XP 3GB limit vs dual channel (3 vs 4 sticks of RAM)

[furball]

So I decided to upgrade with more RAM, knowing full well that I'd get anywhere between 2.99GB to 3.5GB available for use within XP (due to 32-bit memory addressing limitations.)

I'm running 4 x1GB Corsair DDR2-5400 667 4-4-4-12 on a stock Asus P5B Deluxe board, E6300. No overclock, nothing.

In theory, would it be better to leave the 4th stick in, 'enabling' dual channel, or should I just pull it out, since it's not being used anyway?

So, to settle the typical answers, I'm not trying to squeeze out every bit of performance, nor will I overclock.

I know the 4th one 'exists' in the system, it just cannot be utilized. SiSandra shows all 4 banks populated.

I'll tell ya though, my darned mobo temps have risen anywhere from 2-5C from just putting in 2 extra modules! These already have aluminum sleeves already. I opted to install the new OCZ RAM cooler.... it's so neato :)

Uber sexy. Review here: http://www.3dgameman.com/content/view/7667/36/1/1/

[goofball]

You can remove the last stick if you want, your first 2GB would be in dual channel and then the last GB would not be in dual channel operation. Or move to a 64bit OS.

[Silver Bullet]

Leave all the sticks in ... you don't know how the ram is going to be divided between the 4 sticks. You're likely to loose more performance by taking out the last stick. Just because you only see 3.2GB doesn't mean the memory controller just ignores the last stick.