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.
Can I put 1067 RAM modules in 1333 machine...?
- Thread starter MIDI_EVIL
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i think as long as its DDR3 it will fit and work, regardless of clockrate.
wait for someone else to post and check though.
wait for someone else to post and check though.
Ram really should be bus speed or higher.. Processor expects a given Front Side Bus speed and while it *may* downclock to a slower speed to match the RAM bad things may happen too (as in it'll not run at all - like three beeps at boot bad).
You can afford a Mac but not $50 bux for 8gb of the right memory? That's pretty epic fail there. Even if it does run you're looking at a better than 20% performance hit.
You can afford a Mac but not $50 bux for 8gb of the right memory? That's pretty epic fail there. Even if it does run you're looking at a better than 20% performance hit.
Why not assume he just didn't want to throw away memory, if he could use it? He never said anything about not being able to afford it.
I actually just got a new MBP with 4GB from Apple, as a replacement for a machine that they couldn't fix, which had 8GB of RAM already installed.
As the last person said, I thought I could repurpose the 8GB. There's no need to be like that.
Thanks to all for contributing.
That is complete and utter nonsense. There is no FSB that is a thing of the past. There is also no equivalent and absolutely no clock speed that has to adjust.
The IMC runs at the clock speed the RAM modules tell it to run in the SPD settings. Benchmarks also show no discernable difference in speed between 1066 and 1333. I have also never heard of a RAM module that was too slow and didn't run for that reason. DDR3 is DDR3 there is only a too fast and some voltages may be unsupported but no too slow.
Front Side Bus: Another name for the system bus.
System Bus: The bus that connects the CPU to main memory on the motherboard. I/O buses, which connect the CPU with the systems other components, branch off of the system bus.
The system bus is also called the frontside bus, memory bus, local bus, or host bus.
Yeah, don't exist. Right.
The ram will work fine. You will NOT notice a dip in performance at all. Benchmarks have shown that there is not much of a difference. I believe the ram and cpu are connected by Intel QPI, so there actually is no Front side bus any longer. It will work, and you shouldn't have any issues.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4503/sandy-bridge-memory-scaling-choosing-the-best-ddr3/3
"It's worth noting, especially if you use older DDR3 memory, that you need to keep the VCCIO/VCCSA and memory voltage within 0.5V of each other. This follows on from the same rule set by Nehalem and Lynnfield, but given that the whole Sandy Bridge die is now 32nm and operates at a lower ~1.15V voltage, mixing this with older 1.65V+ DIMMs puts it on the fringes of acceptable long-term reliability"
Last edited:
No it doesn't exist ANYMORE.
Core 2 Duo had an FSB no Core iX of any generation does and no AMD CPU since Athlon 64. The FSB died out on those chips just like the back side bus did so long ago.
It was a bus that used to connect the Memory Controller and all the other stuff on the external chipset die to the CPU (cores) on the CPU DIE. Yes it was called system bus by some it still doesn't exist anymore.
Today all the stuff it used to connect is on the CPU DIE and in case of Sandy Bridge connected at the same speed the LLC (aka L3) Cache is connected. With 384GB/s theoretical bandwidth compared to which the FSB well just doesn't compare.
Here is a list with all Intel/AMD CPUs that still had an FSB. The most recent CPU is the Core 2 but that was the end of the FSB.
Suppose you explain why RAM has a frequency rating if "it's all the same and makes no difference"
I'll even help : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR3_SDRAM
Oops. According to that chart those 1067 modules don't have the memory timing or CAS latency that a Sandy Bridge processor is designed for. Snap.
Last edited:
I never once said it was "all the same and makes no difference". Stop being so bitter because you were wrong about the FSB.
Not bitter. in trying to depict yourself as vastly superior you were also very wrong. Takes two to tango dude.
The only thing JamesCorman has been wrong about is that the IMC is not connected by the QPI either but he never unlike you presented it as a fact.
Benchmarks to show that there is little to no difference. Synthetic Memory benchmarks show a difference but they have no significance. In any significant real world benchmark the difference between 1066 and 1333 is maybe 1 %. Performance difference is usually to small to be measured accurately without averaging many many benchmarks.
That whole nonsensical ranting about the Voltage difference also fails add anything to the topic. 1.65V+ RAM maybe a topic on older desktop over clocking rigs. In the mobile space it is a none issue because there is only 1.5V or lower and for a 1066 module you'd be hard pressed to find one with too high voltage.
JamesCorman was not "very wrong" at all. They only reason you might perceive him as depicting himself as superior can be that you are bitter.
Accept when you are wrong and research your answers better or leave the task to others. Those posts of yours seem to serve no purpose but to confuse the op.
Also try to understand what the topic is. Upgrading mobile ram is something that require absolutely no knowledge about memory timings and desktop like over-clocking stuff.
Benchmarks to show that there is little to no difference. Synthetic Memory benchmarks show a difference but they have no significance. In any significant real world benchmark the difference between 1066 and 1333 is maybe 1 %. Performance difference is usually to small to be measured accurately without averaging many many benchmarks.
That whole nonsensical ranting about the Voltage difference also fails add anything to the topic. 1.65V+ RAM maybe a topic on older desktop over clocking rigs. In the mobile space it is a none issue because there is only 1.5V or lower and for a 1066 module you'd be hard pressed to find one with too high voltage.
JamesCorman was not "very wrong" at all. They only reason you might perceive him as depicting himself as superior can be that you are bitter.
Accept when you are wrong and research your answers better or leave the task to others. Those posts of yours seem to serve no purpose but to confuse the op.
Also try to understand what the topic is. Upgrading mobile ram is something that require absolutely no knowledge about memory timings and desktop like over-clocking stuff.
I am actually, very confused!?!?!
Thank you for your constructive reply.
So does this mean then, that I can actually use my 1067 modules in my new machine?
It's worth a try since unless you physically damage the RAM slots you won't hurt your MAC. Run some memory tests, use the machine and save early and often to see how it works. At worst, they will be flaky and you'll need to get new ones; at best they'll work fine.
Don't get caught up in all the back and forth nonsense over design and specs.