New '09 Mac Mini - Maximum Addressable Memory? (4GB, 6GB, or 8GB?)

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by GodWhomIsMike, Mar 19, 2009.

  1. GodWhomIsMike macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    #1
    I am looking at getting a 2009 Mac Mini, but questioning if 4GB would be enough for my needs. I noticed there are two ram slots inside the new Mini. In theory, what would stop me from putting in (1) 4GB DDR3 so-dimm module, and (1) 2GB DDR3 so-dimm module? What is the memory limitation? Is this possible? Is there a memory-controller chip Apple uses to limit end-users from upgrading the ram to more than 4GB?

    I would like to buy the 2.26GHz Mac Mini w/ 2GB ram, and buy a 4GB module and a 2GB module (provided Apple used 2x1GB modules), and swap out the hard drive with a 500GB 7200rpm 2.5" drive.

    Ideas?



    Ahhh, so you folks don't need to search, here is a photo of the inside of the Mac Mini. Notice on the upper right side, that there are two ram slots.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. opeter macrumors 65816

    opeter

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2007
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    #2
    I think it should work... the chipset is the same as in the iMac. If the iMac can take 8 GB, maybe the Mac mini can take it too (inoficially). Someone has to try out.

    I don't have a new Mac mini nor do I have the money, to buy a two of these expensive 4 GB DDR3 1066 MHz So-DIMM RAM moduls.
     
  3. GodWhomIsMike thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    #3
    In theory, this little guy should be almost as powerful as my work Dell (2.4 GHz E6600 C2D, 8GB DDR2 ram, 256MB ATI x1300).

    I'd love a little Mac desktop, where I can dump in 8GB ram, and run a bunch of virtual machines, have multi-monitors, in a quiet and relatively inexpensive desktop that has a tiny footprint, and use it as a multi-platform development workstation.
     
  4. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #4
    Mmmm...it may be able to address 6 GB, but I wouldn't hold my breath for 8.
     
  5. GodWhomIsMike thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    #5
    Ok, 6GB should be just ok. On my Win 7 and Vista 64 partitions on the Dell, I am generally using between 5GB - 6GB of RAM. I use up to 7.25GB of the 8GB when I run two VMs. With memory allocation, I could trim it down to work within the 6GB limit.
     
  6. GodWhomIsMike thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    #6
    I e-mailed OWC a request to see if they are willing to test out to see if Mac Mini can handle 6GB (4GB+2GB) and 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 configurations.

    My purchase is resting on this information.
     
  7. iMpathetic macrumors 68030

    iMpathetic

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Location:
    IMBY
    #7
    How much are the 4GB sticks?

    This just might work!
     
  8. GodWhomIsMike thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    #8
    ~ $350 each.
     
  9. iMpathetic macrumors 68030

    iMpathetic

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Location:
    IMBY
    #9
    Oh.

    **** that then.

    They'll go down eventually.
     
  10. GodWhomIsMike thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    #10
    $783.00 for

    2.26 GHz Mac Mini
    3 year Apple Care


    $380 for 6GB DDR3 memory (4GB+2GB)
    $100 for 500GB Western Digital Scorpio Blue

    Total should be around $1270 for:

    2009 Mac Mini:
    2.26 GHz Core 2 Duo
    6GB DDR3-1066MHz memory (4GB+2GB)
    500GB Western Digital Scorpio Blue 5400rpm hard drive
    3-year Apple Care.
     
  11. iMpathetic macrumors 68030

    iMpathetic

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Location:
    IMBY
  12. GodWhomIsMike thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    #12
    OWC technical support just replied to me with the following:

    "We have tested the 6GB and 8GB configurations and they do not work.

    Tech Support
    Other World Computing, Inc."
     
  13. DannySmurf macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    #13
    You just described a system with a similar price to an iMac, but with less power and no screen.
     
  14. opeter macrumors 65816

    opeter

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2007
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    #14
    Yes, have to fully agree. Isn't Apple's price politic amazing?
     
  15. fhall1 macrumors 68030

    fhall1

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Location:
    NY State of mind
    #15
    Assuming this is true...I take it Apple did cripple the Mini so as not to encroach on their other machines......dammit
     
  16. rrijkers macrumors 6502

    rrijkers

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #16
    Just do 4gb now and add like a 4gb dimm and a decent SSD later when it becomes affordable in about a year or 2. It will give the right boost to the mini for it to last another year or 2 :)
     
  17. Cave Man macrumors 604

    Cave Man

    #17
    But you can't have two 24" displays on that iMac. Plus, one of those iMac displays is going to be a crappy glossy TN panel.
     
  18. opeter macrumors 65816

    opeter

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2007
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    #18
    Well, that's right. :eek:
     
  19. ftaok macrumors 601

    ftaok

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    Location:
    East Coast
    #19
    If you're going to open it up and perform the surgery yourself, you might as well go with the $599 model and upgrade it to 2.26Ghz.

    You'd be looking at $750 ($600+$150) for the machine.

    Not sure where you got the $783 price from (with Applecare).

    Also, as far as I know, you can't address more than 4GB.

    ft
     
  20. DannySmurf macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    #20
    There's nothing stopping you from buying a second monitor to attach to the iMac. Point is... for that price, you can have a 2.26 mini with no monitor, or a 2.66 iMac with one (built-in) monitor. Seems a bit silly to choose the mini if that's the choice.

    Whether the panel is crappy is a matter of taste.
     
  21. txnoob macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    #21
    Many of us do not care for the glossy finish. So while you may have a slightly faster machine, what good would it do if you can't stand to look at it. It may be silly to you, there are enough people around that think it's perfectly logical. And the 24" is a far nicer display than the 20" period. It's not taste, it's fact. I just can't stand the finish.
     
  22. sngx1275 macrumors regular

    sngx1275

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Location:
    Missouri
    #22
    Can't. CPU isn't replaceable.
     
  23. txnoob macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    #23
    Yeah, I mean unless ftaok meant BTO the base model and upgrade to 2.26 ?
     
  24. ftaok macrumors 601

    ftaok

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    Location:
    East Coast
    #24
    Sorry for the misleading post. txnoob got my meaning.

    The $600 base model allows you to upgrade the CPU for $150. That's where I got my $750 2.26ghz quote.

    IMHO, it's better to get the base model over the upgraded model if you're going to crack it open anyways. 1GB of RAM and an extra 160GB of HDD isn't worth $200. You might as well buy 4GB of RAM and a 320GB HDD for less than $200 and install yourself. And you end up with a 1GB RAM chip and a 160GB HDD that you could use/sell/etc.

    ft
     
  25. DannySmurf macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    #25
    What's silly to me is not display preference. What's silly to me is paying the same price for a lesser machine.

    "the 24" is a far nicer display than the 20" period. It's not taste, it's fact"

    ... "this is fact because I say it is fact" is the circular logic of a nine-year-old. That you are an adult does not actually make it less circular, or more true. It's not fact; it's your opinion.

    And my opinion is: the 20" display on the $1200 iMac is a much nicer display than the one on the $1200 mini. :)
     

Share This Page