Whats the deal with 8GB Ram - MacBook Pro

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Croatian, Jan 6, 2009.

  1. Croatian macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2006
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    #1
    so the new MacBook Pro 17" can have 8GB ram and New MacBook Pro 15" can't anyone figured out way it is that way, cuz only difference i can tell is the new processors but those don't matter with memory it is the chip and as far as i can tell is the same unless apple is not saying something.

    i don't have $1200 for 8GB of Ram anyway, but be nice to know my new MBP 15" in a year when the prices are lower can have 8GB Ram
     
  2. Michael CM1 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    #2
    1) The period is your friend.
    2) The max memory depends on the logic board and the operating system. Since the OS is the same, the logic boards on the 17" MBP are probably slightly better. I would at least hope so for the extra dough you cough out.
     
  3. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #3

    1) The processors in the Macbook Pro 15" and 17" are actually the same, the 17" just has slightly updated faster ones.

    2) Your 15" MBP can take 8GB of RAM, at first when they came out Apple limitied them to 4GB, then they increased it to 6GB which it is now, and the max it can take is 8GB so its just a matter of time until they allow you to use it. Its something called a firmware fix thats stopping people doing it. I think its a bit rude really but there you go nevermind.
     
  4. rawdawg macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2009
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    #4
    Do you have info that this is in fact a firmware fix? From what I've read I never saw anything to suggest that though it could be possible to have 8Gb in the Late 2008 models. And we've seen it will take 6Gb but nothing indicated that was due to any sort of firmware update.

    Just want to see if you're "assuming that" or not because you sound pretty sure. Otherwise it could be a logic board issue as suggested earlier, correct?

    I'm curious myself so I'm only asking--- i'm no expert here. I want to buy a MBP and want to know my options as well.
     
  5. bilbo--baggins macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    It would be very unusual for Apple to increase the maximum RAM originally specified by issuing a firmware upgrade. I've never heard of this happening before.
     
  6. kastenbrust macrumors 68030

    kastenbrust

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Location:
    North Korea
    #6
    They havnt openly admitted it but one day 4GB working and then the next 6GB working is a bit suspisous, and the only way thats possible is if they were locking the bios, ie using firmware. The santa rosa chips which the Macbook pro's (all of them) motherboards are based around are designed for 8GB of RAM, you can ask intel if you like, its common knowledge. So thats how i know they can support up to 8GB.
     
  7. AliKat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    #7
    Crapple

    Yeah this bios restriction regarding ram has been going on since the first mac book pros. They want people to upgrade to the newer models.

    revision A, B, and C is just a 3 phase product release plan. Apple is evil.
     
  8. Gamoe macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    #8
    I am rather troubled by this unexplained RAM limitation. It seems rather unfair and unreasonable to me. I can't say I'm really overjoyed at all these little issues (RAM limit, graphics glitch) after paying nearly $2,000 for a new machine.

    And to those Apple apologists: Sure, Apple never advertised the '08 Unibody MBPs could do 8GB, but don't tell me you don't find it a bit wrong if it's really just an artificial limit.
     
  9. santos79 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    #9
    My sentiments exactly. All the unibody models are equipped with the same NVidia chipset. It's not a hardware issue as the NVidia chipset itself supports up to 16GB of RAM.

    It won't be much of an issue as long as 4GB RAM sticks are prohibitively expensive, but after the price comes down to about what the 2GB sticks cost today there will be a lot of dissatisfied first-gen unibody Macbook users.

    I think too that its unacceptable how Apple refuses to address this issue. I'm convinced that it's a firmware issue and that a fix would be relatively easy. But Apple can't be bothered. The company only cares about the current lineup, hence the quick issue of firmware 1.7 which fixed the sata speeds.

    Especially those who invested a lot more that 2,000 euros for the 2.53 and 2.8GHz version of first-generation MBPs must really feel screwed over bu Apple.

    Personally I haven't given up hope for my uMBP 2.4. I bought it in March so it just might have the firmware that the new 2.6/2.9 MBPs came with.

    Also there have been reports that 8GB works fine with the 64-Bit kernel.

    Only time will tell.
     
  10. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #10
    Its not an artificial limit, its a hardware limit due to the nvidia chipset. apple [presumably] used a newer version of the chipset for their 09 MBPs but the fact remains earlier machines could not handle the 8gig, i.e., stability.

    Is it a shame that a laptop in this day and age could not have 8gig, yeah, but its not an artificial limit imposed by apple for some draconian reason.
     
  11. santos79 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    #11
    How do you know this? Do you have any proof to back it up or are you just assuming that there is a chipset limitation because it makes the most sense to you? If the latter is the case, you can just add it to the big pile of theories that I and others have contributed to.

    Under Windows, SiSoft Sandra reports that the chipset can support 16GB of RAM and I can recall NVidia confirming that in an article. The only possibility therefore is that Apple deliberately used defective chipsets. I seriously hope that is not the case.
     
  12. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #12
    Its been a year, but I recall coming across some information stating that the nvidia had a bug in the chipset. Being over a year old, I don't recall where I read that.

    Besides, it makes more sense to see this being a hardware issue, then some sort of nefarious move by apple.
     
  13. Kermit8283 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    #13
    Coming from a pc, the max memory really confuses me. I use to always be under the understanding that a 32-bit OS was limited to ~4GB of memory.

    "By definition, a 32-bit processor uses 32 bits to refer to the location of each byte of memory. 2^32 = 4.2 billion, which means a memory address that's 32 bits long can only refer to 4.2 billion unique locations (i.e. 4 GB)."

    And 64-bit systems are limited to approximately 16GB. It always blew my mind that the Mac Pro could have 32GB of memory. But now, with the new Intel 58 chipsets, even PC mobo's are supporting up to 24GB.

    AHHH, just found a decent write up!

    http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/more_on_64-bits_how_much_ram_can_a_mac_have_really/

    A new question. Where is a good place to pick up 4gb sticks of ram for my new mbp? What has been proven to be the better brands? I haven't seen any recent links.

    Also, I've seen speeds faster than 1066 available by gskill for the mbp on newegg, but my manual says that is the max. What's the deal with that. I know that on my PC, my Corsair Dominator memory advertised at 1066mhz. When installed it only shows up as 800 mhz and has to be overclocked to 1066. Is the MBP memory like this to get the 1333Mhz?

    Here is a link to the memory I'm talking about...
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231299
     
  14. daneoni macrumors G4

    daneoni

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    #14
    He's right. Its a difference in chipsets, the Late 08 models use a B2 chipset whilst the April/June 09 models use a B3 chipset like the original 17" model

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  15. vassillios macrumors 6502

    vassillios

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Location:
    Virginia
    #15
    My late 2008 2.4 MBP is getting a new logic board, is there a chance that the new logic board will handle 8gb of mem?
     
  16. daneoni macrumors G4

    daneoni

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    #16
    Unlikely seeing as there are no longer 2.4GHz models in the recent lineup
     
  17. vassillios macrumors 6502

    vassillios

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Location:
    Virginia
    #17
    Didn't think so. I guess they have extras just laying around. I was hoping maybe they would just plop a 2.4 chip on the new boards....wishful thinking.
     
  18. santos79 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    #18
    That's a plausible explanation, but it is just another theory really. Also the bug you refer to affected the graphics performance not the memory.
     
  19. Bloodhound macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
  20. jjahshik32 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    #20
    Thats the reason why I sold my old unibody mbp for the new one (17") because once the 8gb of RAM goes down to $200 bucks sometime next year I'd have to upgrade and probably one of the best upgrades you can do. :)

    I would think the logic board is exactly the same on both the new unibody 15" and 17" mbp but different from the old unibody 15" & 17" mbps. Oh and the 17" has a much bigger and more efficient heatsink than the 15"
     
  21. nicklad macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Location:
    Nottingham, UK
    #21
    Does 8GB now work with the Boot ROM update that Apple released to quieten the DVD drive. Has anybody tested it since?

    Model Name: MacBook Pro
    Model Identifier: MacBookPro5,1
    Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
    Processor Speed: 2.53 GHz
    Number Of Processors: 1
    Total Number Of Cores: 2
    L2 Cache: 6 MB
    Memory: 4 GB
    Bus Speed: 1.07 GHz
    Boot ROM Version: MBP51.007E.B05
    SMC Version (system): 1.33f8

    ---EDIT---

    Apparently, it works but slows the machine down when it tries to use the higher memory.

    I am, however, interested in testing it with the 64-bit kernel under 10.6.3.
     
  22. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #22

Share This Page