RAM purchase for 2012 Mac Mini, PC3 12800 vs PC3 10600, Does it matter? - MacRumors Forums
Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac mini

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 9, 2012, 06:57 PM   #1
MrXiro
macrumors 68020
 
MrXiro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Los Angeles
RAM purchase for 2012 Mac Mini, PC3 12800 vs PC3 10600, Does it matter?

I just bought a Mac Mini (2012) and noticed that it takes a different kind of RAM than the extra RAM I have on hand.

What is on the included RAM is PC3 12800 and what I have is PC3 10600. I put the RAM in and there doesn't seem to be an issue... though my iTunes does seem pinwheel a bit. Not sure if that has to do with that I have 800gb (on the 1TB 5400rpm HDD, I have my OS on a 256gb SSD) of content or the RAM.

Can anyone tell me the difference between the 2 types of RAM and if it's OK to use PC3-10600?
__________________
Whole lotta Apples, very little $.

Last edited by MrXiro; Nov 10, 2012 at 01:19 PM. Reason: added more info
MrXiro is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 02:22 AM   #2
MrXiro
Thread Starter
macrumors 68020
 
MrXiro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Can anyone help me?
__________________
Whole lotta Apples, very little $.
MrXiro is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 02:48 AM   #3
milkmandan
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR3_SD...andard_modules

The PC3 12800 is basically DDR3 operating at 1600Mhz
while PC3 10600 is basically DDR3 operating at 1333Mhz

Theoretically the PC3 12800 is faster. But will you actually feel any 'real world' difference? Hard to say, and really up to what you're doing.

Some people don't notice, some people do.
milkmandan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 02:53 AM   #4
Malte.
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Sweden
The 2012 mac mini requires 1600mhz ram. Ram is cheap go for 16gb 1600mhz!
Malte. is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 03:25 AM   #5
nikolajlr
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Denmark
The RAM should be fine. It just runs a bit slower (1333 MHz) than what the Ivy Bridge chipset can actually support given the opportunity (1600 MHz).

It will have a small general impact on memory operations, including the part of the RAM set aside for the integrated HD4000 graphics. However I wonder if it will be noticable in other instances than raw benchmark numbers.

FWIW it means your RAM runs at the same speed as what I'm having in my 2011 i7 iMac 27".

I have no idea what to expect with an iTunes library that size. Someone else hopefully chirps in.

If on a tight budget you should try to just stay with the current RAM.

Please note that you should have two blocks of the same size/kind. Or else - if I understand the technology correct - the chipset will revert to single channel memory mode, which means half the speed.

Cheers,
Nikolaj
nikolajlr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 05:38 AM   #6
philipma1957
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
an 80gb itunes on an hdd can be a bit slow . 1333 ram may have tight timings maybe 7 most likely 9. the 1600 ram out there can have 9 10 or 11 for timings. timings and mhz speed both affect overall speed. so a 7 timing with 1333 ram is a bit faster then an 11 timing with 1600 speed. divide timing inot mhz to get an idea.

7 into 1333 is 190

11 into 1600 is 145

most likely the 1333 will win in many cases. of course if your 1333 ram had 9 timing and you purchased 1600 ram with 9 timing the 1600 wins.

this one is fast



http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820104317

this one is slower due to timings

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820233370

it is more complex then this but I am tired after surfing in the middle of the night for 4 hours or so.
philipma1957 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 07:14 AM   #7
dasx
macrumors 65816
 
dasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Barcelona
Timings were very important some time ago, but when DDR2 first came out I remember timings becoming less important and frequency more important. I guess DDR3 is just the same. Should probably test it but I'm not that into it.

My point being, a CL of 9 is better tan 11, that's for sure, but I don't think a CL9 running at 1333MHz is better than CL11 running at 1600MHz.

As I stated, that what I remember that happened in the transition from DDR to DDR2. Also, timings were more important in AMD machines, not with Intel's.

Best option is, no doubt, 1600MHz CL9. Much pricey though.

Cheers.
__________________
Grey computer which does complicated stuff.
Cell phone that can talk to me. (Seriously).
"Fancy quote from dead guy"
dasx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 07:35 AM   #8
philipma1957
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
yeah I am not paying 144 for that ram.

I got these for 77

http://www.jr.com/crucial/pe/CRT_2K1GB64BS16/

I had a promo for 15% off so they were about 67.

And the 9 vs 11 timings will almost never show in real world use.
philipma1957 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 07:39 AM   #9
dasx
macrumors 65816
 
dasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Barcelona
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipma1957 View Post
And the 9 vs 11 timings will almost never show in real world use.
My point exactly. I went for €84 two kingston 8GB modules. I can see myself using up to 10-14GB of memory, but I don't think I'd ever benefit from a CL9 instead of 11. What can I gain, 3s out of 1h? Bah… Not worth it.
__________________
Grey computer which does complicated stuff.
Cell phone that can talk to me. (Seriously).
"Fancy quote from dead guy"
dasx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 01:12 PM   #10
MrXiro
Thread Starter
macrumors 68020
 
MrXiro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally Posted by milkmandan View Post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR3_SD...andard_modules

The PC3 12800 is basically DDR3 operating at 1600Mhz
while PC3 10600 is basically DDR3 operating at 1333Mhz

Theoretically the PC3 12800 is faster. But will you actually feel any 'real world' difference? Hard to say, and really up to what you're doing.

Some people don't notice, some people do.
Oh... I thought they both operated at 1333Mhz.

Thanks!

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by philipma1957 View Post
an 80gb itunes on an hdd can be a bit slow . 1333 ram may have tight timings maybe 7 most likely 9. the 1600 ram out there can have 9 10 or 11 for timings. timings and mhz speed both affect overall speed. so a 7 timing with 1333 ram is a bit faster then an 11 timing with 1600 speed. divide timing inot mhz to get an idea.

7 into 1333 is 190

11 into 1600 is 145

most likely the 1333 will win in many cases. of course if your 1333 ram had 9 timing and you purchased 1600 ram with 9 timing the 1600 wins.

this one is fast



http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820104317

this one is slower due to timings

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820233370

it is more complex then this but I am tired after surfing in the middle of the night for 4 hours or so.
Thank you so much for clarifying that for me! I never realized that RAM timing was so intricate.

So if I wanted to upgrade you are saying that:

This RAM at 1333MHz (9 latency) would be faster than This one at 1600MHz (10 latency) because of latency?

Which would you recommend of the two? I'm on a budget... or I might not upgrade at all. Just looking at my options.


----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nikolajlr View Post
The RAM should be fine. It just runs a bit slower (1333 MHz) than what the Ivy Bridge chipset can actually support given the opportunity (1600 MHz).

It will have a small general impact on memory operations, including the part of the RAM set aside for the integrated HD4000 graphics. However I wonder if it will be noticable in other instances than raw benchmark numbers.

FWIW it means your RAM runs at the same speed as what I'm having in my 2011 i7 iMac 27".

I have no idea what to expect with an iTunes library that size. Someone else hopefully chirps in.

If on a tight budget you should try to just stay with the current RAM.

Please note that you should have two blocks of the same size/kind. Or else - if I understand the technology correct - the chipset will revert to single channel memory mode, which means half the speed.

Cheers,
Nikolaj
I took the RAM out of my iMac and put it into the Mac Mini. That is why I had that RAM laying around. I was just under the impression that they were both 1333MHz.

Thanks for your help!
__________________
Whole lotta Apples, very little $.

Last edited by MrXiro; Nov 10, 2012 at 01:26 PM.
MrXiro is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac mini

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can I use PC3-10600 RAM instead of PC3-12800 for my iMac? Sanchez25 iMac 10 May 10, 2014 08:01 AM
MacBook Pro should take PC3-8500 but will only work with PC3-10600 AndyCalifornia MacBook Pro 1 May 23, 2013 08:57 AM
2011 Mac Mini Server Using 16gb PC3-12800 DDR3-1600 Ram? earthman7 Mac mini 16 Dec 7, 2012 03:06 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:30 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC