Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
RAM disks are essentially a waste. They look great on benchmarks, but the thing is, you are wasting double the RAM... a more technical explanation is below (from a guy that worked at Apple) but essentially, if you load a 1GB App into a RAM disk and then execute it from there, OSX will simply cache it in real RAM again (consuming another 1GB of your real RAM).

Rather than copy it to the Ramdisk, you might as well just let OSX load what you need into RAM. It takes the same amount of time, and you don't need to guess what OSX needs, it will load whatever it needs into RAM and execute it from there and cache it there long after it's no longer needed (until RAM runs low).

The slowest activity is loading whatever you want to run into RAM, whether you do it to a RAM disk or you let OSX do it at run-time, it's still faster loading it from an SSD.

Think about it... it makes no sense to use a RAM disk if the OS is caching every app you run in RAM anyway.

Quote from an Apple Engineer...

That thing is snake oil, as are the vast majority of ramdisk products on OS X. Designing a ramdisk that works well on OS X is remarkably difficult because backing a block device into wired memory causes the contents to be double buffered above it in the Unified Buffer Cache.

For transient data on systems with no VM pressure, what will happen is the file is created, the object backing it sits in the UBC, it might get synched to disk, but unless you are running low on ram it stays in ram as well. That is why you see no speed increases, all you are doing is eliminating the background asynch writeout, and you are wasting a lot of ram to do it. More importantly, if you are actually creating a wired ram disk you are eating a ton of kernel address space which can be an issue if you have a lot of memory (large page tables) or several video cards.

Source
 
RAM disks are essentially a waste. They look great on benchmarks, but the thing is, you are wasting double the RAM... a more technical explanation is below (from a guy that worked at Apple) but essentially, if you load a 1GB App into a RAM disk and then execute it from there, OSX will simply cache it in real RAM again (consuming another 1GB of your real RAM).

Rather than copy it to the Ramdisk, you might as well just let OSX load what you need into RAM. It takes the same amount of time, and you don't need to guess what OSX needs, it will load whatever it needs into RAM and execute it from there and cache it there long after it's no longer needed (until RAM runs low).

The slowest activity is loading whatever you want to run into RAM, whether you do it to a RAM disk or you let OSX do it at run-time, it's still faster loading it from an SSD.

Think about it... it makes no sense to use a RAM disk if the OS is caching every app you run in RAM anyway.

Quote from an Apple Engineer...



Source
It seemed to me, that it could make sense in cases where 32bit apps were used (i.e. PhotoShop), given the address limitations (memory capacity over what the application can use). It's not needed for most things, and not for 64bit apps at all.

//Grrr...Software dragging behind as usual....//end rant :p

Either way, you do still need to get the data from disk to memory faster to really utilize memory or RAM disks. SATA is still a substantial bottleneck. :(
 
VirtualRain, any comments on this article relating to RAM disk.

Apparently Apple also made used of RAM disk in remote installation then ...
http://support.apple.com/kb/TA28388?viewlocale=en_US

Hi, the article appears to agree with the engineer I quoted above... They say...

For some computer systems, a RAM disk may make very little sense, as OS X's built-in virtual memory and i/o caching may duplicate some of the features provided by using a RAM disk.

However, it's not a matter of "may"... it will duplicate it in cache.

The other link appears to be dealing with a very special case during install of the OS.

Just think about it logically and you will see a RAM disk is a wasted step... Anything you run is going to be loaded into and cached in RAM anyway.
 
Ok guys, I'm back! So I wanted to address a few of the questions and responses I got from all of you wonderful people helping me out, and we'll do it in an easy to read format, so here we go!

1. From what I'm understanding, an SSD boot drive will help me out substantially, I plan on getting one of these, preferably intel 160gb unless I'm told about something else that's better.
a. these drives are 2.5" for the most part, so tell me what i need to mount it, or if there is a 3.5" for the same price somewhere.

2. The more I read about the gtx285 the more I think I got screwed on buying the 4870, it benches at almost 4x the speed in gflops! Should I still wait until the 2010 models come to see if we get a better option? i Do need something solid.
a. to answer questions about my work, i plan on using AE/C4D + Modo and ALSO Ableton Live 7 in 2010 substantially. As my work goes right now I do a lot of rendering and I'm just learning how to get myself into trouble with AE. My company will most likely adopt a high end large body format with 1080p DSLR, so video editing will rest in the hands of my computer.

3.I'm not sure I understand this terminal command for addressing RAM to software under snow leopard. and it looks terrifying. anyone want to dumb that response down for me? I'm a designer first, nerd/apple fanboy 2nd :)

4.I think as it stands right now, I WILL be keeping this machine throughout 2010 ( thanks nanofrog ) That means I'll be maxing ram specified for this machine, however do you think the market will shift away from the dd3 8500 mac ram modules?
a. If so, should I wait and see if the price will drop on a 32gb matched set? OWC seems to still have the best price for this.

5. Still no way for me to upgrade these processors? My office is kept pretty cool. Still looking for a safe overclock solution :)

6. Going to hold off on raid solutions until I get a SSD. When I do get one, should I mechanical raid the remaining 3 bays in my machine, and switch to a drobo backup?

Thanks everyone who has suggested anything to me in this thread, keep it coming!:)
 
Good choices.

The Intel SSD is the one to get... and the 160GB Gen2 (G2 in the model name) has the best performance. Amazon has a pretty good deal on these.

To mount it, get the IcyDock adapter.

Forget the RAM disk as I mentioned.

You can always sell the 4870 and get the GTX285.

I would hold off on the 32GB of RAM for awhile... until you see more native 64bit apps in your workflow and the price is more palatable.

Let us know how it goes!
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
1. From what I'm understanding, an SSD boot drive will help me out substantially, I plan on getting one of these, preferably intel 160gb unless I'm told about something else that's better.
a. these drives are 2.5" for the most part, so tell me what i need to mount it, or if there is a 3.5" for the same price somewhere.
The Intel 160GB (Gen 2) is the one to go with from current consensus. Mounting can be done in the empty optical bay. You need to let us know if you're willing to DIY or not, and exactly how many drives you plan to install.

Ready made mounts are usually a bit expensive (there's an exception or two, depending on specifics), and it's best to place it in the empty optical bay (leaves HDD bays open for 3.5" drives).

There is a 3.5" model line though, called the Colossus by OCZ, but untested right now. They do offer larger capacities though (up to 1TB), but it's not exactly inexpensive.

2. The more I read about the gtx285 the more I think I got screwed on buying the 4870, it benches at almost 4x the speed in gflops! Should I still wait until the 2010 models come to see if we get a better option? i Do need something solid.
a. to answer questions about my work, i plan on using AE/C4D + Modo and ALSO Ableton Live 7 in 2010 substantially. As my work goes right now I do a lot of rendering and I'm just learning how to get myself into trouble with AE. My company will most likely adopt a high end large body format with 1080p DSLR, so video editing will rest in the hands of my computer.
nVidia cards don't fare that well under OS X, as the drivers aren't wonderful. They've always underperformed compared to their PC counterparts. ATI cards tend to function better under OS X, as the drivers seem to work more efficiently.

But ultimately, it's up to you. If you can benefit from the GTX285, then get it. Otherwise, keep the 4870, and upgrade again later (future card not yet announced).

4.I think as it stands right now, I WILL be keeping this machine throughout 2010 ( thanks nanofrog ) That means I'll be maxing ram specified for this machine, however do you think the market will shift away from the dd3 8500 mac ram modules?
a. If so, should I wait and see if the price will drop on a 32gb matched set? OWC seems to still have the best price for this.
DDR3 will be around awhile, in all the variants, so there's no real hurry. I'm with VirtualRain on this one. Wait and see if you need it. If so, get it, as the memory market could still lower the prices a bit on the larger capacity DIMM's.

5. Still no way for me to upgrade these processors? My office is kept pretty cool. Still looking for a safe overclock solution :)
You can upgrade processors in the '09 MP's. You cannot however, OC them.

6. Going to hold off on raid solutions until I get a SSD. When I do get one, should I mechanical raid the remaining 3 bays in my machine, and switch to a drobo backup?
You've a few options.

1. Install the SSD to the optical bay, leaving all 4x HDD bays open for 3.5" drives. You could still fit another HDD in the optical drive for Windows if you wish, but you'd need an interface card for it at a minimum, unless you pull the optical drive and make it external.

2. Backups could be done via NAS or via eSATA and a Port Multiplier enclosure. Both will work, and you'd have the ability to run a 4x member array if you wish (level will depend on whether or not its software based - OS X - or a true RAID card, and the features it offers).
 
I've yet to use optical for anything but large recording consoles back in my engineering days.

I'm more than willing to DIY anything. let me know if their is info out there on SSD via optical bay. ( still not sure where the hell my optical bay is) hah.

By the way, if the DIY involves tape or glue, count me out :)
 
For mounting the SSD in the lower optical bay, please read this thread -> Click

The plastic holder in post 16 is probably the version you want to utilize here. The ODD bay is a cage which sits in front of the PSU on top of the Mac Pro. You can extract it when the main lever that unlocks the case is in the unlock position.
 
I've yet to use optical for anything but large recording consoles back in my engineering days.

I'm more than willing to DIY anything. let me know if their is info out there on SSD via optical bay. ( still not sure where the hell my optical bay is) hah.

By the way, if the DIY involves tape or glue, count me out :)
No, you dont' need to use tape or glue.

Take a serious look at the link given, as it has a few possibilities (ready-made solutions).

But if you need to have both an SSD + HDD (i.e. single drive = Windows boot disk), you'd be best using an old (prefferably DOA) CD/DVD drive. Disassemble for the metal plates, and use one of them. Just drill some holes to mount the pair of drives. Rather easy and inexpensive. A few cables would be needed, but they're not expensive either, and possibly not included with ready-made solutions either.

There's even the possibility of using zip ties to attach an SSD to the bottom of an HDD drive. Seriously. It does work, and is the cheapest thing I can think of, and it's not reliant on glue/adhesives (can't fall due to adhesive failure).
 
Regarding your SSD mounting thoughts ...
vogelhausdesign, I'll make this a quick post. Given budget is not a constrain, you may consider the following options

1) DX4 - Link
2) Pro Caddy (select 2009 models) - Link
3) Pro Sled 2.5" (will take up one of the hdd bays) - Link
4) This 4th link brings you to MaxUpgrades, Mac Pro section. Select the respective system you are purchasing and have a look at the options provided.

All these above suggestions are not exactly cheap to some, but imho, it is a reasonable cost especially those solutions offered by Transintl.

Note: This post is merely a simple short compilation of options which mac users have shared on MRF over the years.

p.s. pardon me if these options have been suggested in this thread. 've been following the thread mostly, but i've kinda lost track!
 
A few cables would be needed, but they're not expensive either...

I don't agree. He has got a 2009 which has a ready made SATA headed cable in the second ODD bay. Just attach the SSD and mechanically fix the SSD. Best and least expensive ready fixture is the one in post 16 of the linked thread.

extremepcgear_2077_7172673


http://www.xpcgear.com/scythe-2-5-to-5-25-bay-rafter.html
 
I don't agree. He has got a 2009 which has a ready made SATA headed cable in the second ODD bay. Just attach the SSD and mechanically fix the SSD. Best and least expensive ready fixture is the one in post 16 of the linked thread.

http://www.xpcgear.com/scythe-2-5-to-5-25-bay-rafter.html
That will work with SSD's alone, and is quite a nice and inexpensive solution. :)

My comments about DIY were if a separate Windows disk was desired as well. And in an '09, it would require another SATA port for one of them (and cables for both power and data), unless the optical drive was removed and placed in an external enclosure. ;)
 
Ssd aside.. 2010 24 virtual cores? Tempting, tell me they're made of cardboard and I won't buy a whole new mp every year

They are made of cardboard.
But I still would love to know you purchase a whole new mp yearly. :p

I talk the talk, you'll walk the walk. We make perfect partners ;)
 
what took you so long with the 2009 Mac Pro? Or do you mean to tell me you already have a 2009 Mac Pro for yourself and you are now just building another for her?
 
Quick question here,

So i recently installed iStat menus, and SMC Fan Control on my machine and I had a few questions:

1.SMC Fan control is safe for mac pro? What's the ideal settings for this soft smc controller? anyone use it on their 09 octo?

2.iStat menu, I thought it would be great to be able to monitor my machine with these great little menus, however, I didn't think if they themselves would slow down my machine. What do you all think, is having the extra sensor monitors and all the bells and whistles actually making my machine run slower?

It's winter where I am now and I have the heat cranked, bringing up the ambient temp so I thought "Hey, I'll just boost my fans and then check to see if my workstation is going to blow up by using iStat"
 
iStat menues does not affect todays computers at all, especially not when they have 2.93GHz times 8. :rolleyes:

Anyway, how did you manage to get SMC Fan control running?
It's not supported on the '09 Mac Pro. I tried it once to speed the fans up to their max (just to see how high they can get) but it did not work.
What are your intentions to use it?
The existing fan control is pretty much perfect. No reason to manipulate it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.