or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › more than 2G of ram on Intel macs ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

more than 2G of ram on Intel macs ?

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
Hi,

I was just curious, why is the max amount of ram on both the Macbook Pro and Intel iMac just 2Gs? I was poking around the Acer Travelmate 8200 website (that is Acer's duocore laptop) and it says there is a way to put 4G on their laptop:

Up to 2 GB of DDR2 533/667 MHz memory, upgradeable to 4 GB using two soDIMM modules (dual-channel support)

what is an "soDIMM module?" can we use this on one of the new macs?
post #2 of 20
SO-DIMM stands for Short Outline Dimm, basically a standard DIMM memory module that is smaller and shorter in height.

Also, while Apple officially says the machines support up to 2 GB of RAM (2 slots @ 1 GB each), higher density memory may work and therefore you may be able to run up to 4 GB. We'll have to wait and see when somebody tries it.
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
post #3 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by Xool
SO-DIMM stands for Short Outline Dimm, basically a standard DIMM memory module that is smaller and shorter in height.

Small Outline actually.

I haven't seen any retailers selling 2GB SO-DIMM modules over here. Do they exist?
post #4 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by vgoklani
Hi,

I was just curious, why is the max amount of ram on both the Macbook Pro and Intel iMac just 2Gs? I was poking around the Acer Travelmate 8200 website (that is Acer's duocore laptop) and it says there is a way to put 4G on their laptop:

Up to 2 GB of DDR2 533/667 MHz memory, upgradeable to 4 GB using two soDIMM modules (dual-channel support)

what is an "soDIMM module?" can we use this on one of the new macs?

Well, the Yonah is a 32bit chip. There may be a way to put 4GB in the machine, but I don't think the computer will be able to deal with any more than 2G. If there were a way, I'm sure Apple would let you do it. Even with the late-model iMac G5, which was intentionally crippled (probably to give it fewer advantages over the Intel iMac) you can get 2.5G in there. If a 4G RAM stick ever comes out, you'll be able to get 4.5G. The G5 is a 64bit chip, and can address much more memory than the Yonah.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #5 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Well, the Yonah is a 32bit chip. There may be a way to put 4GB in the machine, but I don't think the computer will be able to deal with any more than 2G. If there were a way, I'm sure Apple would let you do it. Even with the late-model iMac G5, which was intentionally crippled (probably to give it fewer advantages over the Intel iMac) you can get 2.5G in there. If a 4G RAM stick ever comes out, you'll be able to get 4.5G. The G5 is a 64bit chip, and can address much more memory than the Yonah.

Intel's 32 bit chips have typically addressed up to 4GB. One caveat may be physical space. RAM is a very tight fit in these new iMacs, and sometimes the largest ram capacities require slightly more clearance in one dimension or another.
post #6 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Well, the Yonah is a 32bit chip. There may be a way to put 4GB in the machine, but I don't think the computer will be able to deal with any more than 2G. If there were a way, I'm sure Apple would let you do it. Even with the late-model iMac G5, which was intentionally crippled (probably to give it fewer advantages over the Intel iMac) you can get 2.5G in there. If a 4G RAM stick ever comes out, you'll be able to get 4.5G. The G5 is a 64bit chip, and can address much more memory than the Yonah.

Whether the new Macs can handle and use 4GB is totally up to the OS design. I own several old Xeons that are designed to accept 4GB, including a dual 500MHz. I had a second hand, off-lease machine for a few months that did have 4GB, only the upper 256 MB was unavailable, but that is still 3.75GB, and this was with Windows 2000 Pro, not the server edition. The only issue was that I needed the money more than I needed the memory, so off it went.

There might be a per-app limitation of 2GB, but that means two data-hungry apps can operate where only one could before.
post #7 of 20
OS X 32-bit is a 4GB address space per process. Hardware constraints CAN affect the amount of installable RAM, but is probably not worth the effort. It is far more likely that due the the pretty much non-supply of 2GB SO-DIMMS Apple didn't QA them, so doesn't list them as supported.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #8 of 20
the again the imac g5 isight(RIP) has built in 512 plus a 4 gb more then the iMactel. then again the intel core-duo is meant for laptops. cause it is suppose to be the next step for the centrio.
post #9 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by Rise Above
then again the intel core-duo is meant for laptops. cause it is suppose to be the next step for the centrio.

You're right that it's replacing Centrino, but that is not all it's doing. It also is being put to use in Intel's new VIIV media center designation. It is not and has never been just a laptop chip.
post #10 of 20
yeah but those chips suck, my bro have a laptop with centrio and it is so slow, if it is going to be duel then make it fast and better then amd or ibm. come on it is only 20% faster. and my friend that is not a lot if it was over 40% then we can discusse a little more.
post #11 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by Rise Above
yeah but those chips suck, my bro have a laptop with centrio and it is so slow

I don't think your sample size is large enough. The Pentium M is a formidable chip, given the right amount of RAM and decent components. Clock for clock it's a very strong contender, and taking power consideration into account it's posted the best general performance per watt of anything up until the Core Duo. It's because the Pentium M was so strong of an architecture relative to the Pentium 4 that the Pentium 4 is being de-emphasized in favor of the Pentium M successors, beginning with Core Duo and accelerating with Merom / Conroe later this year (using the same socket and chipset as the Duo).
post #12 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by ciparis
... Merom / Conroe later this year (using the same socket and chipset as the Duo).

Really? Even though those, as opposed to Yonah, are 64-bit?

I've read that the Core Duo in the iMac and MBP sits in a ZIF socket and can thus be upgraded; but Yonah won't go beyond 2.33GHz (at least I think so as that is where Merom will start), and so it wouldn't be worth it. But if we were able to put a Merom in the current iMacs / MBPs ... well, that sure would be nice. Really nice.

Would the Merom somehow work in 32-bit mode then, or would it make the whole system 64-bit? I mean, if it actually is the same chipset, it should already support it, no?
post #13 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by december
Really? Even though those, as opposed to Yonah, are 64-bit?


Yep according to Anand, it's a simple drop-in. They won't even have a new chipset ready until next year. I'm expecting it'll be fully supported -- much like the Pentium 4 dual-core upgrade *should* have been supported by existing chipsets, but at the time the chipsets just weren't designed to handle it (unlike the AMD ones which took it in stride). The chipset that did support dual core P4s were very little changed from their predecessors, and it appears that this time Intel did it right with the Yonah chipset and no further change will be required.
post #14 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by Rise Above
yeah but those chips suck, my bro have a laptop with centrio and it is so slow, if it is going to be duel then make it fast and better then amd or ibm. come on it is only 20% faster. and my friend that is not a lot if it was over 40% then we can discusse a little more.

Pentium M (part of Centrino platform) is a great mobile CPU. My guess is that this Centrino notebook is running Windows with an assortment of antivirus and antispyware that slows down the computer further.

Regarding Core Duo vs. G5, while it may be "only" 20% faster in some instances (and none at some), at other tasks, it is well over 40% faster. Can you play two H.264 1080p movie trailers while burning CD on your iMac G5? If you already have iMac G5, yeah, Core Duo is not really worth upgrading. But it is definitely a step up, provided you have enough memory and/or Universal Binary applications.

But let's face it. Whether you like it or not, Apple has left PowerPC to Intel. Both Freescale and IBM make most of their money selling processors to OEM equipment (e.g., network router, car components) and game consoles. It is not in their best interest to release faster CPU every quarter. AMD and Intel far better align with Apple's needs. So get over it.
post #15 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by filburt
Pentium M (part of Centrino platform) is a great mobile CPU. My guess is that this Centrino notebook is running Windows with an assortment of antivirus and antispyware that slows down the computer further.

Regarding Core Duo vs. G5, while it may be "only" 20% faster in some instances (and none at some), at other tasks, it is well over 40% faster. Can you play two H.264 1080p movie trailers while burning CD on your iMac G5? If you already have iMac G5, yeah, Core Duo is not really worth upgrading. But it is definitely a step up, provided you have enough memory and/or Universal Binary applications.

But let's face it. Whether you like it or not, Apple has left PowerPC to Intel. Both Freescale and IBM make most of their money selling processors to OEM equipment (e.g., network router, car components) and game consoles. It is not in their best interest to release faster CPU every quarter. AMD and Intel far better align with Apple's needs. So get over it.

I think it may well be possible that the Core Duo is more than 40% faster. The well-publicized MacWorld tests didn't really stress multiCPU apps, I don't think iLife is very well optimized for dual CPU operation. Those tests may be limited by drive speed or other factors.

Whether the Pentium M is fast, well, when put into a desktop system holds its own pretty well, it seems. As you suggest, whether a computer is fast depends on so many things, like software and the speed and configuration of the hardware. It seems like many of the less expensive Centrino systems use shared memory and that can punish the user at times too.
post #16 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by filburt
Pentium M (part of Centrino platform) is a great mobile CPU.

Just because it's a Centrino, it doesn't mean it has Pentium M inside. It's more likely some low-end Celeron, a pretty pathetic performer.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #17 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by Gene Clean
Just because it's a Centrino, it doesn't mean it has Pentium M inside. It's more likely some low-end Celeron, a pretty pathetic performer.

I haven't seen Centrino with Celeron-M, I don't think that is allowed because Celeron-M doesn't have the power saving dynamic clock speed feature of the Pentium-M. Per-clock, Celeron-M is fine, at least last I checked, they had much more cache than their desktop counterparts. I would bet that the current Celeron-Ms would easily keep up with or best with what is in the Mac mini.
post #18 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by JeffDM
I haven't seen Centrino with Celeron-M, I don't think that is allowed because Celeron-M doesn't have the dynamic clock speed feature of the Pentium-M.


http://froogle.9micro1.com/pmoreinfo.asp?iid=1178
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #19 of 20
Quote:

That looks like a pretty shady site. I don't understand why a page listing a CPU chip talks about the benefits of wireless connectivity, that isn't part of what is being sold.

http://www.intel.com/design/mobile/p...m/centrino.htm

Except for menu sidebars to link to other parts of Intel's site, Nowhere is Celeron (of any type) mentioned in the Centrino platform pages that I looked at, and nowhere is Centrino mentioned on the Celeron-M pages.
post #20 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by JeffDM
-snip-

I think you may have a point. Just did some research and found out that if it's not a Pentium M, it ain't a Centrino.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › more than 2G of ram on Intel macs ?