MacPro 2008 3,1 RAMs

[LaFemme69]

Hi, wondering if anyone can please help me with RAMS.

I recently purchased a used MP 2008 3,1 for the purpose of doing some photo editing with Adobe CS6 and video editing using FCP X, Adobe Premiere. The system has the following RAMs:

Riser 1:
4GB ddr2-5300F 667 Mhz
4GB "
1GB ddr2-6400F 800 Mhz
1GB ddr2-6400F 800 Mhz

Riser 2:
all slots with 1GB ddr2-6400F 800 Mhz

Under About My Mac, shows total 14GB @ 667 Mhz Of course, they only run at the lowest speed........

my questions to what should I do to optimize/maximize the performance:

(1) should I leave it as is or should I remove the two 4GB 667 Mhz and stick with only 6GB 800Mhz?

(2) Since the system is used for photo and video editing, should I might as well max out to 32GB? The question is will I notice the difference in performance if I get 32GB 667Mhz as oppose to the more expensive 800Mhz? If 800Mhz gives better performance, I'd rather pay the extra bucks to achieve that.

 

[IowaLynn]

Hi, wondering if anyone can please help me with RAMS.

I recently purchased a used MP 2008 3,1 for the purpose of doing some photo editing with Adobe CS6 and video editing using FCP X, Adobe Premiere. The system has the following RAMs:

Riser 1:
4GB ddr2-5300F 667 Mhz
4GB "
1GB ddr2-6400F 800 Mhz
1GB ddr2-6400F 800 Mhz

Riser 2:
all slots with 1GB ddr2-6400F 800 Mhz

Under About My Mac, shows total 14GB @ 667 Mhz Of course, they only run at the lowest speed........

my questions to what should I do to optimize/maximize the performance:

(1) should I leave it as is or should I remove the two 4GB 667 Mhz and stick with only 6GB 800Mhz?

(2) Since the system is used for photo and video editing, should I might as well max out to 32GB? The question is will I notice the difference in performance if I get 32GB 667Mhz as oppose to the more expensive 800Mhz? If 800Mhz gives better performance, I'd rather pay the extra bucks to achieve that.

Don't run the system at all with a defective set of memory like you have.

Barefeats: using all 8 slots = 17% improvement vs the 4% tiny cut from using 667MHz FBDIMMs.

So 24GB seems to be a good configuration and 8x2GB 667MHz have been as low as $19 on Amazon and even less on ebay. Use some $$ for PCIe SSD(s) for system, scratch. And make sure to plan for 100GB+ on the system drive for plug-in cache.

 

[b0fh666]

yes, don't run your system with bad memory unless you don't care about it corrupting files all over the place.

 

[LaFemme69]

thank you for the responses.

please clarify something for me.......

please tell me why you think some of my memories are corrupted? I am new to MAC so I don't know much. I read the stickers on the RAM, the 4GBs said DDR2-5300F 667MHz and all the other 1GBs said DDR2-6400F 800 Mhz. In About My Mac, it showed 14GB (2x4GB + 6x1GB) @ 667Mhz (the system runs @ the lowest speed). There was no Red light on the risers when I turn on the MP so I assume they are all good. Unless I am wrong.

in any case because I read somewhere not to mix different speed so I removed the 2x4GB 667Mhz and only running the remainder 6x1GB 800Mhz. About My Mac showed just that, total 6GB 800Mhz with 2 free slots.

thank you so much.

 

[LaFemme69]

Don't run the system at all with a defective set of memory like you have.

Barefeats: using all 8 slots = 17% improvement vs the 4% tiny cut from using 667MHz FBDIMMs.

So 24GB seems to be a good configuration and 8x2GB 667MHz have been as low as $19 on Amazon and even less on ebay. Use some $$ for PCIe SSD(s) for system, scratch. And make sure to plan for 100GB+ on the system drive for plug-in cache.

forgot to mention about the specs of the system after a few upgrades:
- boot up drive is a 512GB SSD (through PCIe controller card in slot 2 x16)
- Nvidia GTX 750 ti graphic (slot 1 x16)
- 250GB 5400 rpm SATA HDD scratch disk (bay 4).....is that sufficient enough?
- 1x500GB, 1x1TB & 1x1.5TB 7200rpm SATA HDD in the remainder of the HDD bays

Yes I read on that site too that most efficient is using all 8 slots, just don't know if I should configure 8 slots of 32GB 667MHz vs 800MHz, or whatever you think is sufficient and cost effective.

I think in the same article, it mentions about 1GB modules are usually SR (single rank) rams but for better performance preferably with DR (dual rank) rams so I am even thinking of swapping out those 1GB rams and get 4GB rams........just a thought!

sorry I am confused, how can i get 24GB using 8x2GB (16GB using all 8 slots)? 2ndly, you think 24GB of 667Mhz should be good for what I do? I don't need to have 800Mhz rams, simply because it won't make much difference b/w 667Mhz vs 800Mhz?

thanx.

 

[LaFemme69]

RAMs.....

I've included some photos of my ram, hopefully you can all see.....

the 1st photo is a sample of the 2x4gb 667Mhz. ? unacceptable heat sink spreader for MPs

the 2nd photo is a sample of the 6x1GB 800Mhz.

thank you.

 

[nigelbb]

I have no idea why IowaLynn & b0fh666 think that you have bad memory because you haven't. You have 2 x 4GB + 6 x 1GB for a grand total of 14GB as correctly reported in About My Mac.

I have a Mac Pro 3,1 filled with 8 x 4GB 667Mhx parts for a grand total of 32GB & it's great for Premiere Pro, Photoshop, FP & other RAM intensive applications.

In your situation I would get at least 2 & preferably another 6 x 4GB 667MHz RAM sticks. Unfortunately the 1GB parts are of little value even if they are 800MHz.

The 667MHz parts run cooler than the 800MHz parts so don't need such big heat sinks which are in any case typical Apple over-engineering.

There are plenty of cheap used 667MHz parts pulled from Xeon servers. Unfortunately apart from Apple almost no other manufacturer used the 800MHz parts which is why they are more expensive.

 

[LaFemme69]

I have no idea why IowaLynn & b0fh666 think that you have bad memory because you haven't. You have 2 x 4GB + 6 x 1GB for a grand total of 14GB as correctly reported in About My Mac.

I have a Mac Pro 3,1 filled with 8 x 4GB 667Mhx parts for a grand total of 32GB & it's great for Premiere Pro, Photoshop, FP & other RAM intensive applications.

In your situation I would get at least 2 & preferably another 6 x 4GB 667MHz RAM sticks. Unfortunately the 1GB parts are of little value even if they are 800MHz.

The 667MHz parts run cooler than the 800MHz parts so don't need such big heat sinks which are in any case typical Apple over-engineering.

There are plenty of cheap used 667MHz parts pulled from Xeon servers. Unfortunately apart from Apple almost no other manufacturer used the 800MHz parts which is why they are more expensive.

Thank you for replying,

I am glad to see someone with similiar specs for the same purpose and happy with performance.

in your opinion, those 2x4GBs have good enough heat sink spreader? and just get enough more to achieve 32GB (6x4gb) 667Mhz.

thanx.

 

[nigelbb]

in your opinion, those 2x4GBs have good enough heat sink spreader? and just get enough more to achieve 32GB (6x4gb) 667Mhz.

Yes.

 

[LaFemme69]

Yes.

do you think it's OK with used rams?

The same guy who sold me this 2008 MP 3.1 has a bunch of used 4GB 667Mhz (same heat sink spreader as the first photo) that can give me 6 more sticks for $75. I just didn't get it because at that time, wasn't sure if 667Mhz was good enough.......not sure if they are from Xeon servers or not. does it matter? when I get home tonight, will try to take a pic of the 2 pieces I have and post up. They are Hynix sticks and MP didn't give any trouble when I have them in so I assume they must have correct specifications as for Mac Pro rams.

thanx.

 

[IowaLynn]

do you think it's OK with used rams?

The same guy who sold me this 2008 MP 3.1 has a bunch of used 4GB 667Mhz (same heat sink spreader as the first photo) that can give me 6 more sticks for $75. I just didn't get it because at that time, wasn't sure if 667Mhz was good enough.......not sure if they are from Xeon servers or not. does it matter? when I get home tonight, will try to take a pic of the 2 pieces I have and post up. They are Hynix sticks and MP didn't give any trouble when I have them in so I assume they must have correct specifications as for Mac Pro rams.

thanx.

Server FBDIMMs would have different RAM spreaders, and even some of those (but not 100% of em) work and don't exceed safe thermal levels.

Make sure that you can have even 30 days to know - and try them alone, not mixed with other DIMMs you have, first. The price is good.

AHT was good at checking FBDIMMs and Risers for hardware issues like parity test. So if you have the OEM DVD or a service disc try that too.

 

[666sheep]

Get those 6 sticks from that guy, price is good. With a little fiddling you can transplant "big" heatspreaders to them from 1GB sticks, if you worry about temps. But it isn't a must.

 

[IowaLynn]

I have no idea why IowaLynn & b0fh666 think that you have bad memory because you haven't. You have 2 x 4GB + 6 x 1GB for a grand total of 14GB as correctly reported in About My Mac.

I have a Mac Pro 3,1 filled with 8 x 4GB 667Mhx parts for a grand total of 32GB & it's great for Premiere Pro, Photoshop, FP & other RAM intensive applications.

In your situation I would get at least 2 & preferably another 6 x 4GB 667MHz RAM sticks. Unfortunately the 1GB parts are of little value even if they are 800MHz.

The 667MHz parts run cooler than the 800MHz parts so don't need such big heat sinks which are in any case typical Apple over-engineering.

There are plenty of cheap used 667MHz parts pulled from Xeon servers. Unfortunately apart from Apple almost no other manufacturer used the 800MHz parts which is why they are more expensive.

When I saw this:

4GB "

I did not read that as "same as above" (ditto) but as EMPTY 0GB DIMM

 

[LaFemme69]

When I saw this:

4GB "

I did not read that as "same as above" (ditto) but as EMPTY 0GB DIMM

no worry, all is good!

done deal.....purchased another 6x4GB 667Mhz ($75 CAD) to total 32GB 667Mhz.

just curious, I looked on the sticker on the ram and it labelled as ddr2 5300f 667mhz but no where said ECC fbdimm......they look like the first pic from above. all worked and shown up appropriately in About My Mac. is it safe to assume they are Apple compatible/certified rams? non-ECC or non-buffered dimms should not fit in the slot would it? and also, MP would give an error correct?

thanx.

 

[LaFemme69]

I have no idea why IowaLynn & b0fh666

I have a Mac Pro 3,1 filled with 8 x 4GB 667Mhx parts for a grand total of 32GB & it's great for Premiere Pro, Photoshop, FP & other RAM intensive applications.

all set, purchased another 6x4gb to make 32GB 667 Mhz.

few questions I want to ask you. I am not sure if I expect too much from this MP or not but so far I don't see much improved performance with this compared to my 2006 Quad-core 6700Q, 4gb RAM Hackintosh.

my boot up time is around 13-15 sec from the chime. when I open up an app e.g Premiere pro, it takes about 6-10 seconds to fully open.......are these within limits? how is yours'?

 

[w1z]

my boot up time is around 13-15 sec from the chime. when I open up an app e.g Premiere pro, it takes about 6-10 seconds to fully open.......are these within limits? how is yours'?

I have a similar setup but with 64GB 667-MHz Crucial server-grade memory modules and Premier loads in 4 to 5 secs... my boot time is anywhere between 15 and 19 seconds, from the chime, due to the initialization of the areca raid card ARC-1882IX-12. Boot/App drive is an encrypted Crucial M550 drive hooked up to a Sonnet Temp Pro SSD card.

 

[crjackson2134]

all set, purchased another 6x4gb to make 32GB 667 Mhz.

few questions I want to ask you. I am not sure if I expect too much from this MP or not but so far I don't see much improved performance with this compared to my 2006 Quad-core 6700Q, 4gb RAM Hackintosh.

my boot up time is around 13-15 sec from the chime. when I open up an app e.g Premiere pro, it takes about 6-10 seconds to fully open.......are these within limits? how is yours'?

Looks like you're all set. It doesn't matter how much memory you have on initial load of the app. (Unless you are so memory starved, it starts swapping/paging right off the bat). Your loading speed is mostly a result of your HDD/SSD speeds.

Most of your memory will be allocated to file caching. For instance, open up your app. And note the load times, then close the app. all the way out. Then launch it again and notice how much faster the loading is now. That's because the memory is now storing part of the app. so that it doesn't have to load the data from the HDD/SSD this time. That example is the most noticable performance increase you'll probably see after your memory upgrade. The more RAMS you have installed, the more apps. can remain in memory for fast loading. There are other benefits and performance increases, but the one above is the most noticeable at first.

Also, adding more memory, often lengthens to the boot time rather than decreasing it, which is normal. It takes longer to quick test your system since it now has more to test.

 

[OS6-OSX]

Nvidia GTX 750 ti graphic (slot 1 x16)

Since you have this video card, switch to use CUDA in Premiere Pro and see if the "performance" differs from that of the "32GB 667 Mhz" ram.

 

[LaFemme69]

thank you everyone for responding.

I am a mac newbie so every bit of infos count.

 

[elvisizer]

such big heat sinks which are in any case typical Apple over-engineering.

It's true the 667 memory doesn't need the huge 'sinks, but the 800's definitely do.
don't cheap out if you're going with 800.

 

[LaFemme69]

I have a similar setup but with 64GB 667-MHz Crucial server-grade memory modules and Premier loads in 4 to 5 secs... my boot time is anywhere between 15 and 19 seconds, from the chime, due to the initialization of the areca raid card ARC-1882IX-12. Boot/App drive is an encrypted Crucial M550 drive hooked up to a Sonnet Temp Pro SSD card.

I remember reading somewhere that any systems booting off a pcie card will experience a slight delay due to the way how MP boots. internal bays first then controller cards. with my 2006 6700q quad-core, 4GB hackintosh in verbose mode, i do notice it reads from the pcie card as soon as it is . maybe that's why it seems to load faster than the MP. Nevertheless, negligible difference!

 

[LaFemme69]

Looks like you're all set. It doesn't matter how much memory you have on initial load of the app. (Unless you are so memory starved, it starts swapping/paging right off the bat). Your loading speed is mostly a result of your HDD/SSD speeds.

Most of your memory will be allocated to file caching. For instance, open up your app. And note the load times, then close the app. all the way out. Then launch it again and notice how much faster the loading is now. That's because the memory is now storing part of the app. so that it doesn't have to load the data from the HDD/SSD this time. That example is the most noticable performance increase you'll probably see after your memory upgrade. The more RAMS you have installed, the more apps. can remain in memory for fast loading. There are other benefits and performance increases, but the one above is the most noticeable at first.

Also, adding more memory, often lengthens to the boot time rather than decreasing it, which is normal. It takes longer to quick test your system since it now has more to test.

good to know infos. thank you.

I do notice that apps open up faster after the initial run. Your explanations do make sense.

I never knew the more rams the longer the boot time. is it only specific with Apple fbdimms (or servers) vs any PC with non-buffered dimms?

I haven't done any rendering or any intense activities with the MP so I haven't really tested the capability of the 32GB

 

[nigelbb]

I never knew the more rams the longer the boot time. is it only specific with Apple fbdimms (or servers) vs any PC with non-buffered dimms?

Checking that harder works is part of the Power On Self Test (POST) of any computer. The more RAM you have the longer it takes to check that it's all working OK.

 

[LaFemme69]

Since you have this video card, switch to use CUDA in Premiere Pro and see if the "performance" differs from that of the "32GB 667 Mhz" ram.

I will definitely do that.

so, do I also have to install the CUDA driver as well? so far, I just installed the web driver for the gtx 750 ti, instead of using the native OS X driver.

thank you.

 

[IowaLynn]

I remember reading somewhere that any systems booting off a pcie card will experience a slight delay due to the way how MP boots. internal bays first then controller cards. with my 2006 6700q quad-core, 4GB hackintosh in verbose mode, i do notice it reads from the pcie card as soon as it is . maybe that's why it seems to load faster than the MP. Nevertheless, negligible difference!

The XP941 and those like it are pass-trough adapters and have no driver or firmware, are natively supported on Mac - something that PC has not had until X99 and Z97 motherboards. https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/19636832/

From Ramcity: "When combined with a M.2 to PCIe adapter, the Samsung XP941 provides class-leading storage performance in desktop machines and is also fully bootable in all cMP Mac Pro models (2006-2012, excluding the 'tube' model)." RAMCity

Works with most motherboards and notebooks with a compatible M.2 PCIe interface slot. Includes Z97 and X99 motherboards and pre-cylindrical Mac Pro. Samsung SM951 NVMe

Transparent to the operating system and does not require any software drivers Sintech M.2(NGFF) PCIe SSD