rectangular said:
I think you'll find people who use much more than 2gigs to good effect, particularly when running multiple simultaneous applications.
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.
16GB of RAM? Anyone? Anyone?
- Thread starter Unorthodox
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think you'll find people who use much more than 2gigs to good effect, particularly when running multiple simultaneous applications.
bradc said:I have 10gb......
![]()
And what does 10gb do for you? What are you doing with all that RAM that needs 10gb?
Not insulting you, just really curious as to what needs that much RAM at this point.
I figured someone would ask. I work at Honeywell, in short I'm a "Rocket Scientist". I deal/design missile guidance systems. So my system at home,my Mac Pro, has to have craploads of RAM because I pull data off our Server's at work and sometimes I work at home. Because, as strange as it sounds, sometimes in the middle of the night I'll wake up and say 'Oh Crap!' and just figured out a solution to my research, so at 3am I hop on my desk chair load the latest data from work, add my bit, save, and then when I go to work I'm ahead of the game.
If that made any sense at all....?
If that made any sense at all....?
Well, I don't have a Mac Pro (yet)... Probably will buy when the quad-core CPUs arrive. But I currently have two Power Mac G5 Quad systems, one with 4GB, the other with 8GB. ...And several PeeCee systems running Win64 and/or Linux with 4GB.
I'm a 3D artist and video guy and my work is all done in HD resolutions these days. I find the 4GB configs work just great, but I have occasionally hit the 4GB wall on some intense projects. 8GB is more than adequate for my work right now -- not that I couldn't use it, but the software just doesn't allow for it yet. Most applications are still limited in the 32bit realm, which means no more than 2GB per app process, but with Lightwave, Modo, Photoshop and one or two other things open at once, I can populate 4GB pretty easily. I did find 8GB limiting on an architectural viz project I did a couple months ago, but that was an extreme case not typical of my usual workflow.
I have actually been seriously considering upgrading my G5 quad at home (the one I mentioned with 4GB) to 8GB so it matches the one at the office. Lately I have been working from home a lot more and the 4GB ceiling is right there and I know I'm going to bump into it sooner than later with a few things I'm working on.
I'm a 3D artist and video guy and my work is all done in HD resolutions these days. I find the 4GB configs work just great, but I have occasionally hit the 4GB wall on some intense projects. 8GB is more than adequate for my work right now -- not that I couldn't use it, but the software just doesn't allow for it yet. Most applications are still limited in the 32bit realm, which means no more than 2GB per app process, but with Lightwave, Modo, Photoshop and one or two other things open at once, I can populate 4GB pretty easily. I did find 8GB limiting on an architectural viz project I did a couple months ago, but that was an extreme case not typical of my usual workflow.
I have actually been seriously considering upgrading my G5 quad at home (the one I mentioned with 4GB) to 8GB so it matches the one at the office. Lately I have been working from home a lot more and the 4GB ceiling is right there and I know I'm going to bump into it sooner than later with a few things I'm working on.
bradc said:
So we have our first answer to "who needs that much RAM?"
Rocket Scientists.
Let's hope this thread is found in five years and resurrected when the 64 core PowerBook is sluggish with its standard load of 128GB RAM.
Yep, 16 Gig.
I got 16Gig Mem. Got it two weeks ago (late shipment because of ati config). My companions and me focus mainly on extreme virtualization scenarios where you have to simulate huge ad networks just with one machine in host only mode (and of course its cute to have them all on one 30" cc). With the 16Gig config we now (since yesterday as parallels brought 1922) can simulate up to 8 Domain Controllers, 2 Exchange Servers and 3 SQL Servers at the same time. Actually, we could simulate patch enrollment fpr our REAL domain with this cute piece of technology.
To conclude: Not only rocket scientists need as much RAM as possible
- Virtuefreaks need it, too.
best regards
Joerg
I got 16Gig Mem. Got it two weeks ago (late shipment because of ati config). My companions and me focus mainly on extreme virtualization scenarios where you have to simulate huge ad networks just with one machine in host only mode (and of course its cute to have them all on one 30" cc). With the 16Gig config we now (since yesterday as parallels brought 1922) can simulate up to 8 Domain Controllers, 2 Exchange Servers and 3 SQL Servers at the same time. Actually, we could simulate patch enrollment fpr our REAL domain with this cute piece of technology.
To conclude: Not only rocket scientists need as much RAM as possible
- Virtuefreaks need it, too.best regards
Joerg
point665 said:
Yeah - don't think too much of skipping the loading screen. RAM doesn't have a heck of a lot to do with this. The Mac loading screen actually isn't particularly accurate in the first place. You might notice that sometimes your loading bar will reach the end and stay there for a few seconds before continuing on, or the reverse - it will move on before reaching the end of the progress bar.
Frankly, even if you loaded everything directly into RAM simultaneously on boot (which doesn't happen), you still wouldn't use up 4GB of RAM to boot OSX, so it's immaterial. In fact, unless you're doing heavy video or effects work, even Photoshop (which is a notorious RAM whore and probably the most etensive App most people use, video editing excluded) very rarely sniffs 4GB of RAM, let alone 8 or 16.
I'm looking at getting a quad 3 GHz MacPro with 16gb of RAM for Blender rendering. It maxes out the 1gb on my MBP at the moment.
I have actually been using projects in Cubase on my studio PC which have taken up 13 gb. It would be sweet if I could load that all into my ram as I get some pretty severe lag when fast forwarding/rewinding through the project.
I have actually been using projects in Cubase on my studio PC which have taken up 13 gb. It would be sweet if I could load that all into my ram as I get some pretty severe lag when fast forwarding/rewinding through the project.
pseudobrit said:
Remember Bill Gates once said no one will ever use more than 20GB of hard drive space?
Zwhaler said:
I think you'll have to wait to find the meaning of life until there's a Mac that'll take 64GB of RAM.
zwida said:I think you'll have to wait to find the meaning of life until there's a Mac that'll take 64GB of RAM.
It won't be too long until that happens. Xserve is up to 32 gigs o' ram right now.
5 years from now, I really wonder how things will be. Things have seriously changed since 5 years ago.
LOL. Where do you people get the money to buy all these $2000 computers every time an update comes out?
FF_productions said:
LOL remember the iBook G3 (Ice) when it first came out?
Standard memory was 64MB.
What does that have to do with maxing out ram?Cassie said:LOL. Where do you people get the money to buy all these $2000 computers every time an update comes out?
eMagine said:
Wasn't that like the early 80's, and he said 500MB?
Point well taken though. Look at how 10 years ago 16MB of RAM was "sweeet".
Now we're talking about 16GB, and more for high end servers. Makes you wonder what the next 10 years will bring...
So Rocket Scientists, heavy virtual machine use, and heavy video editing.
All reasonable uses.
I'm waiting for that one user that says "because I can".
I've got a MacPro on my list for Dec/January, and I have considered popping 16G in it once it arrives. But that would be for video/photo use, not to mention I'm horrid at having 15 applications running at once and bouncing back and forth.
cant wait to order my 80-core, 64gb of ram, and 3tb hd, macbook insane . Anyways their is a version of linux that will take up to 64gb or ram... Big databases are also ram hoggs.
. Anyways their is a version of linux that will take up to 64gb or ram... Big databases are also ram hoggs.
My Dad's an electrical engineer and the minimum requirement for the program his company is adopting to make 3D - models of power supplies and the sort is 16GB of RAM. They're using PC's though , not Macs. His PC should be getting upgraded to somewhere between 20-30GB of RAM. It supports up to 32GB. And at home I have the most RAM with 1GB
Wow.
Wow a program that has a minimum of 16GB of RAM?! Do you know the name of the app? And I'm curious as to what the specs are of his PC: OS, processor(s)?
(Heh, and here we all thought Aperture had steep requirements)
xlosltove777 said:My Dad's an electrical engineer and the minimum requirement for the program his company is adopting to make 3D - models of power supplies and the sort is 16GB of RAM. They're using PC's though , not Macs. His PC should be getting upgraded to somewhere between 20-30GB of RAM. It supports up to 32GB. And at home I have the most RAM with 1GB
Wow a program that has a minimum of 16GB of RAM?! Do you know the name of the app? And I'm curious as to what the specs are of his PC: OS, processor(s)?
(Heh, and here we all thought Aperture had steep requirements
)If I remember right its a specialized version of pro-engineer, and he's using a Dell workstation, with the last generation Dual Core Xeon(just 1 processor), I think its like 2.8GHZ or something. And running Windows XP.