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

8 gb RAM and MBP/SR

Cave Man

Cave Man

macrumors 604
Original poster
Feb 12, 2007
7,178
362
Neander Valley, Germany; just outside Duesseldorf
Thanks to ayeying's testing of a 4 gb module, I bought an 8 gb SO-DIMM kit and installed it in my 2.4 gHz MBP/Santa Rosa. All 8 gb are seen and for the half-hour or so that I've been using it there have been no problems. I notice no performance lag or the such (if anything, it seems a bit snappier).

I have not tried Parallels or Fusion, which seem to cause a problem for one blogger.

If there are any 64-bit apps available for free or demo that would be a fair test of 64-bit memory mapping, I'd be happy to run them to test the memory.

But so far, it sure looks like a MBP - and probably MB and iMac - built on Santa Rosa can utilize 8 gb of RAM.
 

Attachments

  • Picture 2.png
    Picture 2.png
    34.3 KB · Views: 384
  • Picture 3.png
    Picture 3.png
    28.5 KB · Views: 173
Wow, that's fantastic news thanks for sharing!

It's nice to know that 4GB isn't the ceiling for RAM upgrades.

Keep us posted on overall responsiveness
 
Your system's probably snappier because you restarted. You're not using much memory as it is....

And when you hit over 4GB, your comp will crash.
 
mgpg89 said:
Your system will crash when you actually start using more than 4 GB of RAM.
Click to expand...

Firefly2002 said:
And when you hit over 4GB, your comp will crash.
Click to expand...

Well, I cannot tell you if it'll crash because I opened every app on my MBP and it only used 3.45 gb of real RAM. But I can tell you that at around 3 gb, things slowed downed dramatically. So, is that a function of 32 bit addressing, or because I had so many apps (probably around 60 or 70) open, or a combination of both? Since all of these apps are 32 bit, how would a 64-bit app (such as Light Room) do beyond 4 gb? I've dl'd the LR trial - how could I use it in an attempt to breach that 4 gb point?
 
Cave Man said:
Well, I cannot tell you if it'll crash because I opened every app on my MBP and it only used 3.45 gb of real RAM. But I can tell you that at around 3 gb, things slowed downed dramatically. So, is that a function of 32 bit addressing, or because I had so many apps (probably around 60 or 70) open, or a combination of both? Since all of these apps are 32 bit, how would a 64-bit app (such as Light Room) do beyond 4 gb? I've dl'd the LR trial - how could I use it in an attempt to breach that 4 gb point?
Click to expand...

That's because you had 60-70 apps.... 32-bit addressing is fine for everything < 4GB.

Open Photoshop and create a big document (1GB) and then work with it. You'll crash.
 
Firefly2002 said:
Open Photoshop and create a big document (1GB) and then work with it. You'll crash.
Click to expand...

OK, I generated a 32-bit HDR image of 200" x 100" and that gave me a file of 1.5 gb in size. I was able to "work" with it without crashing. But it was very slow. After quitting Photoshop, the speed of the system returned to normal. Is this slowness a function of CS3 being 32-bit, or simply that the 2.4 gHz C2D has trouble with images this size?

Attached is a screen shot of the RAM use. Does "Active" need to exceed 4 gb for it to crash? It would seem that if 4.4 gb is "Used" then I'm beyond the 4 gb limit?
 

Attachments

  • grab.jpg
    grab.jpg
    78.8 KB · Views: 224
Cave Man said:
Thanks to ayeying's testing of a 4 gb module, I bought an 8 gb SO-DIMM kit and installed it in my 2.4 gHz MBP/Santa Rosa. All 8 gb are seen and for the half-hour or so that I've been using it there have been no problems. I notice no performance lag or the such (if anything, it seems a bit snappier).

I have not tried Parallels or Fusion, which seem to cause a problem for one blogger.

If there are any 64-bit apps available for free or demo that would be a fair test of 64-bit memory mapping, I'd be happy to run them to test the memory.

But so far, it sure looks like a MBP - and probably MB and iMac - built on Santa Rosa can utilize 8 gb of RAM.
Click to expand...


Sorry, your not the first. This guy keith combs did it back in July!!

http://blogs.technet.com/keithcombs...ing-my-apple-macbook-pro-with-8gb-of-ram.aspx
 
I'm still waiting for any non-photoshopped picture of Activity Monitor on a MBP, showing it actually using more than 4GB of RAM. Every Activity Monitor screen shot I see of 4+GB MBPs shows more than 4GB free, which means the system is not using the added RAM. The only proof that the MBP can address and use more than 4GB is to show the excess actually being used.
 
UltraNEO* said:
Sorry, your not the first. This guy keith combs did it back in July!!

http://blogs.technet.com/keithcombs...ing-my-apple-macbook-pro-with-8gb-of-ram.aspx
Click to expand...

Yes, I know. That was the blog I was referring to in my original post. He only stated he had problems with virtualization. He did not elaborate (as far as I can tell) on performance with day to day activities.

ggjstudios said:
I'm still waiting for any non-photoshopped picture of Activity Monitor on a MBP, showing it actually using more than 4GB of RAM. Every Activity Monitor screen shot I see of 4+GB MBPs shows more than 4GB free, which means the system is not using the added RAM. The only proof that the MBP can address and use more than 4GB is to show the excess actually being used.
Click to expand...

1. Oops, I see the screen shot did not post - will fix now.
2. My MBP has 3.59 gb of Free memory, which is less than 4 gb.

The biggest problem is that I have no 64-bit apps, so none of my programs can go beyond 4 gb by themselves. But the sum total of system usage appears to be more than 4 gb.
 
Cave Man said:
OK, I generated a 32-bit HDR image of 200" x 100" and that gave me a file of 1.5 gb in size. I was able to "work" with it without crashing.
Click to expand...

So wanna send me the file so I can test. :p

Cave Man said:
The biggest problem is that I have no 64-bit apps, so none of my programs can go beyond 4 gb by themselves. But the sum total of system usage appears to be more than 4 gb.
Click to expand...

Isn't Photoshop 64-bit?
 
alphaod said:
So wanna send me the file so I can test. :p
Click to expand...

Yeah, that'd cause grief with the servers, eh? :) It was pretty easy to make - I just opened three 16-bit PSD images as HDR in PSCS3, then increased the canvas size to 200" x 100", then copied and pasted the 32-bit HDR several times. Got up to 1.5 gb in rather short order - but it was painfully slow when it got around 1 gb or so.

Isn't Photoshop 64-bit?
Click to expand...

Nope, and won't be until CS5 on the Mac side (CS4 on Windoze)
 
Cave Man said:
Yeah, that'd cause grief with the servers, eh? :) It was pretty easy to make - I just opened three 16-bit PSD images as HDR in PSCS3, then increased the canvas size to 200" x 100", then copied and pasted the 32-bit HDR several times. Got up to 1.5 gb in rather short order - but it was painfully slow when it got around 1 gb or so.
Click to expand...

I see. I don't have any HDR files, so wanna help?
 
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