Has anyone tried 16GB in the Mid-2010 17" recently?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by ScreenSavers, Jun 18, 2019.

  1. ScreenSavers macrumors 6502

    ScreenSavers

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, GA
    #1
    I have the Mid-2010 2.66 GHz Intel Core i7 17" MacBook Pro with 8GB and I sure would like to have 16GB in it. Has anyone actually tried this under Mojave? I don't want to blow money, as the maximum I see everywhere is 8GB.
    --- Post Merged, Jun 18, 2019 ---
    Screen Shot 2019-06-18 at 10.32.41 AM.png
     
  2. Stephen.R macrumors 65816

    Stephen.R

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2018
    Location:
    Thailand
    #2
  3. ScreenSavers thread starter macrumors 6502

    ScreenSavers

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, GA
  4. Stephen.R macrumors 65816

    Stephen.R

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2018
    Location:
    Thailand
    #4
    It doesn't make much sense to me either, but 16GB wasn't a "supported" configuration so its just a side effect of the components used.
     
  5. chipchen macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    #5
    The 13" from 2010 used a slightly updated chipset compared to the 15" and 17" motherboards which allowed it to use 16GB.
     
  6. ScreenSavers thread starter macrumors 6502

    ScreenSavers

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, GA
    #6
    That’s what I thought.
     
  7. ScreenSavers thread starter macrumors 6502

    ScreenSavers

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, GA
    #7
  8. Stephen.R macrumors 65816

    Stephen.R

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2018
    Location:
    Thailand
    #8
    It’s eBay. I think you’re just as likely to get a picture of a MacBook Pro as an actual one.
     
  9. ScreenSavers thread starter macrumors 6502

    ScreenSavers

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, GA
    #9
    Wonder where I possibly could’ve gotten all of mine from then?

    That is not my ad, but it is proof that somebody did cram 16 GB in a mid 2010 17 inch model. I’m going to try myself later and report back.
     
  10. technano macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    #10
    I have the exact macbook as yours. And this week i tried to fit in 2 pieces of DDR3 dual 2R 8GB rams, they are match.

    however, they dont work well. keep showing kernel panic. in the end i just swop back the original rams..
     
  11. retta283 macrumors 6502a

    retta283

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2018
    Location:
    Kingman, AZ
    #11
    Why do people still stress this point so hardly? eBay has excellent customer protection, almost unfavorable for sellers. And this listing has free 30-day returns so there's no way he'll be scammed and unable to recover the worth. I've been scammed on Amazon way more than eBay.

    Wikipedia says that the 15 and 17" from 2010 only support 8, but perhaps it would be unofficially supported.
     
  12. agaskew macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    #12
    I've read about this happening too in various reddit posts, i.e. 16Gb inducing intermittent kernel panics on this model of MBP :(
     
  13. ScreenSavers thread starter macrumors 6502

    ScreenSavers

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, GA
    #13
    I tried it with two 8GB 1067MHz DDR3 chips, and the system boots fine and addresses the RAM, but as soon as you put any kind of load on it, it will kernel panic. Not sure why. I tried it with the 2 8GB chips and one 8GB and one 4GB chip, but it was the same both ways. I had to go back to 8 GB.

    Seems like if I want 16GB in a 17" I'll have to get a 2011, and I don't want one of those for obvious reasons...
     
  14. mikehalloran macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2018
    Location:
    The Sillie Con Valley
    #14
    "obvious reasons"???

    ...unless it's that these won't run Mojave and later and you need a 2012 for that... except that there's no 17" 2012. Yikes!

    I'm trying to decide if my 2012 15" MBP is really too big for my uses — being handicapped, it's really too big and heavy for this one-armed guy. Really liking my wife's MB Air more and more.
     
  15. retta283 macrumors 6502a

    retta283

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2018
    Location:
    Kingman, AZ
    #15
    He's referring to the common GPU failures with the 2011 MBP units.
     
  16. ScreenSavers thread starter macrumors 6502

    ScreenSavers

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, GA
    #16
    Yes. The very very very common GPU failures! That are also present on the 2011 iMacs… The Mojave thing is no big deal.
     
  17. ScreenSavers thread starter macrumors 6502

    ScreenSavers

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, GA
    #17
    The “Retina” and “Touch Bar” 15” models are both much more portable than the old 15 inch ones. I have all three styles side by side and there’s no comparison.
     
  18. retta283 macrumors 6502a

    retta283

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2018
    Location:
    Kingman, AZ
    #18
    AH you picked a good time to post this. I was just thinking about getting a 2011 iMac for cheap but didn't realize they had the same GPU issues...
     
  19. ScreenSavers thread starter macrumors 6502

    ScreenSavers

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, GA
    #19
    As long as it’s not 27” 2009-2011. I’ve “baked” a handful of those GPUs. I don’t think the 21.5” models were affected but not positive.
     
  20. mikehalloran macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2018
    Location:
    The Sillie Con Valley
    #20
    You apparently don’t understand the issue. The problem was never the GPU.

    the problem was caused by those WD Black and Seagate (I forget the model) 7200 HDDs. These caused excessive heating and cooling of the GPU putting stress on the solder joints. Baking reflows he solder which is why it has a good chance of working.

    I take care of a large number of these for a school district. We replaced the HDDs and NVRAM batteries a few years ago on a schedule. The drives were likely to go bad after 5 years (100% had problems and could not be reused). Total number of those iMacs that developed GPU issues = 0. I’ll know in another year if any develop problems but I’m not expecting any. These machines won’t be retired till Apple discontinues security updates for High Sierra next year.

    In 2012, Apple went to a cooler HDD in 2012 but those still had some issues. In 2013, they went to an even cooler, slower drive.

    In any case, a 27” 2009–2011 with an SSD (preferably installed a few years ago) is a great machine as long as you don’t need to run Mojave. The 2011 has a SATA bus which gives it a minor performance edge over the 2009–2010. I also like that I don’t have to pull the motherboard in a 2011 to replace the battery.
     
  21. retta283 macrumors 6502a

    retta283

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2018
    Location:
    Kingman, AZ
    #21
    The problem is not caused exclusively by the 7200RPM drives. The base models all use 5400RPM drives, and base models are the most common. The issue would not be as widespread as it is if that was the problem. People who have replaced the HDD with an SSD also were affected.

    2011 iMacs also dealt with the same problem, more so than any 2006-2010 iMacs. Every Intel iMac before 2012 had a 7200RPM drive, yet this model has the most common GPU failures.
     
  22. technano macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    #22
    Yeah. For a moment I thought my logicboard is broken as it keep showing kernic panic. I have since put back the original rams in it.

    That’s strange though, considering that it’s 2x 8gb 1067mhz. I presume they would work with the same speed and compatible rams
     
  23. Stephen.R macrumors 65816

    Stephen.R

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2018
    Location:
    Thailand
    #23
    No, just no. My 2011 MBP17 had 2 GPU failures and had no mechanical drive, ever, it was SSD from factory.
     
  24. ScreenSavers thread starter macrumors 6502

    ScreenSavers

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, GA
    #24
    I wouldn’t blame the drives. It is directly a GPU problem.
     
  25. mikehalloran macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2018
    Location:
    The Sillie Con Valley
    #25
    I’ve taken apart hundreds of these. Schools buy base models. Never saw a 5,400 in a 27” 2009–11 and none was listed. Not even in the i3 EDU model. You are quite wrong on this point and, if you look up the 21.5”, you will see the same.

    The MBPs has a 2.5” 5400 rpm HDD but not the iMac between late 2009–2010... or early 2009, 2008... This can all be looked up.

    https://everymac.com/systems/apple/...uo-3.06-27-inch-aluminum-late-2009-specs.html

    https://everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac-core-i3-3.2-27-inch-aluminum-mid-2010-specs.html

    https://everymac.com/systems/apple/...inch-aluminum-mid-2011-thunderbolt-specs.html

    It wasn’t an iMac which is where this topic has drifted. Yours had 2 GPUs, one an HD Graphics 3000 and the other, a 6750M. If it had only one card, it was the HD Graphics 3000. What makes you think there wasn’t a heat issue and that it took Apple a long time to fix it?

    And yes. Absolutely, positively, yes for the iMac.

    You might be right about the MBP but my daughters’ are going great. One of them lost her 2010 to the exploding battery but the 2011
    Yes, but you are wrong. Read and learn from those with more experience. Doubling down as if we’re supposed to somehow take your word for it doesn’t help. I have given links and have quite a few sitting in classrooms till next Summer at the minimum.
     

Share This Page

42 June 18, 2019