Mac Pro QuadCore 2008 Max = 32GB RAM Now 2009 Max = 8GB!

[tjpeople]

You could get a Quad with 32GB RAM. And now you can only get 8GB with 4 slots.

# 8-core: Eight memory slots (four per processor) supporting up to 32GB of main memory using 1GB, 2GB, or 4GB DIMMs
# Quad-core: Four memory slots supporting up to 8GB of main memory using 1GB or 2GB DIMMs

Really strange downgrade.

Doesn't really effect me, I've only got 2GB in my 8Core but thats cause I'm poor. :p

But still WTF?!

[rockinrocker]

yeah, I don't get it either. I understand why only 4 slots (integrated memory controller) by why wouldn't it be 16 gig? :confused:

[Umbongo]

That is on the single socket board. It may actually support 4GB, 8GB or even 16GB DIMMs, probably just Apple trying to get people to go for a more expensive model if they want more memory.

[rockinrocker]

That is on the single socket board. It may actually support 4GB, 8GB or even 16GB DIMMs, probably just Apple trying to get people to go for a more expensive model if they want more memory.

Yeah, good point. Guess we'll have to wait and see until they get out into the wild....

[dr. shdw]

Lacks Quickpath connections?

[nylon]

Yeah, I think people are getting flustered prematurely. We don't know what the full implications of the CPU/Memory architecture are on software. Still awaiting real world benchmarks.

Let's wait and see!

[Foggy]

I'm slightly gutted. Processor speed isnt really an issue for me - I am more bothered with memory capacity, ideally wanting 12-16gb. I'd happily go for the quad core if the damn thing wasnt restricted to a max of 8gb. Whats gutting is I had managed to clear a budget of £2k per machine for 2 mac pro's which would have allowed me the old dual quad core, 12gb ram and a couple of TB of hdds. No way the budget can cover £2.5k per machine

[Chaos123x]

MAX that Baby out with 8Gb of RAM!!!!! :D

Thats some impressive amounts of memory :eek:


I thought G5's could have more than 8gb.

[tonyl]

MAX that Baby out with 8Gb of RAM!!!!! :D

Thats some impressive amounts of memory :eek:


I thought G5's could have more than 8gb.

If it is true, 8gb/4 ram slots is really pathetic for a pro machine.

[nick9191]

TBH I think they were doing us a favour. Intel has ramped up the price on these chips so much I think Apple did it just to have a reasonably priced pro workstation.

It would probably be $2799 baseline otherwise, and everyone would complain.

[tjpeople]

If it is true, 8gb/4 ram slots is really pathetic for a pro machine.

Its for real, its on apples site. The only thing left to find out is if it will handle more than 8GB, but this will of course be an unsupported hack.

http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html

[dr. shdw]

Yeah, I think people are getting flustered prematurely. We don't know what the full implications of the CPU/Memory architecture are on software. Still awaiting real world benchmarks.

Let's wait and see!

It's very much so a lot faster!

[aleksandra.]

Its for real, its on apples site. The only thing left to find out is if it will handle more than 8GB, but this will of course be an unsupported hack.

http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html

There is a 32GB RAM configuration option in online store...

[Luis Ortega]

I'm also confused about the claim that the new ram works better in triples rather than pairs, hence the 3 and 6 gb memory offerings. Why bother with the 4th ram slot then?

[tjpeople]

There is a 32GB RAM configuration option in online store...

You didn't read my original post OR the link http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html

8core = max 32, 4core max=8. Its very clear.

[Dreamail]

I'm also confused about the claim that the new ram works better in triples rather than pairs, hence the 3 and 6 gb memory offerings. Why bother with the 4th ram slot then?
Because Apple couldn't be bothered to upgrade the case design.

They should have gone with 6 slots per CPU and 12 total for a max of either 24 or 48GB.
No, they stuck with their old 4 slots per CPU. Because with 6 they would have had to make the case wider probably.

I think this 'upgrade' is a stop-gap one. Clearly.

[thedarkhorse]

Don't forget:
It's 6GB Max if you want tri-channel.

[aleksandra.]

You didn't read my original post OR the link http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html

8core = max 32, 4core max=8. Its very clear.

I've actually read both, but you're right in a way, I've somehow managed to skip "quadcore" part of the complaint. By the way I really don't see why it wouldn't be 16GB at least.

[Salavat23]

8GB is really pathetic for a quad core workstation.

The consumer quad-core Nehalems can handle up to 24GB... Epic fail here IMO.

[ekwipt]

Why do people need more than 6Gb on a Quad core anyway?

If you're a video editor you should have bought a 8core machine if you are doing audio, quad core will do fine.

Pro apps can only use 4GB each at the moment and you get full ram speed out of populating 3 slots ie 6GB ram and 12Gb on a 8 core

The older mac pro ran at full speed when all slots were filled that's why i bought 16 GB of RAM, not that it's always needed but the speed throughput is there and that's enough for me.

But like a previous comment suggested thatey should have made the boards with 6 slots each 12 slots on the 8 core

I mainly pissed about the speed of the ram (1066mz) bloddy hell i hope you can put some 3rd part ram in there to run at 1600mhz

[zer0tails]

looks to me this is the mid Tower Apple fans have been calling for without the mid tower price :p

[Bubba Satori]

How about those blazing fast GT120s ? :D

[GodWhomIsMike]

I'm slightly gutted. Processor speed isnt really an issue for me - I am more bothered with memory capacity, ideally wanting 12-16gb. I'd happily go for the quad core if the damn thing wasnt restricted to a max of 8gb. Whats gutting is I had managed to clear a budget of £2k per machine for 2 mac pro's which would have allowed me the old dual quad core, 12gb ram and a couple of TB of hdds. No way the budget can cover £2.5k per machine

The RAM killed the deal for me too, I am looking at getting a EOL 2008 Dual-Quad Core Mac Pro now.

[Syonidism]

why get 32 gigs of ram? u out of all the terabytes of storage on your hd?

*Its supposed to NOT make sense*

8 gigs is more than enough.

I have 5 and dont ever plan on getting any more.

[Bubba Satori]

why get 32 gigs of ram? u out of all the terabytes of storage on your hd?

*Its supposed to NOT make sense*

8 gigs is more than enough.

I have 5 and dont ever plan on getting any more.

:rolleyes:

[GodWhomIsMike]

why get 32 gigs of ram? u out of all the terabytes of storage on your hd?

*Its supposed to NOT make sense*

8 gigs is more than enough.

I have 5 and dont ever plan on getting any more.



I regularly use 7.25+ GB of ram on one of my machines that as 8GB of ram. There are some of us that need it. I think it's absolute ******** that Apple did not get a motherboard with 6 ram slots. Nehalem motherboard is very very low end.

[tjpeople]

why get 32 gigs of ram? u out of all the terabytes of storage on your hd?

*Its supposed to NOT make sense*

8 gigs is more than enough.

I have 5 and dont ever plan on getting any more.

For me 8GB would be a dream and more than enough. But thats not the point. My question is why the downgrade. There is no reason for it so, I guess it just has to be money saving. Shame apple didn't pass on the savings!

[GodWhomIsMike]

For me 8GB would be a dream and more than enough. But thats not the point. My question is why the downgrade. There is no reason for it so, I guess it just has to be money saving. Shame apple didn't pass on the savings!

You can buy 8GB (2x4GB) of FB-Dimm ram on Newegg for about $330.

[tjpeople]

You can buy 8GB (2x4GB) of FB-Dimm ram on Newegg for about $330.

Still alot of money.

[Ploki]

so. its a lot faster.
doing big videos will very FASTLY page in/out then :D :D ?! wtf

[filmweaver]

Maybe Snow Leopard will be so fast we won't need lots of memory. LOL

[thedarkhorse]

why get 32 gigs of ram? u out of all the terabytes of storage on your hd?

*Its supposed to NOT make sense*

8 gigs is more than enough.

I have 5 and dont ever plan on getting any more.

and a few years ago 4 gigs was more than enough, before that 2 gigs was.
Who needs more than 128k of memory?
As time goes on programs need more and more memory. A mac pro is a long term investment and for work machines that upgrade path is often necessary.

[alphaod]

why get 32 gigs of ram? u out of all the terabytes of storage on your hd?

*Its supposed to NOT make sense*

8 gigs is more than enough.

I have 5 and dont ever plan on getting any more.

If I had 32GB of RAM, I would mount 24GB of it as my scratch disk for Photoshop and stuff. It'll make a decent RAM disk.

[Foggy]

why get 32 gigs of ram? u out of all the terabytes of storage on your hd?

*Its supposed to NOT make sense*

8 gigs is more than enough.

I have 5 and dont ever plan on getting any more.

I love it when people claim because they don't need any more then no-one else does either.

I'm going to be watching for an old 8 core job in the refurb store I think.

[kbmb]

yeah, I don't get it either. I understand why only 4 slots (integrated memory controller) by why wouldn't it be 16 gig? :confused:

So according to the Specs page they list this:
http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html

Memory
* 1066MHz DDR3 ECC SDRAM
* 8-core: Eight memory slots (four per processor) supporting up to 32GB of main memory using 1GB, 2GB, or 4GB DIMMs
* Quad-core: Four memory slots supporting up to 8GB of main memory using 1GB or 2GB DIMMs


But why are we only able to use 1GB or 2GB DIMMs for the Quad Core? Is this a technical limitation?

-Kevin

[Outsider]

So according to the Specs page they list this:
http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html



But why are we only able to use 1GB or 2GB DIMMs for the Quad Core? Is this a technical limitation?

-Kevin

Nope. I suspect it's an artificial Apple limitation. We'll soon find out.

[azdunerat]

Or is apple starting to branch into two separate markets with two different machines. The entry level MacPro seems to be a very solid high end consumer model/entry level prosumer. While the upper model is still the High End prosumer model. Apple seems to be prepping us for two seperate towers that will be comming down the road sometime.

[RedTomato]

I have 4GB in my low-end white macbook, about a year old. I use all of it sometimes. It only cost me about £70 for the upgrade.

8GB max on a massive, brand new, high-end workstation machine that is 20xthe size, weight, and many times the cost of my macbook is frankly taking the piss.

Some people have even got 6GB to work in the macbooks and 8GB in the MBPs.

8GB might be a lot now, but it will be nothing for a desktop in 5-8 years time, which is easily the working life of a Mac Pro.

[Bartman01]

why get 32 gigs of ram? u out of all the terabytes of storage on your hd?

*Its supposed to NOT make sense*

8 gigs is more than enough.

I have 5 and dont ever plan on getting any more.

I am guessing that you don't run any virtual machines. If I want to have the VM's for 2 clients open at once with any decent performance, I need 6-8GB of RAM for the VM's alone - not counting what I need for anything running on the system itself.

[kbmb]

As a side note to anyone interested, the new iMacs are listed as being able to expand to 8GB now (at least officially from Apple).

Nice for those that don't quite need a Mac Pro, buy need more RAM to run VMs and such.

-Kevin

[jwt]

I don't understand something: I thought the new MPs had tri-channel memory, which means they must be paired in threes. So why 4 memory slots?

[thedarkhorse]

I believe if you have all 4 full your drop down to dual channel. Tri channel is limited to 6gb AFIK.

[Quu]

Kinda funny really considering my Single Socket PC motherboard (with a Nehalem Chip) can support 24GB. (6 Slots each with 4GB). Even with 2GB Dimms I can get 12GB in there and still have full use of Triple Channel memory.

Crucial sell some 4GB ECC Registered 1333MHz DDR3 RAM that will work in the Mac Pro so I would think you could easily get 16GB in the Single Socket Quad Core Mac Pro by using those.

[ynk1121]

I spoke with someone at apple today. I actually emailed them and to my surprise I got a phone call a few hours later. He was saying he spoke to this and that department and read through this and that manual. If the 8core can support 4gb dimms he doesn't see why the 4core couldn't. Bottom line is he really couldn't say for sure. I guess we just wait for a consumer to just try it.

[VirtualRain]

I believe if you have all 4 full your drop down to dual channel. Tri channel is limited to 6gb AFIK.

Not true... if you have 4x2GB sticks (8GB), the first 6GB or memory is split across three channels and will provide full memory bandwidth. The last 2GB is attached to one of the channels and doesn't gain the benefit of multi-channel bandwidth (access is effectively single channel on the last 2GB).

[HoppyToad]

Maybe Apple figures that nobody on a budget is dumb enough to buy their ridiculously priced 4GB memory sticks, so they only offer memory for the 4-core machine in 1GB and 2GB sizes. Did you notice that for the 8-core machines, 8x4GB of memory costs an extra $6,100? That's $762.50 each! wtf :eek:

[Umbongo]

The quad core Mac Pros not supporting 4GB DIMMs is probably just Apple marketing. The 8 core systems have a higher margin so they will want to use everything they can to sell one over a quad. Apple have a history of doing similar things on the other product lines.

I would expect 8GB DIMMs to work in both too when they are on the market.

[gzfelix]

The quad core Mac Pros not supporting 4GB DIMMs is probably just Apple marketing. The 8 core systems have a higher margin. Apple have a history of doing similar things on the other product lines.

I would expect 8GB DIMMs to work in both too when they are on the market.

Not sure about the 8GB part. Intel's documentation does not mention about 8GB memory module support for Core i7.

[Umbongo]

Not sure about the 8GB part. Intel's documentation does not mention about 8GB memory module support for Core i7.

The i7 platform only works with unbuffered non-ECC memory.

There probably won't be unbuffered non-ECC 8GB DIMMs. There will be registered ECC 8GB DIMMs and maybe unbuffered ECC 8GB DIMMs. Maybe there isn't support on the Xeon 3500 IMC, but the Xeon 5500 does support 8GB and 16GB DIMMs.

[gzfelix]

The i7 platform only works with unbuffered non-ECC memory.

There probably won't be unbuffered non-ECC 8GB DIMMs. There will be registered ECC 8GB DIMMs and maybe unbuffered ECC 8GB DIMMs.

Probably. We still need to wait until Intel releases Nehalem Xeon officially.

[Umbongo]

There may not be support on the Xeon 3500 integrated memory controller for anything above 4GB, but the Xeon 5500 does support 8GB and 16GB DIMMs so it would be an artificial limitation imposed by Intel.

[Grimace]

Not true... if you have 4x2GB sticks (8GB), the first 6GB or memory is split across three channels and will provide full memory bandwidth. The last 2GB is attached to one of the channels and doesn't gain the benefit of multi-channel bandwidth (access is effectively single channel on the last 2GB).

Thank you! Finally someone posting with sense!!

Sets of 3 chips will be linked together in tri-channel mode, while an extra chip or two (before the next set of three) will operate with a slightly slower throughput. But, it's just that extra chip -- any sets of three will always be in the faster tri-channel mode.

[Umbongo]

Thank you! Finally someone posting with sense!!

Sets of 3 chips will be linked together in tri-channel mode, while an extra chip or two (before the next set of three) will operate with a slightly slower throughput. But, it's just that extra chip -- any sets of three will always be in the faster tri-channel mode.

I said this earlier today and nanofrog commented that he had looked at documentation and it may be that all memory is accessed in tri-channel, it will just switch between the first and second DIMMs on the first channel as needed adding latency.

[lostngone]

You could get a Quad with 32GB RAM. And now you can only get 8GB with 4 slots.



Really strange downgrade.

Doesn't really effect me, I've only got 2GB in my 8Core but thats cause I'm poor. :p

But still WTF?!

Its simple logic if you need more then 8 gigs of ram then you are most likely going to be doing something that can take advantage of more processors.

Why do you say this is a downgrade?

[iMacmatician]

Its simple logic if you need more then 8 gigs of ram then you are most likely going to be doing something that can take advantage of more processors.

Why do you say this is a downgrade?Previously there was an option for quad-core + >8 GB RAM. Now there isn't.

[Umbongo]

Its simple logic if you need more then 8 gigs of ram then you are most likely going to be doing something that can take advantage of more processors.

Why do you say this is a downgrade?

While that may be the case for some it certainly isn't for others. In the end more memory won't do any harm and as unbuffered ECC DDR3 is $25/GB it is a cheap way to improve performance, but Apple are limiting that path.

[dnenciu]

Its simple logic if you need more then 8 gigs of ram then you are most likely going to be doing something that can take advantage of more processors.

Why do you say this is a downgrade?

Ah... base model went from:

8x cores and MAX 32GB ram to 4x cores and max 8GB ram.

That to me qualifies as a downgrade.

There is no way 4x cores will be faster than 8x cores.

Same as the base 24" imac that now comes with integrated video like a cheap pc.

Apple really dropped the ball. :(

[lostngone]

There is no way 4x cores will be faster than 8x cores.:(


That is incorrect if your App that only spawns one thread it won't matter if you have 4 cores or 1000 it won't make the App any faster.

[dnenciu]

That is incorrect if your App that only spawns one thread it won't matter if you have 4 cores or 1000 it won't make the App any faster.

Sure because people that buy a mac pro use it to browse the web!

Any professional video, audio, scientific or 3D rendering uses all cores to the max. That is the reason people get a mac pro instead of an imac or an mpb.

If I had the cash now I would get a new 2008 mac pro 8x core at 2.8Ghz unfortunately I don't so I guess I'll have to get by with my Imac for a while longer.

[lostngone]

Sure because people that buy a mac pro use it to browse the web!

??? Thats why I am getting mine... Well that and watch adobe flash movies, I just hope it is enough.

[dnenciu]

??? Thats why I am getting mine... Well that and watch adobe flash movies, I just hope it is enough.

Yeah I know what you mean with the flash stuff. The cr@ppiest technology ever invented sucks CPU cycles and battery on an mpb like there is no tomorrow.

[Ploki]

That is incorrect if your App that only spawns one thread it won't matter if you have 4 cores or 1000 it won't make the App any faster.

everything is showing tendency to multicore.. :S