Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Upgrading an iMac Pro to 256GB of RAM Only Possible at Time of Purchase [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Linus Tech Tips tried to build an equivalent machine to an iMac Pro and found out the Apple tax on the iMac Pro was... -$200. The equivalent PC is actually more expensive. If you skimp on parts, you can build a cheaper system, but the iMac Pro is worth what they charge for it, 256GB RAM notwithstanding. I priced out 256GB of ECC DDR4 2666MHz on Amazon and found a no-name brand that costs $4400, so I don't know how overpriced Apple is on its iMac Pro RAM.
So, I just checked.
There are new logic board part numbers for 2019. There's also a note that 64GB DIMMs are only compatible with the new part number logic boards.
Everything with the Radeon Pro Vega 64X is listed as compatible with 64GB DIMMs. Everything that doesn't have the 64X isn't. So YES, you can upgrade any 2019 iMac Pro that comes with the 64X GPU to 256GB.
Now, that's official Apple stuff, that does not mean the older boards definitively won't work with 64GB DIMMs. It just means Apple says we're not supposed to do it, and it might not work.
Want to find out if it'll work? Try it yourself or wait to see if Mactracker lists an "actual" and "Apple" number for RAM on the older machines at some point in the future.
I suspect that it won't work, and that there are hardware reasons it can't work. But I'd like to see somebody attempt it.
If you haven't done a RAM upgrade on a iMac Pro, you're in for a real treat. You've got to essentially gut the thing, the slots are on the back side of the logic board. And there are some tricky connectors, and some risk of damage if you don't know what you're doing. There are torque specifications on the board screws, you don't want to overtighten them.
There are new logic board part numbers for 2019. There's also a note that 64GB DIMMs are only compatible with the new part number logic boards.
Everything with the Radeon Pro Vega 64X is listed as compatible with 64GB DIMMs. Everything that doesn't have the 64X isn't. So YES, you can upgrade any 2019 iMac Pro that comes with the 64X GPU to 256GB.
Now, that's official Apple stuff, that does not mean the older boards definitively won't work with 64GB DIMMs. It just means Apple says we're not supposed to do it, and it might not work.
Want to find out if it'll work? Try it yourself or wait to see if Mactracker lists an "actual" and "Apple" number for RAM on the older machines at some point in the future.
I suspect that it won't work, and that there are hardware reasons it can't work. But I'd like to see somebody attempt it.
If you haven't done a RAM upgrade on a iMac Pro, you're in for a real treat. You've got to essentially gut the thing, the slots are on the back side of the logic board. And there are some tricky connectors, and some risk of damage if you don't know what you're doing. There are torque specifications on the board screws, you don't want to overtighten them.
OWC offers a 256 GB memory upgrade kit for the iMac Pro for $2800 (4 x 64GB 2666MHZ DDR4 LRDIMM PC4-21300). And it works on the original (late 2017) model. But they warn that installation is extremely difficult, requiring an experienced technician, since in the absence of a memory door, the computer needs to be disassembled:
https://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/DID2627DS256/
Also, I assume making this upgrade will void the warranty.
https://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/DID2627DS256/
Also, I assume making this upgrade will void the warranty.
Last edited:
Even then, I'll still pick up a 'regular' computer for doing 3D modeling and rendering. I no longer trust Apple when it comes to pro machines. They've flipped pro users the bird too many times.
A plain vanilla iMac will suffice for standard admin tasks, coding and even audio production. For real heavy lifting, I'm sadly going to say goodbye to Mac OS.
There we go, so it does work, nice
Now I can save up to get the base model without worries down the line.
Check out the i9 2019 iMac by the way - the performance is pretty similar to my iMac Pro, but at about half the price.
[doublepost=1553850232][/doublepost]The 32Gb of RAM in a MBP has saved me having to carry two of them! Bonkers I know. I have a demo-set of VMs that are difficult to use if they're cloud based - hard to know whether i'll have access to them from a client's site. Instead I fire them all up on my MBP. Couldn't do that on my 2017 unit with 16Gb. It'd grind to a halt. The unit with 32Gb works fine.
[doublepost=1553850232][/doublepost]The 32Gb of RAM in a MBP has saved me having to carry two of them! Bonkers I know. I have a demo-set of VMs that are difficult to use if they're cloud based - hard to know whether i'll have access to them from a client's site. Instead I fire them all up on my MBP. Couldn't do that on my 2017 unit with 16Gb. It'd grind to a halt. The unit with 32Gb works fine.
Who on Earth would spend that much on a high-end Mac when it has limited repairability and the entire thing is rendered useless if the screen breaks?
Why can’t Apple release a new Mac Pro? Or update the (how many years old) AppleTV HD or update the iMac design or release a standalone 5k screen?
Why can’t Apple release a new Mac Pro? Or update the (how many years old) AppleTV HD or update the iMac design or release a standalone 5k screen?
It's the structure of the management of the company. They're still operating with the small tight nit group of executives making every single product decision.
they tend to be able to focus only on a small subset of categories at a time. They focus on iPhones and accessories? Their computer line up suffers. They focus on the macbook pros? The Air and iMac get forgotten. Focus on iMacs and the MacBook gets forgotten. Focus on the watch? and the iPhone stayed nearly identical for 4 years.
the only teams that seem to be constantly producing new stuff right now at Apple are the teams who are more autonomous and outside of the direct manipulations of the executive. Their CPU staff for example wouldn't get day to day direction from the exec, and they seem to be one of the only teams that is consistently able to move forwards all the time.
Apple is no longer that smaller company that could let all product decisions be handled exclusively by 4-5 people. They need to start delegating certain responsibility outside of the executive team.
For example, you don't need the executive teams involvement to make sure your computers are at least updated yearly with the latest available parts. And yet here we are waiting for minor refreshes to just the internals for some grand reveal by the executives.
It doesn't help either that those same executives are so far removed from reality that they don't actually seem to know what people use their devices for. You have Tim Cook, the head honcho making asanine statements about "why would anyone need a computer?". From the same person who can do most of his work, emails and reading of contracts on an iPad, who clearly doesn't know WHY many of us need up to date powerful computers.
The problem is right now the leadership isn't making products based on needs and functional decisions of the market demands. They're making products that are based on profit/loss calculations. Not product usability.
To compare TC to SJ is going to be always an iffy thing, since we don't know how JObs would really behave today. But we can look historically and see that SJ often put usability, and perfection first. His own statements often reinforced this. He was a firm believer that people got rich for making good products people want. Tim Cook is more of a "we'll get rich by making good enough products and adjusting the books and pricing to keep profits high". Honestly, look at the rumoured Camera bump on the iPhone 11. Do you think Steve Jobs would have let that out the door in that fashion? Tim Cook would because it's about profit/loss calculations for him, not the look/feel.
I would whine about this, but:
1.) 128GB isn't so bad
2.) if you need the 256 you'll definitely won't mind paying Apple $5200 for it.
3.) We can all wait for the Mac Pro to get a really upgradeable, modular high-end workstation.
1.) 128GB isn't so bad
2.) if you need the 256 you'll definitely won't mind paying Apple $5200 for it.
3.) We can all wait for the Mac Pro to get a really upgradeable, modular high-end workstation.
Give me a CUDA PC for $2,500 and it will wipe the floor with this thing. Unfortunately, it would be running Windows.
[doublepost=1553878253][/doublepost]
And this isn't even great for heavy lifting even if you felt like throwing your money away since it's oriented towards OpenCL for Apple's FCP X and Motion. If you want to do CUDA with Octane or even use CUDA with After Effects, you are out of luck. Can't do it. You need nVidia.
[doublepost=1553878253][/doublepost]
And this isn't even great for heavy lifting even if you felt like throwing your money away since it's oriented towards OpenCL for Apple's FCP X and Motion. If you want to do CUDA with Octane or even use CUDA with After Effects, you are out of luck. Can't do it. You need nVidia.
Not sure how true it is now, but when the iMac Pro was announced there really wasn't an Apple Tax on it, it's just that the specs are so far and above what most people need it seemed very expensive. It's a high-end workstation, they are always expensive no matter who builds them.
Nice analysis! But it still leaves me puzzled about their management strategy. While it's poor management to not give each division enough autonomy to develop entirely new products on its own, it's still understandable that such would happen. But (at least on the face of it) it seems head-scratchingly nonsensical that the Mac division isn't even given enough autonomy to do basic refreshes (e.g., upgrades on the Mac mini). There must be something else going on.
I suspect, having been a Genius at one point, that the 256GB configuration requires a change in the temperature control system. Possibly one or more additional digital temperature sensors, a different duct for the fans, more foam and ESD tape and so on to meet Apple's internal standards. Maybe even a firmware update to change the thermal and/or voltage profiles and allowable tolerances. All of which may not be cost-effective to implement on models not intended to have 256gb as they would likely be retrofits to the existing chassis.
As I understand it, OWC tests all their upgrades before offering them. Thus the fact that their 256 GB upgrade kit for the iMac only includes the memory sticks and re-sealing tape would seem to indicate that none of the modifications you mention are needed. But if you're curious, you can always call OWC tech support and ask them directly.
The only thing that would really dictate the difference in RAM support is memory controller limitations.
So I'm wondering if the 256gb model has an upgraded memory modules that isn't in the lower tiered one and Apple is saving those motherboards for the 256gb version. And continuing to use the existing chipset for the lower tier to save on costs
So I'm wondering if the 256gb model has an upgraded memory modules that isn't in the lower tiered one and Apple is saving those motherboards for the 256gb version. And continuing to use the existing chipset for the lower tier to save on costs
The fact that OWC offers 256 GB RAM as an upgrade for the original iMac Pro is strong evidence that the memory controller on all tiers of the original model can handle that amount of RAM without issue.
Last edited:
Interesting. Thanks!
now i'm genuinely curious what the reasons are for the current decision. technical or business...
Good question. No idea, but certainly could be either. Interestingly, one sees a parallel situation with the regular iMac: Apple's initial max memory option for the new model (19,1) is 64GB, but OWC finds it works with up to 128 GB.
[I'm curious what percentage of regular iMacs are ordered with anything more than the base 8 GB RAM, since it's easily user-upgradeable, and for far less than what Apple charges; e.g., 32 GB from Apple is +$600, while if you instead buy 32 GB from OWC, you get a total of 40 GB (32 + 8) for +$230.]
The RAM is replaceable; just not easily. It's not soldered in like on the laptops.I have one question
since the main topic or comment is that you need to upgrade your ram when you buy or order to computer
my best guess is that apple solder the ram to the logic board
I don't think they use crazy glue or a piece of bubble gum
so what happens when the ram is faulty or damage
do I have to take the whole computer to the apple store
so they come up with we have to replace the entire logic board
because if they can remove just the ram to replace it
then why can apple let you upgrade the ram module later the same way
in case you decide to upgrade later on
sorry but this is a rip off tactic by apple
just in case since when speaking from the heart is trolling
isn't it really much simple
I got a bad ram module, let me go to my local electronic store and buy a new module
that way I don't have to spent a week without my precious computer
some computers are not just for hobbies and we need them to get our job done
what ever is it that the person do
sorry but this exactly why I don't buy apple computers
is not just because they are over price, yes they look beautiful
but why do I have to take it to an apple store when I can do it myself
I understand there are some people that don't know what they are doing and apple is protecting them against themselves
but is better to let that person screw themselves
because if they open it and they damage the computer
then they should pay for the repair
totally fair
but punishing every one else is not cool
soldering components to the logic board to stop everyone to make a simple upgrade
really
including the ones that know how to change a ram module is not right at least on my eyes
apple if you really wants to make money then let your costumers ruined their own Macs
you will look much better doing it that way
but is all the opposite apple might refused to fix that computer just because you open it
I honestly don't understand the logic behind all this
wait I think I do
even if you buy the computer from apple, I guess apple thinks the computers still belongs to them and not to you
sorry apple but I didn't rent the PC
when the costumer pay the price then is his computer
they bought the hardware
this exactly why I build myself a hackintosh that run circles around anything that apple makes
and I can do whatever I want it with it, upgrade as much as I like
sorry for the long message
[doublepost=1553985295][/doublepost]
I loaded up my 2017, but there's no way I would have paid for RAM up front. I purchased it separately from OWC.
I can't imagine more than a handful of people purchase RAM from Apple---perhaps bulk customers who just don't want to waste the time ordering and installing separate RAM modules. Although I think that would be a boneheaded business decision.
