MacBook/Pros don't support >2GB RAM

[jb84]

http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/07/706/2gb-notebook-ram-but-not-for-macbooks

Apple Australia PR Manager Fiona Martin has confirmed that the 2GB DIMMs will not work in MacBooks or MacBook Pros. She wrote, in part, “At this point in time, the maximum RAM configuration supported by Apple on the MacBook Pro is 2GB which is achieved by installing 2 X 1GB DIMMS. Apple constantly evaluates new technologies as they come to market and where appropriate, will make these technologies available to its customers.

This is a significant, and for me, disappointing, limitation. Hopefully it will be fixed with a firmware update.

Edit: she confirmed the wrong thing. People have found single 2gb DIMMs to work fine, but a 2gb plus another DIMM (totalling more than 2GB) doesn't work

 

[Scarlet Fever]

doesnt really worry me...
portables dont usually support anything more than that, and 2GB is still a fair bit. If you need more, you probably shouldn't be getting a portable.

Wouldnt 2x1GB be faster/better than 1x2GB because of the dual memory thing?

 

[jb84]

2gb should be more than enough for almost anything, but it's people running many Rosetta apps that are feeling the pinch

Wouldnt 2x1GB be faster/better than 1x2GB because of the dual memory thing?

Perhaps but not necessarily. The Core Duo's FSB bandwidth of 5.3GB/s (667mhz * 64 bits) is fully saturated by single channel of RAM, let alone 2 channels.

The only other things which consume memory bandwidth would be:
- integrated graphics (since the part of the system memory is reserved as the graphics memory -- only an issue on the MB)
- and DMA transfers (i.e. reading from/writing to hard drives: a miniscule amount of bandwidth consumption which would be lucky to top 60mb/s)

So at least on a MBP, 2 channels should make half of bugger-all difference.

 

[Josias]

http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/07/706/2gb-notebook-ram-but-not-for-macbooks



This is a significant, and for me, disappointing, limitation. Hopefully it will be fixed with a firmware update.

Edit: she confirmed the wrong thing. People have found single 2gb DIMMs to work fine, but a 2gb plus another DIMM (totalling more than 2GB) doesn't work

Why are you dissapointed. A 2 GB SO Dimm costs $2700. That's like a frickin' 17" MBP! Why would you need anything more than 2 GB? For what? If anyone needs to run PhotoShop or other non-universal apps, they could get a PowerBook. A MBP will on non-native apps match a 1.25 GHz G4. If you get a rev. E PB G4 maxed out, you will be fine. There is no excisting reason to put more than 2 GB RAM in a MB/MBP, except showoff.

 

[dextertangocci]

doesnt really worry me...
portables dont usually support anything more than that, and 2GB is still a fair bit. If you need more, you probably shouldn't be getting a portable.

Wouldnt 2x1GB be faster/better than 1x2GB because of the dual memory thing?

In the MPB it doesn't really matter, but in the MB it does because of the whole integrated graphics thing.

 

[live4ever]

When the 64bit Core Duo 2 starts shipping in the MBP perhaps then >2GB of RAM will be possible, if Apple updates the firmware.

 

[AlBDamned]

Also discussed here guys:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/216293/

 

[jb84]

Why are you dissapointed. A 2 GB SO Dimm costs $2700. That's like a frickin' 17" MBP! Why would you need anything more than 2 GB? For what? If anyone needs to run PhotoShop or other non-universal apps, they could get a PowerBook. A MBP will on non-native apps match a 1.25 GHz G4. If you get a rev. E PB G4 maxed out, you will be fine. There is no excisting reason to put more than 2 GB RAM in a MB/MBP, except showoff.

Wrong. Not all of us upgrade our machines every 6 months. I'd had my previous machine (a 12" aluminium PBG4) for 3 years, and I'm going to hold onto my MBP for at least that long too: I'm still at uni, and definitely not made of money

My PBG4 "officially" accepted 640MB max -- and after 3 years, this was not enough. I'm willing to bet that 3 years from now, the MBP's 2GB limit will not be enough, either.

As for the RAM prices (if they're even correct) -- They may cost a lot now, but they won't cost nearly as much in a year. Or even 6 months. Or even 2 months, for that matter.

BTW, the quote in your sig should read: "Never ask what sort of computer a guy drives. If he's a Mac user, he'll tell you. If not, why embarrass him?"

 

[robbieduncan]

When the 64bit Core Duo 2 starts shipping in the MBP perhaps then >2GB of RAM will be possible, if Apple updates the firmware.

What makes you think they will update the firmware of exiting MBPs. The MBP has a soldered in processor making CPU upgrades impossible. Brand New Merom based MBPs may well support more than 2GB but existing owners (myself included) have no reason to expect it.

 

[jb84]

What makes you think they will update the firmware of exiting MBPs. The MBP has a soldered in processor making CPU upgrades impossible. Brand New Merom based MBPs may well support more than 2GB but existing owners (myself included) have no reason to expect it.

The soldered CPU is a hardware constraint.... if the firmware was changed to allow booting of BIOS-based operating systems, I have no doubt that it can (and will) be changed to remove a RAM limit...