Anyone try 10.8 with 2GB RAM?

Discussion in 'OS X Mountain Lion (10.8)' started by artguy10, Jul 30, 2012.

  1. artguy10, Jul 30, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2012

    artguy10 macrumors member

    artguy10

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #1
    We have a 20" iMac that we got around the end of 2008 or beginning of 2009. It came with 1GB RAM. I installed Snow Leopard on it when it came out, and performance was snappy (but we didn't do virtualization, Adobe CS, or heavy multitasking). I upgraded it to 2GB RAM. Now, I'm wondering if I should install 10.8. I know it's more memory-hungry than 10.6 (but less so than 10.7).

    I'm not interested in hearing from people with 4 or 8 GB RAM saying that you need more RAM to do anything. Is there anyone out there who actually has used ML with 2GB RAM (and not with a SSD)?

    Specifically, how does it compare to Snow Leopard?
     
  2. PurrBall macrumors 6502a

    PurrBall

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Location:
    Indianapolis
  3. brand macrumors 601

    brand

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #3
    I have it installed on a Unibody MacBook with only 2GB of RAM and it is excruciatingly painful.
     
  4. JS82712 macrumors 6502a

    JS82712

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    #4
    2GB ram is def. not enough; just look at how much RAM safari uses ;)
     
  5. artguy10 thread starter macrumors member

    artguy10

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #5
    Brand, do you do a lot of multitasking? We will do relatively light work (web, email, dvd, sometimes a word document).

    I have 4GB on a unibody (although with an SSD) and ML works very well. I don't care about 4GB, I am asking about 2GB. And specifically, I'm asking how it compares with Snow Leopard. If 2GB on 10.8 is slow for you but 10.6 was also slow, then it doesn't tell me anything.

    ----------

    I dont' use Safari, I use Chrome. And for all I know ML manages RAM so it takes advantage of all the RAM you have even if it could do fine with less.

    2GB Snow Leopard to Mountain Lion comparisons?
     
  6. mackid1993 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2009
    #6
    It's about as Memory hungry as Lion, which imo was about as bad as Snow Leopard. For $50 you can jump up to 8GB, which will make a huge difference.
     
  7. artguy10 thread starter macrumors member

    artguy10

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #7
    Thanks, but first off, the iMac's memory bays have a 2-GB-per-slot limit and 2 slots. Plus I checked and it would cost more like $60 to get a 4GB upgrade, so if I need it, then it's not worth it to get 10.8.

    Second off, I know that Lion at least officially required double the RAM of Snow Leopard, and I've heard people talk about ML using about 20% less RAM than Lion.

    So...
     
  8. mojo50 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    #8
    I have a 2 GB MBA, 2011 with ML installed and it is working beautifully. I am not a "power user", but just use my laptop for e-mail, surfing, movies etc. I find that it is faster than Lion.

    Sorry, I've never had Snow Leopard on this laptop, but ML definitely is fine for my use. That being said, I'm not a gamer, and I don't usually have more than 3 tabs open in Safari.... but I want people to know that ML for the casual user is fine. Just my .02!:)
     
  9. artguy10 thread starter macrumors member

    artguy10

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #9
    Thanks. I'm still a bit concerned however because your MacBook Air uses flash memory which performs better than a hard drive in case virtual memory is used. Just curious, can you open Activity Monitor for me and on the Memory tab at the bottom tell me what it says by Free, Wired, Active, Inactive, and Used?
     
  10. mojo50 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    #10
     
  11. artguy10 thread starter macrumors member

    artguy10

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #11
    Thanks mojo50, so it looks like you have a good amount of free ram. I also noticed that you have a small amount of page outs (memory was read from internal storage) and swap used is kind of big. I'll try to compare that to SL, thanks again.
     
  12. Critterbug macrumors member

    Critterbug

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Location:
    Foster City, CA
    #12
    I'm using 2 GB RAM w/Lion

    I've asked this a couple of times, but it seems nobody here hasn't stayed with the 2 GB except us. :rolleyes:
    Mostly I've got advice to upgrade ram, which I will do, though I think I'll go with ML first to see what's what, and let you know.
    Right now, I've got Lion running, and it's much slower than SL. I almost went back, but after a wipe and clean install, things run better. Here's a view of my activity monitor. I've got most of what I use open, so it's a typical stat.
    I've got the Core 2 Duo 2.26GHZ DDR3 MBP mid 2009. Hope this helps.
     

    Attached Files:

  13. artguy10 thread starter macrumors member

    artguy10

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #13
    Thank you. I actually find your results a little concerning. Your hard drive is being used for about 4GB worth of RAM, so in your case an upgrade would really help. Maybe the clean install improved things because you had more space on the HDD?

    I have heard ML uses less ram than Lion, so yes please try it out and report back!
     
  14. Drew017 macrumors 65816

    Drew017

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Location:
    East coast, USA
    #14
    It's totally odd that I have a totally different experience with 2GB of RAM...

    ----------

    OP, I have OS X Mountain Lion on my MacBook (2GB) and my experience has been quite good. It's just as fast as Snow Leopard was, and I'd definitely recommend it!
     
  15. Small White Car macrumors G4

    Small White Car

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #15
    You've got over 3 GB of page ins and page outs. Now, I can't say for sure that that's bad since I don't know when you last reset, but it's definitely a huge red flag. I'd bet money that you do need more RAM.
     
  16. artguy10 thread starter macrumors member

    artguy10

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #16
    Okay, that's a bit of hope. Might I ask if you have an SSD or an HDD and what your Activity Monitor reports as far as page outs and swap usage? (And if those numbers are high how long it was since you restarted?)
     
  17. Critterbug macrumors member

    Critterbug

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Location:
    Foster City, CA
    #17
    I have ordered the ram, but since I am curious, and can't be the only one in the same boat with the OP, I'm going to try ML first. It probably won't be any worse than Lion. That was a big bump from SL.
    Since the wipe and clean install, while it's slow opening apps, and loading large pages, it's livable. Way better than any windows computer I ever owned!!!
     
  18. artguy10 thread starter macrumors member

    artguy10

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #18
    I'm also curious, let me know how it goes!
     
  19. macbook yes macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2009
    #19
    I have 2GB of RAM running ML. I upgraded from SL and I feel it is slower but still usable. I was planning on upgrading eventually anyway, so I just went ahead and ordered 8GB. It should be here in a few days so I hope it speeds up my computer.
     
  20. artguy10 thread starter macrumors member

    artguy10

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #20
    Thanks.
     
  21. Drew017 macrumors 65816

    Drew017

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Location:
    East coast, USA
    #21
    I'm on an HDD (though I plan on getting an SSD soon ;))

    Here's Activity Monitor with Safari open-

    [​IMG]

    BTW I just restarted, so it's not totally accurate.
     
  22. artguy10 thread starter macrumors member

    artguy10

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #22
    Cool, that actually looks good. Is it very different after you run other software?
     
  23. IllmasterMath macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    #23
    From a late 2008 MacBook. Works well enough for me, but I don't keep a lot open.

    Screen Shot 2012-07-31 at 2.35.50 AM.png
     
  24. Blue Sun macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Location:
    Australia
    #24
    I recommend upping that to 8GB of RAM - fairly cheap these days.
     
  25. Critterbug macrumors member

    Critterbug

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Location:
    Foster City, CA
    #25
    ML Installed

    SNAPPY!!!
    I have to say that so far ML is just as fast as SL was, maybe faster. No problems installing, made a USB recovery disk as well.
    I'm impressed. So much better than Lion so far. Will keep you up to date if anything changes, but I'm blown away. Yeah, just 2 GB RAM, and it's like a new computer.:)
     

Share This Page