Hi mates, do you know which type of 4GB RAM is accepted by the mac pro 3,1?
Normal FB-DIMM ECC PC6400 DDR2 800MHZ modules?
Normal FB-DIMM ECC PC6400 DDR2 800MHZ modules?
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.
4GB RAM slots in a mac pro 3,1
- Thread starter sevichenko
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I see: "By default, it was configured with 2 GB of 800 MHz DDR2 EEC "fully-buffered" FB-DIMM". (emphasis mine)
But... Im asking about 4gb modules. Because with the 8gb slots there are some differences because is a configuration that works up to 64gb, then im asking because i don't if its the same with the 4gb modules
667 MHz will also work and can be found much cheaper. It's slightly slower but might be worth the cost difference.
At least the prices are good for OWC. You'll probably find them much cheaper elsewhere.
This is especially true since FB-DIMM servers have reached that "certain age" where they're out of support and fully depreciated - in other words they're being eWasted by the truckload. DIMMs scraped from those systems are on eBay for a pittance. (I eWasted my last 60 or so FB-DIMM systems last October (2015).)
I bought 4 pairs of these and they worked fine. Only $10 for 2 x 4GB. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0038FWFS...TF8&colid=1819S7EX7Z6Q5&coliid=I3K5APS2N7MVP9
Only about a 4% performance difference between the two and the 667 MHz are generally a lot less expensive. http://barefeats.com/harper5.html
but i already have 10gigas at 800mhz, if i put only 2gb of 667mhz ram, then i will have 12gb with a 4% performance less.
Tradeoffs, right? Gotta do what's best for you. I'd probably be adding more than just 2 GB more. If you're adding 8 GB more then it might be worth it for you to lose the 4%.
The performance improvement from having an appropriate amount of RAM is going to significantly offset the loss of using slower RAM. Outside of benchmark testing I would bet most users couldn't tell the difference between 667MHz and 800MHz RAM.
Itguy2016 has it, depends on user workload but to little ram is much much much worse than a potential of 4% slower.
the key word is potential because it depends on the workload.
if you happen to have to use the scratch disc/swap etc then the slow down is much much more than 4%.
lots of people use x-server ram from ebay with smaller heat sinks, i think the 2gb and 4gb sticks run cooler too (1gb sticks are just not worth buying unless your picking them up to get the heat sinks, back in the day people picked up the 512mb sticks to get the heat sinks and stick them on 4GB sticks.
i spent close to the price of a used 4.1/5.1 on ram for my 3.1 i dont miss it (got a 5.1 now)
the key word is potential because it depends on the workload.
if you happen to have to use the scratch disc/swap etc then the slow down is much much more than 4%.
lots of people use x-server ram from ebay with smaller heat sinks, i think the 2gb and 4gb sticks run cooler too (1gb sticks are just not worth buying unless your picking them up to get the heat sinks, back in the day people picked up the 512mb sticks to get the heat sinks and stick them on 4GB sticks.
i spent close to the price of a used 4.1/5.1 on ram for my 3.1 i dont miss it (got a 5.1 now)use activity monitor and watch ram use, if your geing in to swap then you have to little.
relay depends on workload.
if your using server ram from ebay with small heat sinks it's super cheep so not a real problem, if your buying ram with "mac" heatsinks then it tend's to cost a lot, whihc is a pain.
as i mentioned i spent almost as much as my mac 5.1 cost on 3.1 ram towards then end of my use of the 3.1 (part of why up upgraded)
relay depends on workload.
if your using server ram from ebay with small heat sinks it's super cheep so not a real problem, if your buying ram with "mac" heatsinks then it tend's to cost a lot, whihc is a pain.
as i mentioned i spent almost as much as my mac 5.1 cost on 3.1 ram towards then end of my use of the 3.1 (part of why up upgraded)
thanks for the info, i heard something about the fan speed, but i don't know up to what point there is only an "aestethic" problem