Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

What RAM to buy to update new iMac launched today?

EugW said:
I've always felt that Crucial was a top tier RAM brand whereas G.Skill and Corsair were 2nd tier, but also that RAM failure rates overall for these brands weren't uber high.

I finally found a source that corroborates this, although the data is based out of France, and it is several years old now. Still, it's useful information. The numbers are from retail data.

https://linustechtips.com/main/topi...ts-french-but-i-translated-nearly-everything/

Average Failure rates:
- Kingston 0,20% (vs 0,27% year before)
- Crucial 0,39% (vs 0,30% year before)
- G.Skill 0,95% (vs 1,01% year before)
- Corsair 1,18% (vs 1,06% year before)

Average Failure rates:
- Kingston 0,20% (vs 0,20% before)
- Crucial 0,46% (vs 0,39% before)
- G.Skill 0,90% (vs 0,95% before)
- Corsair 1,08% (vs 1,18% before)

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/893-1/taux-retour-composants-8.html
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/911-1/taux-retour-composants-9.html
Click to expand...
Here is more recent data, from 2016:

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/954-4/memoires.html
  • Kingston 0,14% (contre 0,45%)
  • Crucial 0,19% (contre 0,36%)
  • G.Skill 0,54% (contre 0,72%)
  • Corsair 0,90% (contre 0,87%)
Kingston passe devant Crucial, avec dans les deux cas des taux de retours très bas. Même Corsair qui arrive en dernière position obtient un taux sous le pourcent. Les cinq références vendues à plus de 100 unités qui sont le plus revenues en panne sont les suivantes :
  • 2,19% G.Skill Aegis 16 Go (2 x 8 Go) DDR3L-1600 F3-1600C11D-16GISL
  • 2,08% G.Skill NT 16 Go (2 x 8 Go) DDR3-1600 F3-1600C11D-16GNT
  • 1,94% Corsair VS 4 Go DDR3L-1600 CMV4GX3M1C1600C11
  • 1,67% Corsair Vengeance SO-DIMM 16 Go (2 x 8 Go) DDR3L-1600 CMSX16GX3M2B1600C9
  • 1,42% G.Skill SO-DIMM 8 Go (2 x 4 Go) DDR3-1600 F3-1600C9D-8GSL
 
Hi expert,

Just found this thread, 25pages with 600+ post.. I'm newbies in upgrade thingy and have problem digest the entire thread. Would like to know, for iMac mid 2017, 27" 4.2GHz model, if I order from Apple with upgrade to 32GB RAM, what RAM config they give? 2x16GB or 4x8GB?

Appreciate someone can enlighten me.

Thanks in advance
 
youngchek said:
Just found this thread, 25pages with 600+ post.. I'm newbies in upgrade thingy and have problem digest the entire thread. Would like to know, for iMac mid 2017, 27" 4.2GHz model, if I order from Apple with upgrade to 32GB RAM, what RAM config they give? 2x16GB or 4x8GB?
Click to expand...

Interesting question. I suspect it is 2x16GB but unless someone else around here knows for sure I'd suggest you call Apple directly to confirm this.

That said, I would strongly advise against buying RAM from Apple. It is ridiculously overpriced. I recommend ordering with the minimum 8GB and adding your own good quality PC4-19200 RAM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tgara
Thanks Sushi,

I understand buying 8GB is a wise choice, nevertheless, due to company's needs, I have to order 32GB and upgrade to 64GB at a later stage.

Can someone ever bought with 32GB from Apple and advise.

Thanks.
 
Company's "needs" involve spending $600 on a 32Gb RAM machine when it instead could spend half that and do a simple 30-second install of lifetime-warrantied 3rd-party 32Gb RAM, giving the iMac a total of 40Gb RAM?
 
youngchek said:
I understand buying 8GB is a wise choice, nevertheless, due to company's needs, I have to order 32GB and upgrade to 64GB at a later stage.

Can someone ever bought with 32GB from Apple and advise.
Click to expand...

Rather than waiting for someone in here I recommend you call Apple sales line which should be able to give you a definitive answer in 10 seconds.

Update: I see someone confirmed in another thread you asked this question that Apple ships 32GB in 4x8GB configuration. Wow, what a ripoff! Not only do they charge twice as much as third-party but they force you get rid of all that RAM if you want to upgrade from there.
 
Last edited:
SaSaSushi said:
Rather than waiting for someone in here I recommend you call Apple sales line which should be able to give you a definitive answer in 10 seconds.

Update: I see someone confirmed in another thread you asked this question that Apple ships 32GB in 4x8GB configuration. Wow, what a ripoff! Not only do they charge twice as much as third-party but they force you get rid of all that RAM if you want to upgrade from there.
Click to expand...

That's bad, business is ugly..
 
Keeping my eye on Apple referbs, which seem to come with 16GB. Is apple going to be a jerk and install 4x4GB sticks?
 
Jack Burton said:
Keeping my eye on Apple referbs, which seem to come with 16GB. Is apple going to be a jerk and install 4x4GB sticks?
Click to expand...

Yes. 8GB is apparently the only two-part configuration shipped by Apple.

Update: Someone in this thread seems to insinuate that Apple shipped their 16GB refurb with 2x8GB although I've asked for confirmation of that. It may be a refurb thing.

I still recommending calling Apple to positively confirm it prior to placing any orders.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Burton
SaSaSushi said:
Yes. 8GB is apparently the only two-part configuration shipped by Apple.

Update: Someone in this thread seems to insinuate that Apple shipped their 16GB refurb with 2x8GB although I've asked for confirmation of that. It may be a refurb thing.

I still recommending calling Apple to positively confirm it prior to placing any orders.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'm not too worried, as the refurb price is what is the biggest motivating factor vs a new one only with 8GB standard. If it has two chips in it, bonus. If not, it still saves $400 over the new i7 27 inch with 8GB.

These thing sell out FAST.
 
Jack Burton said:
Thanks. I'm not too worried, as the refurb price is what is the biggest motivating factor vs a new one only with 8GB standard. If it has two chips in it, bonus. If not, it still saves $400 over the new i7 27 inch with 8GB.

These thing sell out FAST.
Click to expand...

Although I usually buy new I think the refurbs are an excellent option. You get a machine that is in brand new condition and with the same warranty and option for AppleCare. The only thing you don't get is the nice white box.

Oh, and you probably saw it but the user in the other thread confirmed that their 16GB refurb was in fact 2x8GB. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Burton
SaSaSushi said:
Although I usually buy new I think the refurbs are an excellent option. You get a machine that is in brand new condition and with the same warranty and option for AppleCare. The only thing you don't get is the nice white box.

Oh, and you probably saw it but the user in the other thread confirmed that their 16GB refurb was in fact 2x8GB. :)
Click to expand...

Ohhh, awesome thanks.
 
Jack Burton said:
These thing sell out FAST.
Click to expand...

Sometimes they flicker in and out within a day, and it can't be because everything sold out and got refreshed immediately. Last week I had bookmarked a refurb stock 3.8GHz 27" iMac with 2Tb Fusion Drive for $1949 (15% off), but when I checked the next morning it appeared sold out... along with most every other 2017 iMac previously listed. Yet all those models were back on the page again 5 hours later. So something's weird about the listings, aside from things selling quickly.

(And yes, I bought that iMac, and I'm typing from it now. :D )
 
So after looking at the Ballistix Sport ram and the original ram that comes with the imac, I've noticed something veery interesting. It looks like the imac ram is just relabelled Ballistix Sport ram. If you compare the two you'll notice that all of the components are in exactly the same place, as well as them being the same colour (black). After all they are made by the same company, Micron. I can't believe no one's picked up on this!

Link to the Ballistix Sport ram:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01DOWXJD0/ref=psdc_430511031_t1_B06XC4R72H?th=1

Link to official imac ram:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/8GB-RAM-2...819072?hash=item3f872d1800:g:GiIAAOSwWWpZvlDm

I'm looking to upgrade my 21.5" 2017 Imac from 8gb to 16gb of ram. Despite people in this thread saying it's not possible, it is, it's just a lot harder than the 27". Does anyone know if dual or single ranked ram makes a difference in this case? Because there are two 16gb (2x8) Ballistix Sport ram kits, one is duel the other is single.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Dead_serious said:
So after looking at the Ballistix Sport ram and the original ram that comes with the imac, I've noticed something veery interesting. It looks like the imac ram is just relabelled Ballistix Sport ram. If you compare the two you'll notice that all of the components are in exactly the same place, as well as them being the same colour (black). After all they are made by the same company, Micron. I can't believe no one's picked up on this!
Click to expand...

Crucial is the consumer arm of Micron but the RAM shipped by Apple is not Ballistix and, while compatible, is not the same. Apple's RAM has a CAS latency of 17, for example, while the Ballistix is faster at CL16.

They will work together perfectly, however, at the slower CL17 of the Micron.
 
kdoug said:
Cas latency isn’t an accurate measure of memory performance.
http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/memory-performance-speed-latency
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point is. That is an article explaining how RAM speed is more important CAS latency. I don't recall anyone saying it wasn't.

The Apple Micron and Ballistix are the same speed but the Ballistix has a slightly faster CAS latency. The Kingston Hyper-X many users in here are using is even faster.
 
kdoug said:
Cas latency isn’t an accurate measure of memory performance. A nanosecond is equal to 1 billionth of a second so CL makes absolutely NO difference in speed.
http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/memory-performance-speed-latency
Click to expand...
[doublepost=1505965556][/doublepost]
SaSaSushi said:
Not sure what your point is. That is an article explaining how RAM speed is more important CAS latency. I don't recall anyone saying it wasn't.

The Apple Micron and Ballistix are the same speed but the Ballistix has a slightly faster CAS latency. The Kingston Hyper-X many users in here are using is even faster.
Click to expand...
Why do you keep saying that? Understand this, one nanosecond is equal to one billionth of a second. One billionth! CL has nothing to do with speed. Read and understand.
 
kdoug said:
[doublepost=1505965556][/doublepost]
Why do you keep saying that? Understand this, one nanosecond is equal to one billionth of a second. One billionth! CL has nothing to do with speed. Read and understand.
Click to expand...

Whoa, what's with the condescension, dude? The article you linked to only points out that speed is far more important than CAS latency, a fact I agree with.

Good quality RAM of the same speed with lower CAS latency most certainly does improve performance, although not night and day. A look at the benchmarks posted by various users in this very thread will prove this fact.

Read them and understand. :p
 
SaSaSushi said:
Whoa, what's with the condescension, dude? The article you linked to only points out that speed is far more important than CAS latency, a fact I agree with.

Good quality RAM of the same speed with lower CAS latency most certainly does improve performance, although not night and day. A look at the benchmarks posted by various users in this very thread will prove this fact.

Read them and understand. :p
Click to expand...
So what your saying, is the people with the lowest number of CAS latency memory modules are getting better benchmarks then everybody else. LOL, now I’ve heard everything. Please refrain from posting anything else on this forum.
Maybe you should contact Apple and tell them they’re using the wrong RAM since they’re using CL17.
 
kdoug said:
So what your saying, is the people with the lowest number of CAS latency memory modules are getting better benchmarks then everybody else. LOL, now I’ve heard everything. Please refrain from posting anything else on this forum.
Maybe you should contact Apple and tell them they’re using the wrong RAM since they’re using CL17.
What a maroon.
Click to expand...

Instead of wasting space with childish insults, go back and read through this thread as there are some helpful benchmarks posted by various contributors with different RAM which show that the lower (faster) CL PC4-19200 parts do perform better in benchmarks.

Now, if you were arguing that this wouldn't make for a noticeable difference in performance in daily usage you might have a point.

Apple is obviously not using the wrong RAM. I merely pointed out that the Ballistix has a slightly faster CL.
 
Last edited:
SaSaSushi said:
Instead of wasting space with childish insults, go back and read through this thread as there are some helpful benchmarks posted by various contributors with different RAM which show that the lower (faster) CL PC4-19200 parts do perform better in benchmarks.

Now, if you were arguing that this wouldn't make for a noticeable difference in performance in daily usage you might have a point.

Apple is obviously not using the wrong RAM. I merely pointed out that the Ballistix has a slightly faster CL.
Click to expand...
I could benchmark my computer 10 times and get 10 different readings, you know that and I know that. Lower CL RAM does not automatically translate to faster speeds and DEFINITELY offers no noticeable performance advantages. Anybody who’s spending more money to get lower timings and expecting performance gains on iMac RAM will be sorely disappointed. I’ll offer up once again an article that benchmarks CL9 and CL11 in the same machine. You’ll see CL11 performs as well and in some cases, performs better than CL9. I’ll rest my case for now.
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/memory-timings-affect-real-world-computer-performance/
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back