I guess FluJunkie used a cluster at some scientific facility. The point he was making was just that there are computers with 1TB of RAM. In this case most of the nodes were probably equipped like that.
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.
Future Mac Pro with 128GB RAM, 32 threads
- Thread starter unethical
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I guess FluJunkie used a cluster at some scientific facility. The point he was making was just that there are computers with 1TB of RAM. In this case most of the nodes were probably equipped like that.
so each node had 1TB of RAM? or does the RAM from all the machines total to 1TB of ram?
Awesome, I am waiting for the next Mac Pro to come out and look just like your Hackintosh Beast! That looks quite cool man, too cool!
Unfortunately I don't work at that kind of a scientific facility. I just have the hardware you can see in my sig and some knowledge about clusters.
Unfortunately I don't work at that kind of a scientific facility. I just have the hardware you can see in my sig and some knowledge about clusters.
wrong person lol
pretty solid memory upgrade options .
" **Current Mac OS X versions are unable to utilize more then 96GB RAM due to an operating system limitation. 128GB can be fully utilized by a 2009-2010 Mac Pro if running Bootcamp with 64-bit versions of Windows XP and later as well as with 64-bit versions of Linux."
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/Mac-Pro-Memory#1333-memory
" **Current Mac OS X versions are unable to utilize more then 96GB RAM due to an operating system limitation. 128GB can be fully utilized by a 2009-2010 Mac Pro if running Bootcamp with 64-bit versions of Windows XP and later as well as with 64-bit versions of Linux."
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/Mac-Pro-Memory#1333-memory
what i meant was: i asked the wrong person. about who owns the supercomputer at the scientific facility. My apologies.
I don't think there's a 96GB limit in Lion. It supports up to 16TB of RAM just as SL did since it's a 64-bit OS, too; thus, it can address vast amounts (=16TB) of RAM.
Yeh exactly but people keep saying that the Mac Pros can not support over 96GB due to a software limitation
Last edited:
Hm, ok, there might be a firmware limitation in the Mac Pros. Looking at the OP's build we can clearly see that on his hardware Lion recognizes over 96GB of RAM, so my guess is the Mac Pro's firmware being the limiting factor, which is a bummer.
EDIT: I just did some research: If you put 128GB of RAM into a Mac Pro, it would display those correctly in "About this Mac". The point is that it still only utilizes 96GB, which one can see in the Activity Monitor.
That's much like the 3GB/6GB limitations in some older iMacs/MacBooks.
Last edited:
Must be the reason. Kind of annoying, especially for the people who would need more.
More you grab a bunch of high-end computers, leash them together, and make them all work in tandem. So rather than needing to wait for your computer to finish a job, you can sent it out to ten machines and say "Hollar when you all are done."
Or in this case, offload a *very* memory intensive task onto an extremely high memory machine.
Got it in one.
Two or three of the nodes each have 1 TB of RAM. Then there's several hundred nodes with less RAM for lower memory tasks - each of those have 48 or 96 GB.
As noted above, somewhere in between 500 and 1000. Shared between a large number of researchers running several thousand jobs in parallel.
Last edited: