Realistically, how much RAM needed for Leopard?

Discussion in 'macOS' started by K-Funk, Aug 15, 2007.

  1. K-Funk macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    #1
    I think one of the major drawbacks of Windows Vista is that you need at least 2 GB of RAM for it to run well. Will that also be the case with Leopard? If I get a new MacBook with 2GB of RAM, will I feel like I barely have enough RAM?
     
  2. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #2
    As much as you need. You can run OS X on 512 MB of RAM. Just expect page outs from running more then one or two applications.

    My personal preference is at least 2 GB for what I do.
     
  3. 66217 Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    #3
    I suppose 1GB would be more than necessary for the normal user.

    If not, Apple would be including a default of 2GB in their Macs. You don't want angry people because they bought a new Mac that is not prepared to run Leopard.
     
  4. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #4
    Leopard doesn't have any of that fancy prefetching technolgy to deal with that's new in Vista - in fact, Leopard doesn't really need it, with all the application caching and boot caching Mac OS X does already. That prefetching stuff is the primary reason Vista became so RAM hungry. Mac OS X, on the other hand, has already taken that hit in RAM usage in previous editions, so I'd expect Leopard to require 512 MB of RAM but perform better with 1 or 2 GB, much like how Tiger requires 256 MB but performs better if given 512 MB or 1 GB.
     
  5. yippy macrumors 68020

    yippy

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #5
    How much you need is dependent on what applications you run. Leopard by itself only needs 256-512MB and with most basic uses 1GB total should be fine. However, if you have a lot of photos in iPhoto or use RAM heavy apps you will probably want more.
     
  6. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #6
    When I'm talking about Tiger, I think 512 MB is enough just for the operating system and because Leopard has so many more visual effects, I'd say it's going to take 768 MB to 1 GB.

    At the same time, I'm 99 % certain that the necessary RAM for good performance on Intel-based machines will be less than it has been for Tiger--that Leopard will run better with the same machine, a lot better.
     
  7. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #7
    1. my vista box runs perfectly good with 1G RAM
    2. minimum RAM for Tiger is 256MB. But you need 512 to run it ok, 1G to run it smooth.

    now, minimum requirement for leopard is 512MB, if the experience from Tiger is applicable to leopard, you probably need at least 1G to run it smoothly.
     
  8. Gav macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    #8
    Leopard runs very nicely on 1.5GB Ram. I know a person running the beta who has open the following apps on 1.5GB (Just asked him on IM):

    • Firefox
    • aMSN
    • Mail
    • FTP
    • iTunes
    • Transmission
    • iMovie 08
    • iPhoto '08
    • Numbers
    • Skitch
    • Dreamweaver CS3
    • AND he also has a 720p Movie playing on VLC...
    So 1.5GB seems pretty good
     
  9. treblah macrumors 65816

    treblah

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2003
    Location:
    29680
    #9
    How many page outs?

    1GB should be fine, 2GB is preferred.

     
  10. MorzillA macrumors 6502

    MorzillA

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Location:
    Miami
    #10
    ....hmmmmm this thread is sure an eye opener!!! Know I know that Im going to need at least the 1.5Gb Thx pesoas!!!
     
  11. Krevnik macrumors 68030

    Krevnik

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    #11
    The RAM usage doesn't escalate like that. More effects does not always equal more RAM. Considering the GUI sits on top of OpenGL, CoreAnimation leverages OpenGL technology for the animation, making most animations just a series of commands sent to your GPU, like everything in the UI already does.

    That said, for home use I recommend about 1GB. 2GB is fine for heavy use (development, etc). If you are a professional content type... you should already have 4GB of RAM...
     
  12. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #12
    I'd imagine 384 MB at a minimum, maybe for grandma, 512-768 to be for the average user, 1-1.5 GB for more frequent users, and 2 GB+ for Pro's.
     
  13. techlover828 macrumors 68020

    techlover828

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
  14. iBookG4user macrumors 604

    iBookG4user

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #14
    I'd say you want at least 1GB of RAM for normal usage, 768MB might get you by though.
     
  15. Grape macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    #15
    If a MacBook Pro, get 4GB.
    If a Mac Pro get 16GB.
     
  16. DisturbedSith macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #16
    Leopard (WWDC 07) runs pretty darn good on a 12" Powerbook (1.5Ghz and 512MB Ram). And from what I've read and heard, the latest build is even faster with the same configs. They are doing some amazing optimization, so I wouldn't doubt that 512MB would be enough for the light users with 1GB being a sweet spot for normal users.
     
  17. Siemova macrumors member

    Siemova

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Location:
    Texas
    #17
    Might as well chime in. :cool: When I first installed the WWDC build, I had 1Gb RAM and it ran perfectly fine for average use... usually around 700Mb in use. Sometimes it would slow down if I tried to do anything intensive, though. Now I have 2Gb installed, and usage might go as high as the 1200's if I'm messing with BT or something. But 9A466 has debugging code active, so I imagine final release should use less.

    All that to say, I think 1GB would be plenty for the average user, and 1.5 or greater should be enough to avoid even occasional slowdown. Unless you're a pro user, of course, in which case the more the merrier!
     
  18. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #18
    It's difficult to believe that it runs well at all with 512 MB but nevertheless, it will likely run more poorly once they finish the bug fixes. Every other beta has looked good up until the end and then, performance slows a lot as correct operation is more than somewhat desirable.
     
  19. iBunny macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #19
    I Got 4GB of Ram in my MBP for Leopard.

    I want the fully expirance, and want to run it without speed issues if possible.

    With all that I do, I find that 2GB is just enough. So if I ever want to do something extra... I go over that limit.

    so 4GB for me. I guess it just depends on what you do.

    For the Average person, I would not try to run Leopard with anything other than at least 1GB of Ram.
     
  20. FJ218700 macrumors 68000

    FJ218700

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Location:
    Blue Dot, Red State
    #20
    okay, so two of my PPC's that will be ugraded to Leopard (dual 867, dual 1.25) have the RAM maxed at 2 GB. However, the VRAM is only at 32, and 64, respectively. I know I am going to ugrade the cards in the towers, but will 128 be sufficient, or should I go to 256? I'd rather not spend the extra money for these old systems. Just want them both to last through Leopard. I don't do to much graphics work, mainly editing /creating scientific figures for publication. Everything works well enough at the moment with Tiger.

    Any suggestions from beta users on G4 towers would be appreciated.
     
  21. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #21
    I've read it's a bit slow, like running Tiger on a G3,(Which I can vouch for) but it is completely do-able.

    128 should do it, but if they take 256, go for it.
     

Share This Page