Just wondering if anyone has sprung for that $595 2GB stick...and do you think the price will go down....ever?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
anyone have 3gb RAM in MBP??
- Thread starter kerisimasi
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Paying for 3 gbs of ram. I didn't even want to pay for the MBP, so I just got a MB, but I do have 2 gbs of ram. Works great!
The Stig
The Stig
yeah i paid for it lik a sucker..seemed snappy but not loaded apps on yet as it came with a faulty screen so at 2 days old needs repairing . . not really my happiest appl experience.. [u readin this mr jobs?]
I may be wrong, but I thought the MBPs had a limitation in the EFI that would not allow them to support 2GB sticks of RAM? Only 2 GB Max (1gb x 2). 3GB was theoretical?
edit: nvm. 4gb is supposedly supported but there is something called memory overlap in memory larger than 3gb.
But why do this? You get rid of dual channel..
edit: nvm. 4gb is supposedly supported but there is something called memory overlap in memory larger than 3gb.
But why do this? You get rid of dual channel..
Although the C2D chip is 64bit, I believe the chipset is the limiting factor. As I understand it you could throw 4 gigs in it, but it would only see/use about 3. The bios might see 4, but not the OS. Santa Rosa was supposed to expand this limit when last I researched it, but I'm not sure if this is still true.
It is, or rather, Crestline, the chipset in the Santa Rosa platform, will be expanding it as it is a 64-bit chipset.
not worth it?
Right, so we can utilize 3 GB with the current chipset. Obviously the most convenient way to get the RAM would be by purchasing a 1GB and 2GB module. However, you run into the problem of the modules not being matched, which I guess apple doesn't recommend because you lose interleaving. Here's what I found on barefeats.com:
"DO MATCHING PAIRS OF MEMORY HELP?
Though we ran the tests above using matching 1GB SODIMMs in both MacBook Pros (for a total of 2GB), we also ran the same tests in the 15" MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo with one 1GB SODIMM and one 2GB SODIMM for a total of 3GB of memory. We wanted to see if non-matched modules would cause the MacBook to slow down due to the loss of interleaving.
The answer is "no, it didn't slow down." In some cases we saw a gain in speed. An example is Aperture where the "lift and stamp" ran 11% faster with 3GB of RAM. But that's probably due to the fact that Aperture + OS X = more than 2GB of total memory usage.
When we get our hands on a second 2GB SODIMM, we plan to run two of them. Even though only 3GB of the 4GB will be available, we want to see if a matched pair of 2GB SODIMMs will show anything different."
So while it doesn't slow down your performace, it doesn't seem to help it all that much either, ESPECIALLY for the price. It seems like you'd be dishing out a lot extra for the extra gig of ram, while not getting equal dividends on your returns. Just an idea. The quote came from this link:
http://www.barefeats.com/mbcd6.html
Right, so we can utilize 3 GB with the current chipset. Obviously the most convenient way to get the RAM would be by purchasing a 1GB and 2GB module. However, you run into the problem of the modules not being matched, which I guess apple doesn't recommend because you lose interleaving. Here's what I found on barefeats.com:
"DO MATCHING PAIRS OF MEMORY HELP?
Though we ran the tests above using matching 1GB SODIMMs in both MacBook Pros (for a total of 2GB), we also ran the same tests in the 15" MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo with one 1GB SODIMM and one 2GB SODIMM for a total of 3GB of memory. We wanted to see if non-matched modules would cause the MacBook to slow down due to the loss of interleaving.
The answer is "no, it didn't slow down." In some cases we saw a gain in speed. An example is Aperture where the "lift and stamp" ran 11% faster with 3GB of RAM. But that's probably due to the fact that Aperture + OS X = more than 2GB of total memory usage.
When we get our hands on a second 2GB SODIMM, we plan to run two of them. Even though only 3GB of the 4GB will be available, we want to see if a matched pair of 2GB SODIMMs will show anything different."
So while it doesn't slow down your performace, it doesn't seem to help it all that much either, ESPECIALLY for the price. It seems like you'd be dishing out a lot extra for the extra gig of ram, while not getting equal dividends on your returns. Just an idea. The quote came from this link:
http://www.barefeats.com/mbcd6.html
Unfortunately people have tried running 4gb before. You just get a black screen.
ya...4gb's does produce that black screen....
3gb's makes it faster, but not significant....iThink it shaved a 1/2 second off aperture load times...
3gb's makes it faster, but not significant....iThink it shaved a 1/2 second off aperture load times...
not worth it?
so is the general consensus that an increase in 1GB of RAM is just not worth the $$??? kind of sounds that way....thanks for all the input.
so is the general consensus that an increase in 1GB of RAM is just not worth the $$??? kind of sounds that way....thanks for all the input.
My computer MBP has 2gb of ram. Its been on for a week. I haven't had a single page out. Ever since upgrading to 2gb I haven't had a page out. Their isn't a need.
In the end:
2gb of matched memory with interleaving is basically as good as
3gb with no interleaving (Dual Channel). 11% increase in performance in some applications is definitely not worth the price of a 2GB stick of ram.
Verdict: Not worth it.
edit: their test does not correctly observe the effect of interleaving. the answer is yes, it does. To test the interleaving theory, use different 1 GB sticks, maybe with different speeds (making the overall speed slower) or somehow disable it in EFI. Dont use 1gb and a 2 gb stick and call the small increase (11%) in performance negating the benefit of interleaving...sorry for the rant.. do you guys get what I mean?
2gb of matched memory with interleaving is basically as good as
3gb with no interleaving (Dual Channel). 11% increase in performance in some applications is definitely not worth the price of a 2GB stick of ram.
Verdict: Not worth it.
edit: their test does not correctly observe the effect of interleaving. the answer is yes, it does. To test the interleaving theory, use different 1 GB sticks, maybe with different speeds (making the overall speed slower) or somehow disable it in EFI. Dont use 1gb and a 2 gb stick and call the small increase (11%) in performance negating the benefit of interleaving...sorry for the rant.. do you guys get what I mean?
i don't think you get a black screen, you just don't access the full ram.
http://reviews.digitaltrends.com/review_printerfriendly4208.html:
MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo & 4GB RAM **
OS X boot time - 30 seconds
Open iTunes 7 - 4.6 seconds
Open Firefox 2 - 8.3 seconds
Open Acrobat Pro 7 - 29 seconds
Burn 512MB DVD - 6 mins 43 seconds
Import 112 photos (512MB) - 4 mins 48 seconds
Open 2.1MB photo in Photoshop - 19.3 seconds
Fully boot XP Pro in Parallels - 17.1 seconds
** Again, the logic board will allow for installation of 4GB RAM, but the Intel chipset limits accessible RAM to 3GB.
thanks for the update.
I got the blacksceen problem from http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8300945231/m/719000469731/p/2
I got the blacksceen problem from http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8300945231/m/719000469731/p/2
-volvoben
Bingo. You win the prize.
AFAIK, this is not limited to Apple boxes either.