I see that the new 2009 Mac Pro comes with DDR3 1066Mhz. Can the Mac Pro support faster memory like DDR3 1333Mhz or 1666Mhz? Since Nehalem utilizes memory so much more, being able to have faster memory certainly will make a difference on a music workstation which is what I would be using the Mac Pro for. Any insights or thoughts on this?
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.
2009 Mac Pro Limited to DDR3 1066Mhz?
- Thread starter music3
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The 2.66GHz and 2.93GHz dual processor Xeons (8 core systems) have memory controllers that support 1333MHz memory. We won't know until it is tested though.
Link fron Intel preferably
Intel haven't presented official details to the public as far as I know. There are plenty of sources that provide that information that don't just link back to each other though.
The Xeons are less about cutting edge performance. There is also the issue of available memory. In the end it probably wasn't worth offering support. That doesn't mean the processors won't be able to do it.
If you look on the Intel web site you'll see that i7 only officially goes up to 1066 so it's slower than the top end Xeons. It is just that people overclock the memory and it is perhaps a bit more flexible than Xeons in this regard.
Would you settle for an article with chart from Tom's Hardware?Link fron Intel preferably
E5520 is the 2.26GHz part used in the Octo model. No X version at all, and the L version is lower power, and has less cache (4MB rather than 8MB).
The non-ECC DDR3 has quite a few vendors stumbling over one another to make OC capable memory.
The ECC variants aren't aimed at this market, but it may be possible to do so.
Would you settle for an article with chart from Tom's Hardware?
E5520 is the 2.26GHz part used in the Octo model. No X version at all, and the L version is lower power, and has less cache (4MB rather than 8MB).
The non-ECC DDR3 has quite a few vendors stumbling over one another to make OC capable memory.
I'm convinced. Now I know why the 2.66 is an extra $1400 from Apple. But I also now know by looking at various benchmarks that it's not really worth spending the extra $1400 for the 2.66.. I'm glad I ordered the 2.26.
As of now it doesnt matter. All the Nehalem Mac Pros use the 1066MHz anyway.
The 2.66GHz and the 2.93GHz 8 core models controller are specified as 1333MHz but their all locked down to only 1066MHz RAM.
If it stays that way, it gives you one less reason to get the 2.66 and the 2.93 models over the 2.26GHz.
The 2.66GHz and the 2.93GHz 8 core models controller are specified as 1333MHz but their all locked down to only 1066MHz RAM.
If it stays that way, it gives you one less reason to get the 2.66 and the 2.93 models over the 2.26GHz.