Hello, I just received my package of matched memory (2GB x 4), to replace the measly 1GB x 2 that came with my 2008 Mac Pro. I know there's a performance increase when using 4 modules. If I also keep the 1GB x 2 in the system, for a total of 10GB, will I lose the speed increase, or is it enabled when you have at least 4 modules, and anything more than that comes along for the ride? Thanks for any info!
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.
10GB slower than 8GB in 2008 Mac Pro?
- Thread starter Delirium39
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's my understanding that things work best if all the memory matches. So I think by adding in the 1GBx2 you will likely lose some performance. How noticeable that will be is a different question.
I thought dual-channel just needed to be installed in pairs... not every stick in the whole system had to match.
Hmmmmm, well according to this article, the 8GB configuration would give me 6.5GB/s, while the 10GB configuration would give me 6.8GB/s. If true, I'm wondering what slot order gets that result. Accordng to OWC, I should be installing new memory in this order:
Top Riser:
1GB (stock)
1GB (stock)
2GB (matched new)
2GB (matched new)
Bottom Riser:
2GB (matched new)
2GB (matched new)
Anyone know if this is correct?
Edit: I think I found the answer here: http://eshop.macsales.com/Reviews/Framework.cfm?page=/Benchmarks/macproearly08ram/article.html
Looks like running 10GB in the above configuration is the same or faster than the 8GB option.
Thanks for all your opinions everyone!
Top Riser:
1GB (stock)
1GB (stock)
2GB (matched new)
2GB (matched new)
Bottom Riser:
2GB (matched new)
2GB (matched new)
Anyone know if this is correct?
Edit: I think I found the answer here: http://eshop.macsales.com/Reviews/Framework.cfm?page=/Benchmarks/macproearly08ram/article.html
Looks like running 10GB in the above configuration is the same or faster than the 8GB option.
Thanks for all your opinions everyone!
I'm confused now about how this works. I didn't know you could have ONE chip in the upper riser, and ONE chip in the lower riser. I thought they had to be matched pairs.
I had 4x512mb when I got my Mac Pro (two on the top riser, slots 1 and 2, and two on the bottom riser, slots 1 and 2).
When I installed the two 2GB chips I just got, I put them in slots 3 and 4 of riser A. Is that correct? What's the order of how to put them in?
I had 4x512mb when I got my Mac Pro (two on the top riser, slots 1 and 2, and two on the bottom riser, slots 1 and 2).
When I installed the two 2GB chips I just got, I put them in slots 3 and 4 of riser A. Is that correct? What's the order of how to put them in?
Å
åidån
Guest
How about putting one of your 1gb sticks from the top riser into the bottom, that would match everything up, wouldn't it.
He's using the configuration specified by . I think the way the risers work means splitting it in that way would hurt, not help.
That's right. With the proper installation:
You'll get dual channel from the 1st four 2GB modules and single channel access from the last 1GB modules. Buying two more 1GB modules will provide dual channel access to all modules.
I think the general behavior of software makes any loss of speed negligible, and not worth worrying about until one is striping Intel X-25M SSDs to eliminate the storage bottleneck.
I think that indeed will make it more relevant. It's still relevant even now IMO though. Just not as much. 
I have the 10 gigs and it is plenty fast
Agreed I run 10GB with 2x4GB and 2x1GB and I've never felt it crippled my Mac in anyway regarding performance, infact a year down the line and it's still the most rapid system I've ever used