Anybody have 1.25GB RAM on MacBook?

[Mr. MacBook]

Sup all,

I was wondering if anybody has 1.25GB ram on their macbook.
Alot of my friends said that they replaced their macbook w/ 1x 1gb+1x 256mb with 2x 512 and told me the 2x 512 is faster.

Is that true?

 

[Scarlet Fever]

i think if you did a blind test comparing 1.25 GB to 2*512 MB most of us won't notice the difference.

I have 1.5GB in my MacBook (1024+512), and it runs a hell of a lot better than 2*512.

 

[grafikat]

I am running 1.25 in my MacBook. I replaced on of my 256mb with a 1G, and it runs very nicely, thank you!

 

[siurpeeman]

i think if you did a blind test comparing 1.25 GB to 2*512 MB most of us won't notice the difference.

I have 1.5GB in my MacBook (1024+512), and it runs a hell of a lot better than 2*512.

my macbook launches safari a tenth of a second quicker with 1.25 gb of ram compared to 1 gb, and i can feel it, too. of course i'm just making this stuff up, but i'm really hoping to notice a substantial difference with the 2 gb i just ordered.

 

[Cult Follower]

The difference will be minimal.

 

[TBi]

There shouldn't be any difference except that more ram should be faster. New chipsets don't need matched ram to achieve full speed, they just need two sticks.

 

[infz]

The thing about RAM is that you don't notice it until you run out of it. And then, wham! So the key is to make sure your usage patterns don't often run over the limit, or else try to keep fewer apps open at a time.

I don't know for sure, but I reckon that the speed difference you get from having a dual pair isn't worth the cost of possibly running out of space. Then again, depending on what you're doing, you might not often find yourself in the range between 1GB and 1.25GB where you'll actually be helped by having that extra bit.

 

[TBi]

I don't know for sure, but I reckon that the speed difference you get from having a dual pair isn't worth the cost of possibly running out of space.

You get the same speed with any two sticks of ram as long as you have two sticks of ram. There is no speed difference between 1GB+ 256MB and 2x512.

There is a speed difference between 1x1GB and 2x512MB though because one is dual channel and the other isn't.

 

[mattcube64]

I replaced one of the 256MB sticks with a gig stick of Corsair ValueSelect. I noticed a substantial increase in performance. Apps load quicker, and more run smoothly simutaneously (sp?). I don't have a 512x2 computer to compare to, but I've read from multiple sources that no matter what, more RAM in different configs is faster than matched RAM but less of it.

Luckily, I plan on getting another gig stick here pretty soon. That's the best of both worlds.

 

[Mr. MacBook]

Ok guys, thanks.

you guys know where to get a cheap 512 mb sodimm? hopefully gona buy a 512 and a 1gb.

 

[Scarlet Fever]

Ok guys, thanks.

you guys know where to get a cheap 512 mb sodimm? hopefully gona buy a 512 and a 1gb.

if you already have 2*256 in your macbook, just buy a single GB stick.

I have 1.5 because i *acquired* (took) a 512MB stick from my parent's MBP. They don't notice the difference, but i notice the boost i get, so they don't lose anything, and i gain more performance

But i could live on 1.25. Don't spend any more money than you need to; RAM isn't exactly cheap.

 

[Mr. MacBook]

if you already have 2*256 in your macbook, just buy a single GB stick.

I have 1.5 because i *acquired* (took) a 512MB stick from my parent's MBP. They don't notice the difference, but i notice the boost i get, so they don't lose anything, and i gain more performance

But i could live on 1.25. Don't spend any more money than you need to; RAM isn't exactly cheap.

Theif *pulls out ak47*

 

[Scarlet Fever]

Theif *pulls out ak47*

just don't let me fix up your macbook; i might end up with 2GB instead of 1.5

 

[zephead]

I have 1.25 GB in mine. I was reading up on whether to get matched pairs or not, and most people said it wouldn't matter, so I decided to get a 1GB stick. It runs blazing fast compared to 512MB. I wouldn't know the diff between 2x 512 MB and 1x 1GB + 1x 256MB, but more RAM = faster. There's been a few times where I went over 1GB of memory use, and that extra .25 is sure handy.

 

[pip11]

To get the speed benefits of dual-channel operation, you need matched pairs. Regular pairs just get you more capacity without any speed boost in memory access. For dual-channel, both controllers must have an equal amount of RAM to address, so sticks of equal-size are needed.
There aren't many benchmarks on the net testing matched-pairs performance on the MacBook, but Macworld has some advice:

...on the MacBook, which shares up to 80MB of its main memory with the onboard graphics system, the extra speed you pick up by interleaving two separate RAM modules is vital.

In another article, FPS is doubled in Q3 by upgrading from 512MB to 2GB. Obviously, both of these configurations are running dual-channel, but the extra RAM has a huge effect.

I would say that anything is better than the stock 512MB, but 2GB of matched-pairs is definitely the way to go if 3D performance is a factor. I haven't tried many 3D games on my MB, but Expose and FrontRow are both sluggish when running in clamshell on my 20" Dell, and full-screen Coverflow is unusable regardless of which screen I'm on.
I'm planning to upgrade from 1.25 to 2 GB now that Newegg is selling 1 GB sticks of G.Skill for $70. I don't think RAM has ever been so cheap.

 

[BoA*]

1GB seems fast enough for me, I tried one out in the store with 512 MB so I ordered 1gb. I have a friend with 1.25 and couldn't see a big change on hers...

 

[JonBoy470]

2GB is totally wicked!

I got a 2x1GB RAM upgrade for my wife's MacBook from NewEgg.com. The RAM is G.Skill brand, lifetime warranty, and 92% of the customer ratings were 5 stars, including a substantial number of customers who bought it for MacBooks, and it was $176 shipped. Works great, and the speed improvement is beyond words.

As for pairing/not pairing RAM. The Intel chipset in the MacBooks/MacBook Pro's /iMacs is capable of dual-channel RAM access. That is, it can access matched RAM modules in parallel, increasing throughput between the CPU and RAM. Given a mis-matched pair, or a single module, it defaults to single-channel mode automatically and transparently to the user.

A matched pair of modules will thus out-perform a single module, or mis-matched modules of equal total capacity. That said, the performance gain from not disk-swapping due to insufficient total RAM generally more than off-sets the performance loss from have mis-matched RAM. Given that you can max out the MacBook at 2GB for less than $200, it's hard to justify in my mind going for less RAM than that.

 

[TBi]

Stop spreading FUD. You don't need matched pairs, and if you read the intel literature you'd know this. All you need are 2 sticks. As long as you have 2 sticks of ram you get dual channel. They don't need to be identical, there just needs to be 2!

From Intel

To get the speed benefits of dual-channel operation, you need matched pairs. Regular pairs just get you more capacity without any speed boost in memory access. For dual-channel, both controllers must have an equal amount of RAM to address, so sticks of equal-size are needed.
There aren't many benchmarks on the net testing matched-pairs performance on the MacBook, but Macworld has some advice:

In another article, FPS is doubled in Q3 by upgrading from 512MB to 2GB. Obviously, both of these configurations are running dual-channel, but the extra RAM has a huge effect.

I would say that anything is better than the stock 512MB, but 2GB of matched-pairs is definitely the way to go if 3D performance is a factor. I haven't tried many 3D games on my MB, but Expose and FrontRow are both sluggish when running in clamshell on my 20" Dell, and full-screen Coverflow is unusable regardless of which screen I'm on.
I'm planning to upgrade from 1.25 to 2 GB now that Newegg is selling 1 GB sticks of G.Skill for $70. I don't think RAM has ever been so cheap.

 

[TBi]

As for pairing/not pairing RAM. The Intel chipset in the MacBooks/MacBook Pro's /iMacs is capable of dual-channel RAM access. That is, it can access matched RAM modules in parallel, increasing throughput between the CPU and RAM. Given a mis-matched pair, or a single module, it defaults to single-channel mode automatically and transparently to the user.

A matched pair of modules will thus out-perform a single module, or mis-matched modules of equal total capacity. That said, the performance gain from not disk-swapping due to insufficient total RAM generally more than off-sets the performance loss from have mis-matched RAM. Given that you can max out the MacBook at 2GB for less than $200, it's hard to justify in my mind going for less RAM than that.

Not true, read my post above.

 

[Objectivist-C]

Stop spreading FUD. You don't need matched pairs, and if you read the intel literature you'd know this. All you need are 2 sticks. As long as you have 2 sticks of ram you get dual channel. They don't need to be identical, there just needs to be 2!

From Intel

Those links are for a different chipset, and don't appear to support your assertion. Bonus points for misuse of "FUD".

 

[TBi]

Those links are for a different chipset, and don't appear to support your assertion. Bonus points for misuse of "FUD".

Well clearly you didn't read them...

The first one gives details on the "Intel Flex Memory Technology"

The second one clearly states that the chipset in question has this technology. Go read it again. (Or see the attachment)

Facilitates easier upgrades by allowing different memory sizes to be populated and remain in dual-channel mode.

 

[Carrot007]

The macbook uses the 945 GM chipset not the 945GT chipset which is the newer one.

I belive the not needing mached pairs for dual channel mode is new to the 945 GT chipset.

Which would be soo much nicer in a macbook with the gma3000 gfx which is a half decent chip for intergrated gfx, whereas the 950 sucks!

 

[snowmoon]

DO MATCHED PAIRS OF MEMORY HELP?
We've done some matched versus unmatched memory tests on the Intel Mac mini (which has virtually indentical architecture to the MacBook 13"). In the case of the Intel Mac mini, Quake 3 saw a 51% gain from matched memory pairs while Doom 3 saw an 18% gain. As for Productivity Apps, matched pairs gave iMovie HD a 3% boost and Photoshop CS a 4% boost.

From http://www.barefeats.com/mbcd3.html and http://www.barefeats.com/mincd.html

So... I would say that matched pairs are important for some people.

 

[Objectivist-C]

Well clearly you didn't read them...

The first one gives details on the "Intel Flex Memory Technology"

The second one clearly states that the chipset in question has this technology. Go read it again. (Or see the attachment)

Point conceeded, apparently I'm blind. However, from what I can dig up, the MacBook's video chip still takes a performance hit in asymmetric dual-channel mode.

 

[TBi]

From http://www.barefeats.com/mbcd3.html and http://www.barefeats.com/mincd.html

So... I would say that matched pairs are important for some people.

Those tests aren't fair. Of course you'll get better performance with 2GB ram than with 1.25GB ram. They should have kept the memory around the same size, comparing 2x512 Vs 1GB + 512.

Now the question remains is the performance hit due to the lack of ram or due to dual channel.

The macbook uses the 945 GM chipset not the 945GT chipset which is the newer one.

I belive the not needing mached pairs for dual channel mode is new to the 945 GT chipset.

Which would be soo much nicer in a macbook with the gma3000 gfx which is a half decent chip for intergrated gfx, whereas the 950 sucks!

The part i cut out implicitly mentions the 945GM.