on the motherboard topology though. Daisy chain is better for two modules and T-topology for four. 

Worth going for two, but its not a big consideration for the sort of overclocks you and I are likely to do. And its not the issue it was in the past. 

Edited April 5, 20215 yr by martin-w

1 hour ago, orchestra_nl said:

Difficult choice. Using 2x16 gives you the option of adding more RAM in the future.

 

True, but adding another kit, even if identical spec can sometimes causes issues. We buy matched kits for a reason. 

17 minutes ago, Charlatan said:

Strange.  I swapped over from an 8700k system in November.  I've not had one single crash since

Its very frustrating, and I expect it is a very specific combination of hardware to cause this. Asobo might not have completely solved the USB problems in MSFS, AMD still has known USB issues (x570 chipset). The combination of those two, perhaps with a third factor like a very specific USB device might be haunting me. Take away one of these and the issue might be gone, or at least become sufficiently rare.