Yes! I talked to Apple and this is exactly what they told me. Its ATI related. They hope to have a fix very soon as it is an easy one. Oh and I just checked, its def ATI Radeon card that I have in there.
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.
If your Mac Pro has more than 80 gigs of ram DO NOT UPDATE TO 10.8.2
- Thread starter HyperX13
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes! I talked to Apple and this is exactly what they told me. Its ATI related. They hope to have a fix very soon as it is an easy one. Oh and I just checked, its def ATI Radeon card that I have in there.
RAM disks were useful back in DOS days, especially when using floppies. Programs needed less RAM, so you could dedicate 128KB or more for storing programs.
Then, later, with EMS and extended memory (and the 640K DOS limit), put a meg of ram disk and store programs and temporary files there.
Then, later, with EMS and extended memory (and the 640K DOS limit), put a meg of ram disk and store programs and temporary files there.
RAM disks are useful these days too. For example, 1333 MHz RAM is roughly 15-20 times faster than the fastest SATA based SSDs. That sounds pretty useful to me.
Please tell me what you would use 96gb of ram for? Serious question
Beyond what people have been talking about for RAM disks, some data analysis packages, like R, have a tendency to load data into memory. While it's trivially easy to end up using all your RAM on a huge database, there are other ways even with less massive amounts of data to cap out your RAM pretty quickly.
Statistics based on extensive simulation or permutation of data come to mind. I regularly run jobs that exceed the maximum RAM of a cluster node with 96gb of RAM, and end up dumping it on a machine that has a TB.
Sorry for OT but are these fitting a 2010 hexcore? i'm from europe and 24GB usually costs around 229. thx
Sorry for OT but are these fitting a 2010 hexcore? i'm from europe and 24GB usually costs around 229. thx
Yes they will work with a hexcore.
http://www.crucial.com/eu/store/partspecs.aspx?IMODULE=CT102464BA1339
RAM disks are useful these days too. For example, 1333 MHz RAM is roughly 15-20 times faster than the fastest SATA based SSDs. That sounds pretty useful to me.
Now that RAM can be pretty cheap, and systems can support large amounts of memory, I can see where they would come in handy in certain conditions.
I wouldn't want to move my email store to RAM disk. Hardly worth the effort. Especially since you would still want it to stay persistent.
For many years, the reason RAM disks went out of fashion is that memory was a limiting factor. You use some RAM for a ram disk, then increase swapping. Just use memory as a filesystem cache, and let the system try to improve overall disk performance.
If you are doing a dataset that routinely works with very large temporary files, and you have a large amount of extra memory, it should be good. Esp
I myself don't work in an environment where this would help. I wonder whether it would help in compiling, say, a Linux kernel enough to handle the overhead of copying the source from disk then writing the output to hard drive?
People weren't really using them before SSDs because memory was too expensive and limited.
SSDs actually make RAM disks more useful because a single user workflow utilizing RAM disks is still quite reliant on a hard disk. I'd suggest that SSDs have also made people realise how fast I/O improves their computing experience and productivity.
Too LATE!!!!
Not yet. I will be monitoring issue closely. I have a big project that requires all my ram!
A 10.8.2 Supplemental Update was just released with this.
- Addresses an issue that may prevent systems with more than 64 GB of RAM from starting up
- Addresses an issue that may prevent systems with more than 64 GB of RAM from starting up