Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

4 core and 4gb of ram in a MB

L

lloydhooson

macrumors member
Original poster
Nov 26, 2007
45
0
Hello, I am wondering if it is possible to place 4GB of ram in a mac book as you can get hold of 2gb RAM chips nowadays, also if anyone knows if the CPU is soldered into the mother bored as a 4 core Intel is only like 150 quid.

any one done this and whats the bat life gonna be after?

Cheers.

:apple:
 
To my knowledge, the processor is soldered to the board and there is no feasible to switch out the processor.

I'm not sure about the ram, but if it's got the santa rosa processor, it should be able to take 4 gb.

c!
 
RAM: It depends on which model of the MB you have....the newer ones are able to handle 4 GB or RAM but some of the older ones are not. Which model do you have and we will be able to answer what the maximum amount you can put in it.

Processor: It is not possible to change the MacBook to a quad core....the battery life would be terrible.
 
thanks its Processor Speed: 2.16 GHz

is that ok?

if it's possible with 4GB of RAM reduce bat life too?

thanks again.
 
no way to change processors

It's impossible to put a quad core in. The quad core has a completly different pin layout. When laptops have quadcore next year they have have to completly redesign the internals inorder to have the correct layout for the pin schematic. Google "mobile quad core" they are suppose to arrive Q2 2008, but only as a true desktop replacement. It will get to hot for your lap. At the end of 2008 advancement in cooling technologies will arrive which will make this a reality.
 
Also, that processor that you can get for 150 quid is more than likely a desktop chip, and they are not pin compatible with the mobile chips that the MacBook's have.

Plus the fact that the MacBook CPU is soldered onto the LogicBoard.
 
I'm sorry one more thing....is it a Core Duo or Core 2 Duo??

No more RAM generally will not really effect battery life...... sometime it can actually make the battery last a few minutes longer. Nothing worth worrying about tho.
 
TheStu said:
Also, that processor that you can get for 150 quid is more than likely a desktop chip, and they are not pin compatible with the mobile chips that the MacBook's have.

Plus the fact that the MacBook CPU is soldered onto the LogicBoard.
Click to expand...

Not just soldered, it is a BGA array soldered to the logic board.

So it requires a BGA thermal rework station to remove.

So it isn't a job for a soldering iron and a steady hand. Since there are no pins to get at.
 
Sun Baked said:
Not just soldered, it is a BGA array soldered to the logic board.

So it requires a BGA thermal rework station to remove.

So it isn't a job for a soldering iron and a steady hand. Since there are no pins to get at.
Click to expand...

Oh yea, i forgot that it was BGA as well... frankly, the idea of 479 little pins to desolder adn then resolder is deterrent enough for me.
 
When I purchased my Blackbook, I made sure it was the SR 4gb dual channel capable.

a quad core wouldn't work in a macbook. for all the reasons they mentioned, plus your forgetting that you have to take into account heat and power. The MB C2D 2.16 are designed to have enough power for that processor and fans were put in to accomodate that processors heat.

if you changed the processor, the most u could put in is probably the 2.33 which is the next processor up. While i don't work for Intel, I believe when they clump speeds together, that means that (in this case) the 2.0 2.16 and 2.33 can all function on the same logic board under the the same heat and power conditions, any thing higher will need a different logic board.
 
i believe the G5 dual core architecture is compatible with the santa rosa macbook pin layout... correct?
 
sr5878 said:
i believe the G5 dual core architecture is compatible with the santa rosa macbook pin layout... correct?
Click to expand...

It is, but you have to span the sub-stipulating DingleHopper (<-Technical Term) in order for the Mass-Overlay-Photonic-Discombobulator (<-Also a Technical Term) to appropriately Transmogrify (<-Must be a Technical Term, Apple Dictionary allowed it) the transistor flops.
 
ah yes yes... but of course.

17085pBookG5.jpg


i couldnt resist :D
 
TheStu said:
It is, but you have to span the sub-stipulating DingleHopper (<-Technical Term) in order for the Mass-Overlay-Photonic-Discombobulator (<-Also a Technical Term) to appropriately Transmogrify (<-Must be a Technical Term, Apple Dictionary allowed it) the transistor flops.
Click to expand...

:D

Best answer ever to a question that doesn't make sense. At all...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back