16GB RAM modules

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by DeeEss, Oct 26, 2011.

  1. DeeEss, Oct 26, 2011
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2011

    DeeEss macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    #1
    I'm considering 16GB RM Modules. 4 of them for my 3.3 6c Mac Pro for 48GB. I currently have 24GB

    I could definitely use it as it's usually been gobbled up but I'm just wondering how much practical or real world difference there will be? I have a SSD Raid as a scratch for PS which seems to really pick up the pace when memory is running short.

    Your thoughts?
     
  2. JavaTheHut macrumors 6502

    JavaTheHut

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    #2
    I think you mean "3 of them" 16x3=48
    So you get pages out? with PS How big are your files?
    RAM is waaaaaaay faster than ssd
     
  3. alust2013 macrumors 601

    alust2013

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Location:
    On the fence
    #3
    Why not try adding another 8 first? There really isn't a real world difference in performance between triple and dual channel memory. I'm also not certain that it will support that much, although it probably would.
     
  4. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #4
    sit and stare at the activity monitor see the page outs. going from 24gb ram to 32gb ram may be enough. lot less then buy 3 sticks at 200 each
     
  5. DeeEss thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    #5
    Sorry, yes I meant 3. Files are massive, they come from a 60MP camera. You have a few of them open and it chews up the RAM. I need to keep them open when retouching so as a story of images they can be all balanced together.

    Hmmmm...from what I read. Using the 4th slot slows things down a fair bit? Money is not really an issue here as it's a Tax Deduction.

    Thanks. How do I look for Page Outs? I have just been going on available RAM.
     
  6. alust2013 macrumors 601

    alust2013

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Location:
    On the fence
    #6
    Using the 4th slot only somewhat reduces performance numbers, real world difference is unnoticeable.
     
  7. minifridge1138 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    #7
    Using the 4th slot is not going to slow things down to any degree you'll notice.

    If you used the 4th slot for a 32MB ram chip (which they don't make anymore), then you'd notice a difference.

    The performance boost of an additional 8GB of ram (assuming you'll use that much ram) will more than offset any performance hit from using the 4th slot.
     
  8. JavaTheHut macrumors 6502

    JavaTheHut

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    #8
    If money is no problem Hell go for the 3x16GB sticks I believe that the MAX you can go at this point is 3x16GB and OWC approves that config.

    I read that the 4th slot penalty "out of tri channel config" is only about 2%~3% which is negligible compared the gain out of another +8GB if you went that route 4x8GB sticks.

    Open Activity Monitor in Utilities to see the real world RAM usage.

    ----------

    Oh by the way how big is the SSD array 2x ? you should use that as a work area for speed
     
  9. johnnymg macrumors 65816

    johnnymg

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    #9
    Agreed: 32GB (4x8GB) will run just under $300 and 48GB (3x16GB) is currently $600.

    cheers
    JohnG
     
  10. netvis, Oct 28, 2011
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2011

    netvis macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2011
    #10
  11. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #11
    SEE MY THUMBNAIL

    I have 660 mb page ins and 0 page outs. 32gb ram is more then enough for me.
     

    Attached Files:

  12. DeeEss thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    #12
    Hmmm...for me, 17GB of pages outs with 24GB of RAM.
     

    Attached Files:

  13. DeeEss, Oct 29, 2011
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2011

    DeeEss thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    #13
    Thanks

    This link is interesting too:
    http://macperformanceguide.com/Reviews-OWC-16GB-MacPro-6core.html

    So it seems, for tasks that 24GB is best when it's enough. But for times when the RAM is needed 48GB obviously kills the 24GB.

    My work load is getting bigger all the time so I think I'm going to spring for the 48 as its also a tax deduction. That also means I won't have to close down all my other apps like Capture One and Lightroom etc while retouching.
     
  14. DeeEss thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
  15. JavaTheHut macrumors 6502

    JavaTheHut

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    #15
    Ouch! - agreed get the 3x16GB -- this is not good all the pages out
     
  16. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #16
    yeah he needs the 3 x 16gb sticks big time.
     
  17. digitalhen macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #17
    Well, you have 27 GB free, that probably helps :)
     
  18. JavaTheHut macrumors 6502

    JavaTheHut

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    #18
    Another thought is if you go 4x16GB and create a RAMDisk of 16GB as a scratch disk this may be advantages... but I can not say for sure if creating the RAMDisk leaves 3x16GB to remain isolated for best performance ie. 'Tri-Channel'. You would be a guinea pig unless someone here who knows more on memory matters can enlighten us. The RAMDisk speeds would be very fast comparable to 4SSD's in a stripe raid.
     
  19. digitalhen macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #19
    The ram would still be dual-channel. The RAM drive is at a higher level.

    Would make more sense to use the 16GB as actual ram, and avoid swapping in the first place.
     
  20. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #20
    may not be stable someone had issues with 64gb in a sp cpu 48gb will work
     
  21. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #21
    I am going to give you some suggestions. First I'd like to know what your photoshop preferences look like. If you don't limit photoshop somewhat on how much ram it can use, it will starve the OS. Generally the default 70% is fine. Things which are cached from photoshop aren't included in this 70%. It's just the amount it addresses directly. Turn off thumbnails on all palettes. Close out the navigator and histograms. Assign a dedicated scratch drive. Keep your history settings low (under 20) or purge when you save a file.

    This should help considerably :) I've dealt with plenty of files that size and larger.
     

Share This Page