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.
10.6 double the RAM?
- Thread starter hugodrax
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Are you sure?
For me it's the opposite, Calculator takes up 26,43MB and Dictionary 45,52MB right after I just started them. (edit: in Leopard)
64-bit means that every long, pointer...etc takes twice the memory. It effectively doubles RAM usage.
From Wikipedia:
"The main disadvantage of 64-bit architectures is that relative to 32-bit architectures the same data occupies more space in memory (due to swollen pointers and possibly other types and alignment padding). This increases the memory requirements of a given process and can have implications for efficient processor cache utilization."
It sounds like something bogus made up by people who don't understand technology properly, but it's true. There are ways to reduce the effect, but I don't know if Apple are doing anything like this.
From Wikipedia:
"The main disadvantage of 64-bit architectures is that relative to 32-bit architectures the same data occupies more space in memory (due to swollen pointers and possibly other types and alignment padding). This increases the memory requirements of a given process and can have implications for efficient processor cache utilization."
It sounds like something bogus made up by people who don't understand technology properly, but it's true. There are ways to reduce the effect, but I don't know if Apple are doing anything like this.
It'll be interesting to see whether they manage to trim memory usage in other ways enough to counter out the effects of 64 bit. I'm hopeful 
(I haven't tested yet... don't want to reboot into 10.5 to get numbers for memory usage there)
(I haven't tested yet... don't want to reboot into 10.5 to get numbers for memory usage there)
So if it uses double the ram, will my old 2.2ghz MBP which only supports 4gig ram be able to be upgraded to 8gig once 10.6 is installed? Like will 10.6 recognize 8 gig where 10.5 could only see 4?
its gb, not ghz and no, if your computer only supports 4gigs, that all it will ever support
the ram increase is what leopard will need to use software wise
interesting so is the ram increase namely due to going to 64bit?
if i have a core duo machine and wont be utilizing 64 bit, would my ram requirements be below what apple reccomend at 1 gb, and be essentially 512mb?
Yes, the increase is due to 64-bit computing. Memory pointers can address more memory by being 64-bits long rather than 32-bits long. However, these pointers have to be stored, and since they're longer in the 64-bit system, they take more bits to store.
That means that 1Gb of RAM on 64-bit is like having 512Mb on 32-bit. However, there are other advantages, like some faster calculations and more registers which mean it's a bit faster than 512Mb on 32-bit.
This doesn't increase the amount of memory your computer can handle. So if you're computer (and your wallet) can handle a 2x RAM increase, and you have a 64-bit capable Mac, do that in preparation for Snow Leopard to be sure of a performance boost. Otherwise the lack of RAM might bottleneck application performance, depending on your usage.
For my Santa Rosa 2.4Ghz BlackBook, getting 4Gb of DDR2 notebook RAM (2x2Gb) is £40 from overclockers.co.uk. It's fairly inexpensive and will be well worth it.
Actually it's GB, not gb.
GB = gigabyte
Gb = gigabit
gigahertz is technically GHz, but I won't call you out on it.
So does this mean that users who don't upgrade their RAM may actually see a decrease in performance? Or will Snow Leopard make up for the increased RAM usage some other way? I planned on upgrading to 8GB of RAM at some point but not for a quite a while.
Since you want to be understood correctly? Or maybe since you want to give the impression of basic literacy?
oh i have no problem with formal writing when it calls for it. i treat forums as a treat texting, that being informal
as long as i convey what i am trying to say, ive accomplished what i wanted
I second this question. My Rev.1 C2D MBP can only handle 3gig max. I can't increase the RAM beyond that. Will I possibly see a decrease in performance upon upgrading to SL?
You should see an increase in performance as the registers are twice as wide in 64bit mode allowing double the data to be processed during the same clock cycle, that is the theory anyways...