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

OMG: 16gb RAM in 2011 MBPro

How's is this possible? Sandy Bridge mobile design limits RAM to 8GB max. Unless there is some secret backdoor activation in the chipset, I don't see how this is possible :confused:

edit: just saw price...I'll order 2 right away!
 
iPadThai said:
Sandy Bridge mobile design limits RAM to 8GB max. Unless there is some secret backdoor activation in the chipset
Click to expand...

I love these terms. "Mobile design limits"... "backdoor activation in the chipset"... lol way to say "I don't understand computing."
 
I would like to see can the 16GB be fully utilized. It may be recognized but it's another case whether the MC can use it all or not
 
Eh, wait for 8GB chips to hit newegg. I'm guessing an 8 x 2 kit from, say, Crucial would be no more than about $300-400.
 
Wow expensive. For me rather spend my the money on an SATA3 drive when they come out, but I'm sure some people will buy who need it.
 
mjohnson1212 said:
External monitor?
Click to expand...

zer0sum said:
I know this will come as s shock, but some people use external monitors :D
Click to expand...

vant said:
External monitor.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Nonetheless it's more likely that most people working with 9GB Raw files are pros and have a desktop or workstation for that. Why spend up to $5000 for a MacBook Pro with 16GB of RAM and an SSD (laptop hard drive would be a bit of a killer), when a Mac Pro would do a much better job? Besides the obvious advantage of having everything in one place. Although I'm guessing most would have some kind of NAS, even a 512GB SSD will get filled pretty quick with 9GB Raw files.
 
nick9191 said:
Fair enough. Nonetheless it's more likely that most people working with 9GB Raw files are pros and have a desktop or workstation for that. Why spend up to $5000 for a MacBook Pro with 16GB of RAM and an SSD (laptop hard drive would be a bit of a killer), when a Mac Pro would do a much better job?
Click to expand...

Retaining portability.
 
Some of us travel around the world. I have no need for a MacPro it is mostly useless to me. I use a NEC 30 in wide gamut monitor and run a huge Epson 7900 printer plus a mired of other things right off a MBP the new quad cores just put a nail in the coffin for a macPro for me . Now with a Sata 3 drive 12 to 16 gb of ram there is simply not much I can't do. BTW most working Pros would have both so throwing 5 k in either direction or both would most likely be normal for some of us. I work with a 40 mpx back and a 9gb raw is peanut stuff. My output files are 230 mgs EACH. Money is not always the issue it is more about getting work done in the environment you need it to work and effectually delivering to your clients. Now having said all that having 16gb of ram is very nice but until Adobe does something better with there programs to be more efficient and not be so damn Ram hungry and more core friendly we are stuck with needing ram. I may get to 12gb but that will be after I get the Sata 3 drive. But trust me on this there is not much I can't do on this MBP. You just have to work differently and be more connected to externals and T bolt will help with that down the road.
 
The 8GB limit on Sandy Bridge might be from the limited availability of single 8GB SODIMMs.

Any link on Intel's site that states the RAM-limit on mobile Sandy Bridge?
 
axu539 said:
Each stick can be up to 8 GB, and there are 2 slots. 2 x 8 GB = 16 GB.
Click to expand...

Precisely, this is how I read it as well. I can see how some came to the opposite conclusion. The spec sheet was simply too ambiguous, but hey this is a good thing!

This nudges it closer to a Mac Pro replacement but not quite.
 
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