Mac Mini i7 2.6 - Memory Upgrade

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by BilbooToo, Feb 14, 2013.

  1. BilbooToo macrumors newbie

    Aug 22, 2012

    Firstly, apologies as I know there have been a number of memory upgrade questions on this forum, however I'm now in the position where I wish to upgrade the memory in my Mac to 16gb and looking back at the threads seems to show a number of suggestions.

    I'm looking at UK retailers, and the following seem to be the most popular options...

    Crucial @ £73.19

    Corsair @ £75.75 (via Amazon)

    I've built PC's in the past so no issues with the installation, plus the prices are essentially the same so the questions I have are...

    - Are both of these options suitable for my Mac?

    - Is one better than the other?

    Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks in advance,
  2. Designed4Mac macrumors 6502


    Jan 6, 2013
    I Wish I Knew
    I purchased the 16GB Vengeance from Amazon a couple of weeks ago and can confirm that they work perfectly. Cant say how they compare to the Crucials but am very happy with the choice that i made:D
  3. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Dec 17, 2009
    There is no difference between PC RAM and Mac RAM (even though memory manufacturers try to tell you otherwise). About the only difference is if you try to use some of the above spec RAM (1866) does not necessarily play nice in Apple computers. I recommend reading the reviews and looking for other Mac users using it and as long as they have no issues then buy it. Kingston HyperX 1600 CL 9 is the fastest 16GB kits, but really faster memory will have minimal impact on the overall system speed so buy whatever you can afford and don't get to wrapped up in the numbers.
  4. philipma1957, Feb 14, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2013

    philipma1957 macrumors 603


    Apr 13, 2010
    Howell, New Jersey

    the fastest is it worth more then the others that is up to you. both the crucial and the corsair should work

    read the corsair reviews below

    read the kingston reviews

    the ram used to have heatsinks many bad reviews are the lack of heatsinks. people feel top dollar I want the heatsinks. those heat sinks are pretty much not needed in the mini.
  5. McCaffers macrumors member

    Jul 8, 2012
    I've got 2x Crucial 4GB in mine and they work great. You'll also see in that link for the Crucial memory that people are using it their mini's too and giving it 5*.
  6. BilbooToo thread starter macrumors newbie

    Aug 22, 2012
    Went for Crucial in the the end, ordered and just waiting for delivery.

    Thanks to those who responded.
  7. LucasLand macrumors 6502a


    Mar 6, 2002
    New England
    i decided to go for the kingston. just ordered it online. I figure I'd rather have the best ram available for a few dollars. figure it s a good investment since i plan on using this mac for a long time
  8. iWantAMac macrumors 6502

    Feb 6, 2003
    Hi! I've been looking at what ram to buy since getting the mini... knowing that any of the big names would be fine really. But decided on the Kingston modules that Philip and a couple of others in this forum have been recommended as the fastest.

    These. But now on NewEgg I see THIS other model. This model has the same low latency but also has 1.35/1.5v rating like some of the other manufacture's slower chips. Other differences are...
    ECC - No
    Buffered/Registered - Unbuffered
    And I don't know if they are actual differences or simply specs that are stated on the product page for one but not the other. Also don't know what they mean. So basically, can anyone with the knowledge shed some light on which model of the two Kingstons may be best?
  9. magebarf, Feb 18, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2013

    magebarf macrumors member

    Dec 29, 2012
    Gothenburg - Sweden
    You're on the right track with unspecced for one but not the other, that is exactly so.

    If looking at Kingston's own data page for both of the products they are on the spot identical, which leads me to believe that the only difference between the two are which ones come out of the quality control with higher grade.

    If they produce high enough volume of the chips, some of them will be better than the others, and through quality testing they can validate which of their chips are able to run at 1.35V.

    The rest of them gets to go through to the testing at 1.5V instead.

    Its very similar to how CPU manufacturers produce one type of CPU chips and in QC they lock down one or two cores where they identify quality issues. After quality grading they are then sorted to the various end products.

    This is where I would bet my money on, when it comes to the difference between the two Kingston RAM kits.

    Since they're rated for 1.35V though, their JEDEC SPD tables will have a bit of different information in them though. Theoretically this will mean that the Mini will run them at the lower voltage (unless it decides to ignore the information given by the RAM module, which I don't see why it would) which in turn means that it should generate less heat.

    Edit; Links to Kingston's own Spec sheets:
    Regular PnP:
    LoVo PnP:
  10. LucasLand macrumors 6502a


    Mar 6, 2002
    New England
    i got the kingston 16gb ram and my mini works great. I opened about 10 apps all at once and no beach ball
  11. eyepea macrumors member

    Jul 20, 2012
    I use the same on my i7 2.6ghz and it works great as well. I am guessing this post is too late though.

Share This Page