6GB in MacBook (Pro); Yes it works. - 8GB... well...

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by ayeying, Oct 2, 2008.

  1. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #76
    not to be an opportunist or anything but uh.. since it looks like this failed, do you happen to have a live linux cd sitting around? or do you have vista in bootcamp? running this test successfully in another OS would show that it's a soft limit in OS X when running on the mbp and perhaps something that can be worked around.
     
  2. Cave Man macrumors 604

    Cave Man

    #77
    Page in is 339 mb. Page out is 128 kb (why so much smaller?). Swap is 6.45 mb. VM size is 69.5 gb.

    No, no linux, but I do have Win XP in bootcamp. However, I gotta get kids in bed and spend a little time with the wife. I'm going to close this down for now (and I'm out of town tomorrow through Thurs). Would appreciate an explanation as to what all this means to you.
     
  3. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #78
    so wtf...

    I just ran it on an 8g macpro and I'm getting no proc usage.

    I'm thinking that it's OS X at this point.. if you get a chance at some point could you try and run this in linux? If it works I promise to try and find out whats going on with OS X and see if I can do anything about it.
     
  4. Cave Man macrumors 604

    Cave Man

    #79
    Here's a screen shot. It's now at 6.01 gb and going up.
     

    Attached Files:

  5. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #80
    it looks like os x is only using 4g.. but it isn't swapping...

    well the proc usage makes me think that you're swapping and thus the memory isn't being used, but you aren't. But why would OS X have issues with 8 gigs when it runs fine on other machines... popping in a live linux cd (no need to install) would let me verify that..

    XP would only address 3.3g it can't be used for this test.

    no rush.. thanks for your time..
     
  6. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #81
    hmm they're not even finished grabbing the memory... that should take under a second.

    let me think on this more. I can't imagine apple would cripple the memory controller on intels chipset... and OS X has no problem with large amounts of memory as evidenced in the macpro line... it looks like apple has some kind of soft limit.
     
  7. Cave Man macrumors 604

    Cave Man

    #82
    Would it matter if I were copying a large number of music files onto my MBP from my other Mac while these were running?
     
  8. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #83
    I'm not sure, but I do know that if that memory was being used you should be able to fire 5 of those bam bam bam bam bam and go on like nothing happened...

    but your mem stats says nothing is swapping...

    don't know what to make of it...

    if I had to guess right now, I'd say that the hardware sees 8gigs, recognizes 8g, but has totally borked your ability to allocate any memory at a reasonable speed... which looks like the OS.
     
  9. ayeying thread starter macrumors 601

    ayeying

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Location:
    Yay Area, CA
    #84
    This is the part where it isn't hardware being at fault.

    OSX Leopard is 64-bit in frameworks, most of the software being used is only 32-bit. Therefore, until Snow Leopard comes out, you might have issues with 4+GB.
     
  10. Cave Man macrumors 604

    Cave Man

    #85
    So, would these also affect Mac Pros? Presumably, the OS is the same?
     
  11. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #86

    my app is most assuredly 64 bit, and even if were compiled as 32 bit it falls well within the common 2g address space limit that are present in some 64 bit OSes.

    you are wrong in your belief that the macbook pro can use 8 gigs of ram while running OS X. It doesn't matter what the fault is, the problem is that you didn't do enough testing before announcing success.

    work can be done to find this limit if it is indeed in software and I'm willing to attempt this, but you need to withdraw your statement that people can go run out and pop 8 gigs in and get anything other than a little 'about mac' that shows a bigger number.
     
  12. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #87
    my mac pro handles piggy. something is awry, either with hardware or some aspect of OS X reacting differently based on the machine it thinks it's on.
     
  13. ayeying thread starter macrumors 601

    ayeying

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Location:
    Yay Area, CA
    #88
    Outside programs that specifically force the max amount of ram to be used, the 6 and 8GB ram works very well on the MBP. I use it mostly for virtual machine work. I can run several VMs at once without lag anymore because the system has more then 4GB of ram to work with. That is what I usually use my laptop for and I found success in my trials. It is not just a "About Mac" trigger. There has been several screenshots that shows it can use that much ram, however, the method being used might not be what you're looking for.

    Edit: I ran your piggy. I ran 5 Windows, with VMWare Fusion running Vista at 1GB dedicated in the background. 0 CPU usage for your piggy once its loaded. However, the system does not want to hold the memory in the actual, it keeps wanting to dump it into swap. If you can write a program that works in 64-bit windows, it would really prove if this is a software or hardware fault.
     

    Attached Files:

  14. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #89
    that app should run in 64 bit windows, you can compile it with cygwin or msvc.
     
  15. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #90

    there is a difference between allocation and usage. You can't use the memory.

    if it swaps, you're not using it and you wasted your money.
     
  16. ayeying thread starter macrumors 601

    ayeying

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Location:
    Yay Area, CA
    #91
    Here's the same test, running 5 piggy windows in OSX Snow Leopard Developers Preview. I'll let you determine the results. No swap was used until I opened the 5th window. OSX was running with 1 GB used after boot up.
     

    Attached Files:

  17. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
  18. fireloss macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Location:
    USA
    #93
    A software limit, perhaps?
     
  19. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #94
    the amount of swap used is right about where it should be if it was using the memory none of the memory I grabbed is wired, so I'd expect the OS to notice I'm not actually accessing it anymore and page some of it out... a small amount

    if that system is up usable and cpu is where it should be I'd say that the mbp can use 8G of memory in 10.6.

    which begs the question, why is it not in 10.5 when the mac pro can use it no problem.
     
  20. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #95
    if his screenshot is accurate it looks like it works no prob in 10.6. annnnd on the upside since so many people didn't notice it really wasn't working right in 10.5 it would suggest that no one really needs more than 4G in a normal environment.

    and it would also suggest that either vista 64 or linux 64 can access it as well.
     
  21. nephilim7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    #96
    I'm going digging.
     
  22. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #97
    I'm sure when 10.6 is out, the prices will be cheaper too.
     
  23. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #98
    DDR2 prices are about to head back up.
     
  24. ayeying thread starter macrumors 601

    ayeying

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Location:
    Yay Area, CA
    #99
    Once DDR3 comes more mainstream.
     
  25. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #100

Share This Page