16GB RAM upgrade for late 2012 quad core i7

[SoCalReviews]

Originally Posted by BookEmDanno

Pardon my lack of knowledge on this, but is a higher latency (CL11 vs. CL9) good? Both have the same clockspeed 1600MHz.
I'm deciding on Amazon which one ram to buy:

the CL9 Kingston
http://www.amazon.com/1600MHz-PC3-12...I39GK7SKH1XPFT

or the CL11 Crucial
http://www.amazon.com/Crucial-PC3-12...I18WM6U5EWUCZA

I know knowledgeable folks here recommend the Kingston and it's only $19 more expensive than the Crucial.

Mahalo.

Memory reliability with your Mac is the #1 concern. Both Crucial and Kingston should be excellent for reliability. The lower latency for the memory at the same clock speed should be faster. Therefore 1600Mhz CL9 would be faster and generally a better choice than 1600Mhz CL11. While the official stock 1600Mhz memory spec for the late-2012 Mac Minis is CL11... unless you just want to save a little money you should try to go with the lower latency if possible. The 1600Mhz CL9 Kingston HyperX plug and play dual memory kit would be a great choice for your late-2012 Mini...and that happens to be exactly what I recently purchased for my new late-2012 model 2.3Ghz i7 Mini. Most people simply choose the standard latency of the Apple stock memory to obtain the standard stock Mini memory specs and to save a little money.

Note: This has been discussed in this forum many times but remember in the future if you ever need to have work done on your Mini under Apple warranty...that you carefully remove your upgrade memory and re-install the stock Apple memory if you by chance need to turn the Mini in to the Apple techs for repair or diagnostics.

[iWantAMac]

Originally Posted by SoCalReviews

Note: This has been discussed in this forum many times but remember in the future if you ever need to have work done on your Mini under Apple warranty...that you carefully remove your upgrade memory and re-install the stock Apple memory if you by chance need to turn the Mini in to the Apple techs for repair or diagnostics.

i have seen this come up a few times. My understanding after all of it was that Apple are fine with people upgrading the RAM themselves and it's partly why it's so accessible.
Regarding the Kingston RAM. I bought the exact modules you mention. Ran memtest after installing and after a few runs discovered only one of the modules wasn't passing most of the tests. Is this generally ok grounds to return the memory on?

[SoCalReviews]

Originally Posted by iWantAMac

i have seen this come up a few times. My understanding after all of it was that Apple are fine with people upgrading the RAM themselves and it's partly why it's so accessible.
Regarding the Kingston RAM. I bought the exact modules you mention. Ran memtest after installing and after a few runs discovered only one of the modules wasn't passing most of the tests. Is this generally ok grounds to return the memory on?

My advice about replacing the modules with the stock modules before taking it to Apple support for repair wasn't because Apple did or didn't approve of it. It was because the Apple warranty only covers Apples stock parts that came with the new machine and not the parts that are part of any upgrades the customer does. Therefore their testing would only cover their hardware. The other concern would be if the diagnostic and repair techs for some reason removed the upgrade memory and replaced it with stock memory or if the entire machine was going to be replaced but the upgrade memory was left installed. You would hope they would inform you and return your upgrade memory if that happened but with hundreds or thousands of machines going through the tech centers why take that chance?

I would say absolutely yes that you should be able to return the memory if one of the sticks doesn't work properly on your Mac because Kingston states that they guarantee compatibility with a wide range of systems from common manufacturers of which Apple is one of them. You could return the dual kit to your vendor or you could call Kingston tech support for advice and maybe they would be able to send you a single replacement stick.

While you could have received a bad module I would need to ask...if you had any noticeable memory issues using the one bad stick. Are you mixing the Kingston with other memory...with a different voltage and different timings? Did you swap the memory in different memory banks and still get errors for the same stick? Did you test the memory in a different system other than yours? Did you run any other tests? Before sending it back I would also recommend you run one or more other memory tests just to confirm it as a problem with the memory because there is always an outside chance that for some reason memtest didn't post accurate results on your machine or had a specific bug when testing this memory, etc.. I don't know what system you are using or what your installed software is. I have not used memtest so I can't speak from personal experience about it but I believe I have read in this forum about memtest or possibly other memory testing programs not providing accurate results...false errors, etc... when trying to run a 32bit version of the memory testing program in a 64bit OS.

[SR45]

Originally Posted by raniel

I'm using gskill. so far i have no issues with it

Same here but got on a better sale than link shows below

http://www.amazon.com/G-SKILL-204-Pi...kill+16gb+1600

[philipma1957]

Originally Posted by iWantAMac

i have seen this come up a few times. My understanding after all of it was that Apple are fine with people upgrading the RAM themselves and it's partly why it's so accessible.
Regarding the Kingston RAM. I bought the exact modules you mention. Ran memtest after installing and after a few runs discovered only one of the modules wasn't passing most of the tests. Is this generally ok grounds to return the memory on?

so you purchased this ram?

http://www.amazon.com/1600MHz-PC3-12...on+plug+n+play

loaded memtest and got it to fail?

what mac mini the 2012 2.3 quad, 2.6 quad or the 2.5 base?

what version of memtest?

[ptys]

Originally Posted by SoCalReviews

Usually they decrease the voltage (for example from 1.5v to 1.35v) when they shrink the die of the memory chips. They can get away with using less voltage on those smaller chips but when the process is new they usually get lesser manufacturing yields...or less working chips that are able to run at a the current standard frequency. Using the slightly higher voltage often improves the ability of the memory chips to run at higher frequencies but higher voltage isn't always optimal because they run warmer. As the manufacturing yields improve on the scaled down memory chips so do the number of chips they can produce that run at a cooler and lower voltage.

In summary there is no advantage for memory running at a lower voltage other than they generally run a little cooler and use slightly less power but when they have to they will slightly increase the voltage on early runs of a scaled down memory circuitry because it can help the memory run more reliably at a higher (faster) frequency. So you don't need to worry about 1.5v vs. 1.35v for this generation of PC3 12800 (1600Mhz) memory. There should be no performance advantage between the two volages. Either voltage should run well without getting too warm but in the future the faster frequency (1600Mhz and higher) of 1.35v DDR3 memory will become more common as the manufacturing yields improve.

Thanks, I've picked up a few things that are interesting from these replies. I'd say cooler would be better as this thing is only tiny and would like to make it run as smoothly as possible.

Is it a bad idea to run two different brands of ram on the same PC as I think I'll just go 8gig now and add another 8 in a few years when need?

Thanks.

[glen e]

Question: I have a base Mini and just run safari and MS office...will I see any changes in any type of performance if I go to the kingston 16MB switch?

[philipma1957]

Originally Posted by glen e

Question: I have a base Mini and just run safari and MS office...will I see any changes in any type of performance if I go to the kingston 16MB switch?

look at this my "bad" numbers are 1.6 MB page outs 27.4 MB Swap this is out of 1.4GB page ins very small fraction so yeah I could buy 16gb ram but I really don't need it. The fraction of 'bad' is small 1 out of 900. look at your numbers to tell if you need it. this is the size issue .

the speed of kingston 16gb plug n play vs any other 16gb pair is a small but real edge for the kingston. think fast bus that seats 16 people vs slower bus that seats 16 people .. the fast bus can go 100 MPH the slower bus can go 98 miles an hour.


So if you have stock 4gb ram and a lot of page outs and swaps you may (most likely ) gain a lot by moving up to 8gb or 16gb. this fixes the size issue . as for speed issue the kingston ram plug n play is the fastest ram for a mac mini as it is 1600 MHz by 9 timing . while other ram has 1600 MHz no one else has 9 Timing both numbers affect the rams speed.

Is kingston plug n play worth the extra money? for some yes for others no but I like it in my macs. The machine I am using now has 1333MHz 8gb Gskill and I have noticed it is slower MY kingston is on order.

[glen e]

yes I have, and why I'm gonna do it...I always have about 850K (or less) free...

[SoCalReviews]

Originally Posted by ptys

Thanks, I've picked up a few things that are interesting from these replies. I'd say cooler would be better as this thing is only tiny and would like to make it run as smoothly as possible.

Is it a bad idea to run two different brands of ram on the same PC as I think I'll just go 8gig now and add another 8 in a few years when need?

Thanks.

Cooler is better and lower voltage means it uses a little less power but a little higher voltage can sometimes improve stability depending on the memory that is being used.

I would base a decision about what memory to use more on the reputation of the brand and the customer feedback and reviews for your exact machine when using those particular memory modules that you are interested in purchasing. I can only speak from my own experience. As long as you select the right memory... I approve of Crucial brand for use in Macs with confidence. I have used Crucial memory for many years on Windows PCs and I am using that in my mid-2011 Mini. I have used Kingston brand memory in the past but only with Windows PCs. I believe Kingston makes high quality memory but they are usually more expensive. I have never had a problem with Kingston brand memory when I have used it in the past.

The other brands I often used reliably for PCs in the past were Corsair and GSkill brands. The knowledge and opinions I have about the other brands of memory for use in Mac Minis comes from reviews in this and other forums. Many users have no problems with other brands on their Macs. At this time I can only personally recommend Crucial for the Mac Minis and suggest Kingston based on current reviews and experience with them as being a long time vendor of premium quality memory.

Mixing different brands of memory may work for you and others perfectly well but in practice it is something I always try to avoid. I have mixed memory in the past with older Windows PC systems when I didn't have any other choice and despite my resistance it often has worked fine. The PC system manuals usually explain recommended optimal configurations that you can use. However, I would rather spend a little more money for matched pairs and dual kits with the same specs of the same brand than to hassle with problems showing up in the future because of incompatibilities. Using dual kits also makes it much easier to debug memory problems since you are using the exact same brand and type in two memory banks. I don't expect my more expensive way of doing things to be the way everyone else has to do them. It's my answer for trying to avoid potential computer problems.

You can go with only 8GB now. Memory prices have always fluctuated and seem to have gone up considerably in the last month. I would recommend buying a matched pair or dual kit 8GB (2 x 4GB) and completely removing the stock memory... but many Mac Mini owners have reportedly had no problems using a single 8GB (dual sided or chips on both sides) stick in one bank or adding one of the stock 2GB (dual sided) modules to one of the other banks for a total of 10GB in their late-2012 model Minis. If you mix memory you want to try to match the specs of the memory you purchase with the stock memory...same voltage, CL timings, etc..

[Yebubbleman]

Originally Posted by BookEmDanno

I'm waiting for my new Mac mini and first thing I plan to do is upgrade the ram from 4 to 16.

The apple 16gb ram option is expensive. So I'm considering either the Corsair or Crucial. Anyone have good or bad experience with either or both?


Mahalo for any insights.

~ Aloha! ~

Crucial is great! Of the seven Macs that I have, each in one point in time, owned, I have used their RAM in five of them (the other two shipped to me with the RAM pre-maxed out) and have had no problems at all. Plus they're very reasonable in terms of pricing.

[glen e]

Here's a really basic question - when I go to switch apps or open a doc and get a beach ball, is that memory or just the hard drive being slow?

[Mr. Retrofire]

Originally Posted by glen e

Question: I have a base Mini and just run safari and MS office...will I see any changes in any type of performance if I go to the kingston 16MB switch?

The CL or CAS Latency is necessary to reduce transmission errors on the RAM modules. That is the reason why RAM-modules which use higher frequencies use also a higher CL. Normal SDRAM has a CL measured in clock cycles. That means (RAM bus speed to CL ratio):
1600 MHz / 9 clock cycles ≈ 177.000.000 iop/s
1600 MHz / 11 clock cycles ≈ 145.000.000 iop/s
(100 / 145.000.000) * (177.000.000 - 145.000.0000) ≈ 22 %
The DDR does not increase this advantage.

So the CL 9 can increase the internal speed on the RAM module by 22 percent, if
a) the memory address is not known (read delay), and
b) the requested memory contents is not in one of the processor caches. Modern processors and memory controllers reduce the theoretical 22 % advantage in real world applications to ≈ 5 %, or less.

-----

Or in other words: No.

[SoCalReviews]

Originally Posted by Mr. Retrofire

The CL or CAS Latency is necessary to reduce transmission errors on the RAM modules. That is the reason why RAM-modules which use higher frequencies use also a higher CL. Normal SDRAM has a CL measured in clock cycles. That means (RAM bus speed to CL ratio):
1600 MHz / 9 clock cycles ≈ 177.000.000 iop/s
1600 MHz / 11 clock cycles ≈ 145.000.000 iop/s
(100 / 145.000.000) * (177.000.000 - 145.000.0000) ≈ 22 %
The DDR does not increase this advantage.

So the CL 9 can increase the internal speed on the RAM module by 22 percent, if
a) the memory address is not known (read delay), and
b) the requested memory contents is not in one of the processor caches. Modern processors and memory controllers reduce the theoretical 22 % advantage in real world applications to ≈ 5 %, or less.

-----

Or in other words: No.

Good information with one possible exception. I don't claim to understand exactly how the i5 and i7 chip sets handle the shared DDR3 video memory for the Intel HD4000 GPU but a higher shared memory clock speed and lower CAS Latency could have a much bigger impact on video graphics performance than it does on the CPU related performance which is why the discrete GPU chips these days utilize the highest performing common memory possible such as DDR5 at extremely high clock speeds.

[eyepea]

I am using 16gb corsair vengeance 1600mhz on the i7 2.6ghz quad. I am very happy.

[philipma1957]

Originally Posted by glen e

Here's a really basic question - when I go to switch apps or open a doc and get a beach ball, is that memory or just the hard drive being slow?

It depends on a lot could be either one or a program conflict even conflict with a piece of gear like the printer.
Ram is easy to test as a cause of the beach ball look at your activity monitor.
For example see what mine looks like; 0 page out 0 swapout of 1.6Gb page in, so a spinning beach-ball would not be from lack of ram. I also have 16gb ram in place so would have been very surprised at a lack of ram.

[iWantAMac]

Originally Posted by philipma1957

so you purchased this ram?

http://www.amazon.com/1600MHz-PC3-12...on+plug+n+play

loaded memtest and got it to fail?

what mac mini the 2012 2.3 quad, 2.6 quad or the 2.5 base?

what version of memtest?

Hi. Yes you linked to the exact page I ordered from. Memtest failed twice in a row with both modules inserted. Then I did each module individually in the bottom slot - One was fine, the other was not after running memtest on it twice. I didn't bother trying the faulty one in the upper slot though. Here are photos I took of the faulty module's memtest and a Apple Hardware test I ran with both Kingston modules installed.
Mac is a 2012 i7 2.6 w/ Apple's 256GB SSD.

[philipma1957]

Originally Posted by iWantAMac

Hi. Yes you linked to the exact page I ordered from. Memtest failed twice in a row with both modules inserted. Then I did each module individually in the bottom slot - One was fine, the other was not after running memtest on it twice. I didn't bother trying the faulty one in the upper slot though. Here are photos I took of the faulty module's memtest and a Apple Hardware test I ran with both Kingston modules installed.
Mac is a 2012 i7 2.6 w/ Apple's 256GB SSD.

well you are the first confirmed fail of that ram! I guess it goes to show that even the best ram can have a bad stick. did your ram have heatsinks?

[SoCalReviews]

Originally Posted by iWantAMac

Hi. Yes you linked to the exact page I ordered from. Memtest failed twice in a row with both modules inserted. Then I did each module individually in the bottom slot - One was fine, the other was not after running memtest on it twice. I didn't bother trying the faulty one in the upper slot though. Here are photos I took of the faulty module's memtest and a Apple Hardware test I ran with both Kingston modules installed.
Mac is a 2012 i7 2.6 w/ Apple's 256GB SSD.

Kingston has a lifetime warranty. If you are convinced one of the RAM sticks is faulty...even if it show up just from the memtest testing then have that one stick replaced or maybe have the entire dual kit replaced by Kingston or the vendor if it's still within their return window. You could probably get an RMA and send it back in the packaging as is or if you send both sticks back maybe put a small piece of tape on the faulty module and include a printout the failed memtest photo(s) if you want. I'm sure Kingston does their own thorough testing before it's shipped but maybe somewhere in the process the module was somehow damaged or it could have failed after you installed it or their own internal testing didn't catch specifically what the memtest detected. No matter what you should be fully covered by Kingston.

[iWantAMac]

Originally Posted by philipma1957

well you are the first confirmed fail of that ram! I guess it goes to show that even the best ram can have a bad stick. did your ram have heatsinks?

Nah. Stickers.

Thanks for the replies, guys.

[philipma1957]

Originally Posted by iWantAMac

Nah. Stickers.

Thanks for the replies, guys.

stickers are the newer ones.

[glen e]

16GB Kingston installed yesterday - no problems - less beach balls now...

[SoCalReviews]

It's good to hear there are less beach balls unless you are at the beach. My i7 2.3Ghz is arriving today. I already have the 16GB of Kingston HyperX with the stickers instead of the heat sinks ready to go. I will keep everyone updated if I run into any memory problems or video issues. I have a gut feeling it's all going to work fine. I will be setting it up this week for an office for the Parallels 8 VMs to run older Windows XP Pro software and external hardware devices via converters that run on ML...USB and Ethernet...parallel port HP Laserjet 5 printer, external RS-232 serial port fax modem, old USB scanner. I will probably put Win 7 Pro on it too. At first I will be using an old Samsung 19" LED 19T Monitor for a display. I want to use a KVM switch with DVI, USB and/or PS/2 and audio that works with these Minis running ML. Any advice on KVMs for Macs is welcome. BTW, I am typing this post using Firefox v19.02 from Windows XP VM on my 2011 Mini... Actually I just switched to using 32 bit Safari v5.1.7 for Windows XP to add this line. Why? Because I can.

[HarperVision]

Originally Posted by BookEmDanno

Pardon my lack of knowledge on this, but is a higher latency (CL11 vs. CL9) good? Both have the same clockspeed 1600MHz.
I'm deciding on Amazon which one ram to buy:

the CL9 Kingston
http://www.amazon.com/1600MHz-PC3-12...I39GK7SKH1XPFT

or the CL11 Crucial
http://www.amazon.com/Crucial-PC3-12...I18WM6U5EWUCZA

I know knowledgeable folks here recommend the Kingston and it's only $19 more expensive than the Crucial.

Mahalo.

OMG, is this the "Danno" from HI that I know from SNC? This is ironic if so cuz I am here because I just got an new 2012 Mini and am looking at doing the exact same thing. Thanks for all the great advice here!

If this is ex-roomie Danno, shoot me a PM dude!!!

Dave

[ocabj]

Originally Posted by BookEmDanno

I'm waiting for my new Mac mini and first thing I plan to do is upgrade the ram from 4 to 16.

The apple 16gb ram option is expensive. So I'm considering either the Corsair or Crucial. Anyone have good or bad experience with either or both?


Mahalo for any insights.

~ Aloha! ~

I just got a Mac Mini i7 2012 and before I powered the thing on I threw in 16GB of Crucial RAM. Immediately after that, I did the dual drive conversion with an OWC kit and Crucial m4 SSD.