Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I would like to see can the 16GB be fully utilized. It may be recognized but it's another case whether the MC can use it all or not
I am curious as well. in the Mac Pro the idea is that 24 is max useable by the current line of processors yet the system will read 32 as being installed... EDIT I read some more of the thread... it looks good but pricy as of right now, just give it a bit!

Easily. 9GB Raw files in PS.

I hope this response was not to the question that Hellhammer asked because that is not what he is referring to. 16 gb 'could' be used all day thats common knowledge
 
Last edited:
This is great news for folks that have a platform that requires a large amount of memory. I could use a new MBP to run Oracle Enterprise in a Virtual Machine an allocate the instance 8GB of ram and still have some to spare for my other VM's. While 1600 would be better spend on a Mac Pro from some peoples' perspective, having a workhorse of a laptop onsite to troubleshoot in real time could be a real life saver.
 
yeah, those 8GB sticks are pretty pricy! An 8GB (4GB x2) only costs $112.99, but take out one 4GB stick and add an 8GB stick and the price skyrockets up to $879.00! That's roughly $100 per GB, what we used to pay for HDDs, back in the day. I do, actually, remember buying 1GB of RAM for $75, but that was a very long time ago, just after a major earthquake in Taiwan, and also thinking that I got a pretty good deal.
 
It's pretty expensive, but the 12GB upgrade looks like a better option at only $879. That is what I have in my Mac Pro, and it is more RAM than I would ever need. It's enough for all the Adobe apps, and enough for doing any photo work in Aperture or Lightroom, and enough for doing the kind of music production work I do.

16GB of RAM would only be necessary if you were running some highly specialized mathematic-calc or scientific apps where you really need that kind of memory. Nobody needs to have 30 apps open at one time, usually.
 
It's pretty expensive, but the 12GB upgrade looks like a better option at only $879. That is what I have in my Mac Pro, and it is more RAM than I would ever need. It's enough for all the Adobe apps, and enough for doing any photo work in Aperture or Lightroom, and enough for doing the kind of music production work I do.

16GB of RAM would only be necessary if you were running some highly specialized mathematic-calc or scientific apps where you really need that kind of memory. Nobody needs to have 30 apps open at one time, usually.

If for some reason you had to run 3 or 4 virtual machines at once you could definitely use up 16 GB.
 
Yep, i need those 16gb ram. Price isn't an issue for me.

Being able to put in 16gb of ram in a laptop is a reason why i won't need a desktop computer for a foreseeable future.
 
Yep, i need those 16gb ram. Price isn't an issue for me.

Being able to put in 16gb of ram in a laptop is a reason why i won't need a desktop computer for a foreseeable future.

I think that's where things are going in general, and even outside your foreseeable future I would thing that laptops would be powerful enough by then that you still won't need a desktop

with how powerful the latest MBP's are I can see that desktops will soon only be necessary for EXTREMELY heavy lifting, like scientific work and high end hardcore gaming (triple HD screens ect.)
 
thunderbolt is making more sense

Cram 16GB in a laptop config, with a thunderbolt monitor with ethernet, firewire, USB, external discrete GPU, etc. = so long mac Pro. i don't believe apple is ditching os x, but they are ditching desktops, just look at their sales figures.
 
Cram 16GB in a laptop config, with a thunderbolt monitor with ethernet, firewire, USB, external discrete GPU, etc. = so long mac Pro. i don't believe apple is ditching os x, but they are ditching desktops, just look at their sales figures.

Aside from the fact the Mac Pro can use better/multiple GPU cards, much faster CPU, more RAM, fiber cards, more drive space, and RAIDed drive space.

When a MacBook can house 2 1TB drives in RAID0, a BluRay drive, 2.5+CPU, 1080p, and 16GB of RAM with a 6850(desktop spec) GPU, for under $2,500 then I'll look into replacing a desktop with one.
 
Last edited:
so the price is kinda crappy, i just paid 775€ for my 16GB kit which translates to 1100$. a premium i paid smilingly - can open apps until i won't recognize the tiny icons any more :p
 
My current 8GB is easily eaten up when I'm running 3 Virtual Machines (2 x XP, 1 x Win7 or a 2003), itunes, mail, firefox, teamviewer etc etc and I would love 16GB in mine but at the current prices that's a joke!

Hopefully the memory prices will come down in the near future :rolleyes:
 
Aside from the fact the Mac Pro can use better/multiple GPU cards, much faster CPU, more RAM, fiber cards, more drive space, and RAIDed drive space.

When a MacBook can house 2 1TB drives in RAID0, a BluRay drive, 2.5+CPU, 1080p, and 16GB of RAM with a 6850(desktop spec) GPU, for under $2,500 then I'll look into replacing a desktop with one.

This is what I'm waiting to see myself - a useful thunderbolt enclosure could add in an effective laptop expansion chassis - USB3, discrete graphics or a pcie slot or two, etc. Mathwise, things start to get close unless I'm off on remembering specs - TBolt gives 2x 10Gb/sec bandwidth, pci2 is something like a max of 16Gbit/second (theoretical, not removing overhead) for all 32 pcie lanes, with most gfx cards (I believe all, but may be wrong here?) use 16 lanes or max of 8Gbit/second. It's not unlimited expansion by any means, but could make a pretty nice laptop/desktop replacement companion, that will presumably scale upwards as PCIE3 rolls out (not meaning current tbolt systems will magically be faster, but future tbolt ports on systems with pcie 3 busses).

It would take the insane RAM prices to come down significantly to be remotely comparable in pricing to most power desktops/workstations, but where portability is a job or personal requirement, it would make for a pretty nice 'sidecar' expansion. I'll gladly take that 16GB of RAM for VMs and work, too. :D
 
I just wish somewhere in the UK sold those sticks.

I do a lot of work in VMs. 16GB is expensive but I'd probably just get one sitck for now and go tot 12GB, that would give me enough breathing room, I can have a full 8GB VM which is what I need really.

I could of course just go down the route of a Dell Precision or similar which has 4 RAM slots but then I would own a Dell :(
 
As people above have posted, 16GB is not frivolous when you are doing large projects, multiple VMs, and database work.

I popped for 8GB on my 2009 MBP @ $800 and thought it was the best deal ever. Went 8 GB on my 2011 MBP from the start.

I will probably go 16GB when they drop to $800ish.

Frankly, I think it's embarrassing that Apple only ships 4 GB in the current MPPs given the PRO moniker. The amount of notebook computers that are consider PRO level are all on 8GB or more. Heck 8GB is cheap now...

Others post here that 8GB or more is frivolous but I don't see how people run Lion in just 4 GB of memory. Lion is not only buggy but a memory hog! Safari gobbles memory like it's the only application running.

-P
 
Aside from the fact the Mac Pro can use better/multiple GPU cards, much faster CPU, more RAM, fiber cards, more drive space, and RAIDed drive space.

When a MacBook can house 2 1TB drives in RAID0, a BluRay drive, 2.5+CPU, 1080p, and 16GB of RAM with a 6850(desktop spec) GPU, for under $2,500 then I'll look into replacing a desktop with one.

Sorry friend, you're no longer their target market. Fiber and RAID? On the outs for Apple. GPUs? We've long had to settle for sub-optimal solutions (just look at what OpenGL apple ships with their latest OS).
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.