Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

OWC is now selling 32GB RAM kits for 2010 iMacs

tsugaru said:
11,3 - 2010 model.
11,1 - 2009 model.

So they are testing if it will work on the 2009 iMacs now. It's not backwards.
Click to expand...

You can't say "if it runs on 11,3 it should run on 11,1" without a firmware caveat.
 
cube said:
The performance benefit is basically infinite when you have huge datasets that thrash the system.

I would think few such power users are using an iMac instead of a Mac Pro.
Click to expand...

Badger^2 said:
More ram wont give you more "performance".

It will give you the ability to have more applications open at once and those wont slow down... but for simple performance, meh.

So you can open more and larger files without having increased page outs, for example.

And Im talking about daily use, stock 4 gigs vs 16 gigs.
Click to expand...

Thank you guys, wouldn't really help much with iMove then?
 
Emathieu said:
Yep. That was a disappointment when iLife '11 came out and was still 32 bit... It would be nice to have a 64 bit Garageband and iMovie.
Click to expand...

Maybe with Lion.

It's time to go fully 64 bit me thinks. Pretty sure every Mac in the lineup now comes with at least 4GB (save for the base Mini,) and/or has the capability of >4GB of RAM.
 
These have been available for a week or so. Not nearly as big a deal in a machine with 4 RAM slots already as it is in a MBP with only 2.

8GB is a serious bottleneck, especially given how much power the new quad-core MacBook Pros have. Upgrading to 12GB on a new MacBook Pro could actually be worth the $880 price; going past 16GB on a 2010 iMac really isn't.

For the cost, you'd be better off buying a Mac Pro - the RAM price alone will offset the initial extra cost on the Mac Pro. An i7 iMac with 32GB will run $5400; you could get a 3.33GHz six-core Mac Pro with 32GB and a 27" Cinema Display for $5600.

I love my 2009 i7, but if I had something that needed more than 16GB of RAM, the Mac Pro is the only way to go.
 
rnb2 said:
These have been available for a week or so. Not nearly as big a deal in a machine with 4 RAM slots already as it is in a MBP with only 2.

8GB is a serious bottleneck, especially given how much power the new quad-core MacBook Pros have. Upgrading to 12GB on a new MacBook Pro could actually be worth the $880 price; going past 16GB on a 2010 iMac really isn't.

For the cost, you'd be better off buying a Mac Pro - the RAM price alone will offset the initial extra cost on the Mac Pro. An i7 iMac with 32GB will run $5400; you could get a 3.33GHz six-core Mac Pro with 32GB and a 27" Cinema Display for $5600.

I love my 2009 i7, but if I had something that needed more than 16GB of RAM, the Mac Pro is the only way to go.
Click to expand...

At current prices, yes. Eventually they will drop. Give it a few months.
 
tsugaru said:
At current prices, yes. Eventually they will drop. Give it a few months.
Click to expand...

Of course, but I still have difficulty seeing the need for more than 16GB for all but a very specialized set of users, most of whom would never have bought an iMac in the first place. It's like the debate over how many cores are useful - the case for 4 cores is easy to make, but most people won't see any noticeable benefit from 8. By the same token, there are enough users who would benefit from >8GB of RAM to make 16GB in a MBP an important development; the number who would need more than 16GB is vanishingly small.

In five years, I expect this will have changed - just as two cores and 2GB RAM became necessary for any performance-minded user in 2006, four cores and 8GB is now becoming the norm (with more RAM needed by some). Another five years will probably see the norm shift to 8 cores and 32GB, but the ability of a current iMac to reach 32GB is of negligible benefit. By the time you need that much RAM, you'll almost certainly have upgraded to a new machine.

It's not a bad thing that the RAM is available, of course, but it's going to be sales to MBP owners that drives the price down.
 
Any news on Late 2009 iMac 27" RAM?

A few posts mentioned that 11,1 might take (undocumented) 32GB, just as 11,3 has been confirmed as doing in practice.

Has anyone heard anything new on this in the meantime (thread dormant for 9+ months).

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
jh1990 said:
A few posts mentioned that 11,1 might take (undocumented) 32GB, just as 11,3 has been confirmed as doing in practice.

Has anyone heard anything new on this in the meantime (thread dormant for 9+ months).

Thanks!
Click to expand...

I'm going to assume you never went to OWC's website to see what they offer for memory for your imac. Should tell you pretty quickly what was decided....

http://www.macsales.com
 
its one thing that it takes it but does it work long-term and make use of the 32gb ram or does it stop at 16gb?
 
Wow.

Wow, paulrbeers. Thanks for the unhelpful reply, accompanied by a healthy dose of smug.

Yes, I had checked OWC. They sell memory up to 16 GB for the 11,1. However, since those are the official specs, and there appears to be no mention of having tested 32 GB, that seemed inconclusive to me.

Any chance anyone out there has any firsthand information on this, rather than a desire to publicly self-pleasure?

Thanks in advance...
 
jh1990 said:
Wow, paulrbeers. Thanks for the unhelpful reply, accompanied by a healthy dose of smug.

Yes, I had checked OWC. They sell memory up to 16 GB for the 11,1. However, since those are the official specs, and there appears to be no mention of having tested 32 GB, that seemed inconclusive to me.

Any chance anyone out there has any firsthand information on this, rather than a desire to publicly self-pleasure?

Thanks in advance...
Click to expand...

Wow, so you thought I was being smug on that post, then prepare for this....

In this thread, they stated OWC will be testing this. If it had worked, don't you think they would have updated their page so they could make more money? There's a lot more money to be made on 8GB Sodimms than 4GB.

How about you search the forums next time?

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1317781/

or how about searching the web?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac_(Intel-based)#Unibody_iMac

Please feel free to continue questioning everything. I guess everyone telling you that 16GB is max, just isn't good enough. Was this smug enough for you?
 
I believe I've already fully made my point that no information confirming the success of 32 GB is hardly information contradicting it, which you've chosen to ignore.

You are a delight!
 
jh1990 said:
I believe I've already fully made my point that no information confirming the success of 32 GB is hardly information contradicting it, which you've chosen to ignore.

You are a delight!
Click to expand...

Then please, spend $300 and prove the internet wrong which you continue to ignore.

I've given you a link to a Retail store that makes money selling parts for Macs (and is the first and last word on what a Mac can handle for memory).

I've given links to these forums that show users what they state is the max amount of memory.

and I've given you external links that list the specs that could/would be updated by anyone if the information proved to be wrong.

And yet you continue to state we haven't proven it won't work. Man up and spend the money and prove THE ENTIRE INTERNET wrong then since you seem to know better.
 
paulrbeers said:
Then please, spend $300 and prove the internet wrong which you continue to ignore.

snip

Man up and spend the money and prove THE ENTIRE INTERNET wrong then since you seem to know better.
Click to expand...

^^This. If someone whats to prove something is supported regardless of prevailing wisdom the only way to resolve the issue is to run your own tests.

I did this with my Motorola Xoom. Spent $150+ for a 64GB microSD card just to prove it does work when everyone said it would not.

Not the best strategy from a financial standpoint but really the only way to conclusively prove a particular machine will or will not support the upgrade in question.

Cheers,
 
panzer06 said:
^^This. If someone whats to prove something is supported regardless of prevailing wisdom the only way to resolve the issue is to run your own tests.
Cheers,
Click to expand...

The difference here is that we know OWC would have tried this already of for no other reason than to sell more expensive RAM but hey what do I know....
 
paulrbeers said:
The difference here is that we know OWC would have tried this already of for no other reason than to sell more expensive RAM but hey what do I know....
Click to expand...

I know that and you know that but there's always someone who feels they can get "their's" to work. I have no problem letting them try.

Cheers,
 
panzer06 said:
^^This. If someone whats to prove something is supported regardless of prevailing wisdom the only way to resolve the issue is to run your own tests.

I did this with my Motorola Xoom. Spent $150+ for a 64GB microSD card just to prove it does work when everyone said it would not.

Not the best strategy from a financial standpoint but really the only way to conclusively prove a particular machine will or will not support the upgrade in question.

Cheers,
Click to expand...

Screw the curiosity about the RAM! How did that card work? Lol..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back