Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

16GB DDR3 1600 Now Available

S

shortcut3d

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Aug 24, 2011
1,112
15
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233265

Corsair recently released their 16GB (2 x 8GB) dual channel 1600MHz kit for laptops. The top review on Newegg.com states its working in a MacBook Pro. I'm going to give it a try in my 2011 15" MacBook Pro 2.3GHz Quad-Core Intel i7. I'll post Geekbench scores if it works. I can make a good comparison because I've been running Corsair's 16GB 1333MHz kit since fall 2011.
 
shortcut3d said:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233265

Corsair recently released their 16GB (2 x 8GB) dual channel 1600MHz kit for laptops. The top review on Newegg.com states its working in a MacBook Pro. I'm going to give it a try in my 2011 15" MacBook Pro 2.3GHz Quad-Core Intel i7. I'll post Geekbench scores if it works. I can make a good comparison because I've been running Corsair's 16GB 1333MHz kit since fall 2011.
Click to expand...

This is semi-related, I suppose so I'll post it in here. I don't necessarily need RAM that is this fast, but is there really any specific type of RAM (besides laptop-sized lol) that I can only use in a Mac? I feel like this is a dumb question but I see on newegg that you can filter RAM based on whether it's Mac compatible.

To be honest, it seems like a bunch of BS to me. Hah. Either way I'm thinking about making the jump to higher RAM here soon, perhaps an SSD as well, so I wanted to ask.
 
mrobit said:
This is semi-related, I suppose so I'll post it in here. I don't necessarily need RAM that is this fast, but is there really any specific type of RAM (besides laptop-sized lol) that I can only use in a Mac? I feel like this is a dumb question but I see on newegg that you can filter RAM based on whether it's Mac compatible.

To be honest, it seems like a bunch of BS to me. Hah. Either way I'm thinking about making the jump to higher RAM here soon, perhaps an SSD as well, so I wanted to ask.
Click to expand...

Depending on the model of MacBook Pro you can use 204-pin laptop memory at the spec speed or above. So for 2011 MacBook Pros and any Sandy Bridge based Macintosh for that matter, you can use 204-pin memory up to 1866Mhz and up to 8GB per SODIMM module.
 
Currently only that the value is only in 1333 not in 1600 Mhz available.
It's just 10 bucks difference thus reasonable to pay up but RAM speed doesn't create any significant speed difference. Between 1333 and 1600 it is probably very difficult to measure with anything but pure memory benches.
Mem speed is not a problem which is why DDR4 is so long delayed that one has to wonder if they will ever release it. Maybe for a 13" MBP that relies on the on chip GPU it gets you something.
 
XMizer said:
What's the difference this vengeance brand and the value brand?
Click to expand...

Value brand is lower cost standard memory (based on cost per GB). Vengeance brand is reserved for high performance memory typically at a higher speed and marketed to gamers. The quality should be the same.

----------
dusk007 said:
Currently only that the value is only in 1333 not in 1600 Mhz available.
It's just 10 bucks difference thus reasonable to pay up but RAM speed doesn't create any significant speed difference. Between 1333 and 1600 it is probably very difficult to measure with anything but pure memory benches.
Mem speed is not a problem which is why DDR4 is so long delayed that one has to wonder if they will ever release it. Maybe for a 13" MBP that relies on the on chip GPU it gets you something.
Click to expand...

Correct. 1866MHz would get the biggest gains at 5% - 10% depending on the specific benchmark. 1600MHz would probably net 2% - 7%.

The Intel HD 3000 benefits from fast memory because it shares the system memory for use as VRAM. VRAM is considerably faster than standard system memory because of speed and channel width. Faster system memory closes this gap, albeit slightly.

The general consensus is the current memory timing for 1600MHz and 1866MHz is holding back much of the performance gain. CAS 9 is typical for 1333MHz where as only Kingston's latest Hyper X 1600MHz is CAS 9, previously CAS 10.
 
shortcut3d said:
Value brand is lower cost standard memory (based on cost per GB). Vengeance brand is reserved for high performance memory typically at a higher speed and marketed to gamers. The quality should be the same.

----------



Correct. 1866MHz would get the biggest gains at 5% - 10% depending on the specific benchmark. 1600MHz would probably net 2% - 7%.

The Intel HD 3000 benefits from fast memory because it shares the system memory for use as VRAM. VRAM is considerably faster than standard system memory because of speed and channel width. Faster system memory closes this gap, albeit slightly.

The general consensus is the current memory timing for 1600MHz and 1866MHz is holding back much of the performance gain. CAS 9 is typical for 1333MHz where as only Kingston's latest Hyper X 1600MHz is CAS 9, previously CAS 10.
Click to expand...
There's plenty of 1600MHz sticks with CAS 9.

Also, tests have shown that the HD3000 doesn't benefit that significantly from faster RAM speeds. Not that that stops me.

Waiting on 16GB 1866MHz CAS 9 RAM myself, and then some daring posters to test it to make sure it's finally stable with CAS 9 timings.
 
Mr. Wonderful said:
There's plenty of 1600MHz sticks with CAS 9.

Also, tests have shown that the HD3000 doesn't benefit that significantly from faster RAM speeds. Not that that stops me.

Waiting on 16GB 1866MHz CAS 9 RAM myself, and then some daring posters to test it to make sure it's finally stable with CAS 9 timings.
Click to expand...

Sign me up to test 16GB 1866MHz CAS 9. That's what I've been waiting for. The 16GB 1600MHz will suffice for now.
 
does anyone know when 1866 will be available?
would it work in early 2011 MBP or late high end or both?

i wonder why on newegg the vengence 1600 mhz is not in the "mac compatible section"

yes i would also love to see geekbench scores
 
gramps416 said:
does anyone know when 1866 will be available?
would it work in early 2011 MBP or late high end or both?

i wonder why on newegg the vengence 1600 mhz is not in the "mac compatible section"

yes i would also love to see geekbench scores
Click to expand...

1866MHz's available, just not at CAS 9. The other issue is that some RAM advertised as 1600MHz or 1866MHz are only capable of running at those speeds on Windows with particular settings changed in the BIOS.
 
Correct me if I am wrong but thus far, most of the SB processors in the MBP max at 1600, right? How would 18xx work?
 
I was wondering the same thing.
Apple claims 1333MHz.
It runs 1600MHz.
But I don't think its possible to run 1866MHz or anything above 1600MHz?
 
wait a moment,
that is CL10 memory.
does CL10 work? evidence, not conjecture

i wonder if CL9 at 1333 is similar speed to CL10 at 1600
 
Last edited:
I think you are fooling yourself if you thing the memory will run at anything but the stock 1333MHz spec that apple makes the motherboards for. Waste of money for anything faster as the motherboard won't use it.
 
MaxBurn said:
I think you are fooling yourself if you thing the memory will run at anything but the stock 1333MHz spec that apple makes the motherboards for. Waste of money for anything faster as the motherboard won't use it.
Click to expand...

This is incorrect for the 2011 Apple Macintosh line-up. The 2011 Macs all have Intel Sandybridge chipsets which support up to 8GB per SODIMM and 1866MHz. The theoretical maximum per slot is 32GB, but RAM is not produced in that density. The current Apple EFI does support 8GB SODIMMs. The memory must be Plug 'n' Play or Auto-detect to work at its rated speed since Apple uses EFI and does not provide access. I currently have 16GB 1333MHz in my 2011 MacBook Pro and 32GB in my 2010 iMac (Clarksdale chipsets maximum supported speed is 1333MHz). I have 8GB 1866MHz in two 2011 Mac minis.
 
And you have some way to show that they are actually running faster than 1333? I don't doubt that it will be fine with the size or even setting timing but I rather doubt that it is going to lower the memory multiplier to run it above 1333.
 
shortcut3d said:
This is incorrect for the 2011 Apple Macintosh line-up. The 2011 Macs all have Intel Sandybridge chipsets which support up to 8GB per SODIMM and 1866MHz. The theoretical maximum per slot is 32GB, but RAM is not produced in that density. The current Apple EFI does support 8GB SODIMMs. The memory must be Plug 'n' Play or Auto-detect to work at its rated speed since Apple uses EFI and does not provide access. I currently have 16GB 1333MHz in my 2011 MacBook Pro and 32GB in my 2010 iMac (Clarksdale chipsets maximum supported speed is 1333MHz). I have 8GB 1866MHz in two 2011 Mac minis.
Click to expand...

Sandy Bridge suports up to 1600 MHz unless the late 2011s are different.
http://ark.intel.com/products/52227/Intel-Core-i7-2820QM-Processor-(8M-Cache-2_30-GHz)
 
Using spd to detect the right timings is one thing but setting a different memory multiplier is quite another.

You are saying the system info or something like cpuz does or does not show the memory running faster than 1333 when you put in memory capable of greater speed?
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2012-03-20 at 12.54.31 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2012-03-20 at 12.54.31 AM.png
    37.4 KB · Views: 288
shortcut3d said:
2011 (Early) 15" MacBook Pro 2.3GHz Quad-Core Intel i7, 16GB 1600MHz Corsair Vengeance, 480GB OWC Mercury Extreme Pro 6G

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/585788
Click to expand...

I have the same MBP, sans the SSD and the Vengeance RAM. Got the 16GB Value ram and here are my results:

Those extra 500 points are probably from the SSD, even though the RAM test is higher on yours.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2012-03-20 at 1.44.37 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2012-03-20 at 1.44.37 AM.png
    217.5 KB · Views: 538
been trollin for yrz ...
this thread brought me on board
check out my geekbench
Shortcut - how is it that my i7 2.5 is scoring less than your 2.3 quad in the processor integer and floating point scores?
Sdave your integer was higher than mine too

i'm running in the free 32bit mode on geekbench were you?

I'm running the 1333mhz 16gb as you can see here
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/585836


also btw: my stream add and stream triad scores were paltry compared to yours and I'm running the samsung 830 ~500gb ssd
 
Last edited:
Forgive the slight tangent here.....

I'm in the market for a new 15" MBP.
Plan to dual boot with win7 to run GIS software STATA, winbugs, R etc.
Anyhow want to max out ram but don't want to pay apple prices.

Was in apple store and apple guy made big deal of telling me how Apple RAM is better and how his mate stuck crucial RAM in his machine and ran every program he had and the crucial ram melted.

Is this just sales talk ? Is the apple ram somehow better quality ? If I put after market ram in will it melt ? I am VERY skeptical myself but thought I'd ask people who may know more than me.

Also one other question. I notice the RAM speed you are talking about is faster than the factory fitted ram speed. If you put in faster RAM does the motherboard adjust to that speed automatically ? Or you have to do something ?
 
SDAVE said:
I have the same MBP, sans the SSD and the Vengeance RAM. Got the 16GB Value ram and here are my results:

Those extra 500 points are probably from the SSD, even though the RAM test is higher on yours.
Click to expand...

Though it makes sense. Getting things to the CPU and RAM faster is going to improve overall RAM and CPU performance. (Oh gosh. Flashing back to my Operations Management class.)

MaxBurn, if you want further proof:

81JSU.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back