Will Snow Leopard increase memory capacity on the Unibody MacBooks?

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by luiso455, Mar 6, 2009.

  1. luiso455 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    #1
    We all know that you could never have enough memory in our computers, so I have a fairly simple question to ask. When OS 10.6.0 comes out a.k.a. Snow Leopard, will all the Intel Core 2 Duo machines have an increased ram capacity. It looks more and more everyday as if 4GB is becoming a standard in machines and all across the board (Dell,Hp,Apple) computer these days are handling 8GB of ram with ease. So does anybody know if when Snow Leopard comes out, will there be a potential for my MacBook to contain 8GB of ram?

    P.S Right now with 10.5.6 how much ram can my Aluminum MacBook hold officially...? 6.....8.....16? ;-) :apple:
     
  2. clyde2801 macrumors 601

    clyde2801

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Location:
    In the land of no hills and red dirt.
    #2
    Officially, it will hold 4, but people have taken it to 6. 8 causes instability.

    I doubt apple will ever release a firmware update that will allow you to up the memory capacity. They want you to buy a $3K 17" MBP.
     
  3. mbradyrn macrumors member

    mbradyrn

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
  4. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #4
    Sure you can, just plan your memory capacity in accordance to your usage and keep a little extra for future expansion.

    It's not hard either with the Activity Monitor to gather data about usage patterns.
     
  5. Boston Fan macrumors member

    Boston Fan

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Location:
    SE Pennsylvania
    #5
    I think the OP just meant that more RAM is always good - as in "you can never have too much RAM" - not that they had not planned well enough for their current needs.
     
  6. michael.lauden macrumors 68020

    michael.lauden

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    #6
    while i get what you are saying. you can DEFINITELY have too much RAM :D

    right now, unless i'm virtualizing windows on parallels and video chatting + rendering HD video WHILE watching a DVD, running every Adobe prorgram x2 (under windows, AND os x)

    i dont see a need for 32GB of RAM


    but then again.... if you have a computer based job where you can afford to upgrade your RAM that much. you probably require it
     
  7. Matek macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    #7
    Again, It's just an expression. You don't post nutritional facts when someone goes "You can't have too much cheese", do you? :p

    To the OP - as someone already mentioned, it's a hardware issue. Just like the first C2D MacBooks could only address 3.3 GB of RAM despite the fact they had 64-bit CPUs, newer models also have certain hardware limitations. These cannot be changed through software in the future.
     
  8. VPrime macrumors 68000

    VPrime

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Location:
    London Ontario
    #8
    I understand what you are saying..... but really what you are saying does not mean that some one can have to much ram. Just because some oen does not need it does not mean they should not have it.


    That is not exactly true... There are a lot of cases where a motherboard can accept more ram with a firmware/bios update (PC world).. So don't rule out that issue just yet. And There couuld be a firmware patch to fix the 8gb issue of macbooks.

    When having too much ram starts doing harm, that is when you have too much ram.... Not when you dont need it ;)
    an example would be the 8gb causing instability in the macbook.. ;)
     
  9. GfulDedFan macrumors 65816

    GfulDedFan

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Location:
    Indiana
    #9
    Or this example:
    If I were to take out one of my 1GB chipsets and replace it with a 2GB chipset, my macBook won't start. If I leave it that way, I will always have too much RAM. (as opposed to never have too much RAM). ;)
     
  10. Roy Hobbs macrumors 68000

    Roy Hobbs

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    #10
    The Dells and HPs you mention also ship with Vista which is know as a huge memory hog. 4 GB in Vista is much different that 4 GB in OS X. OS X sitting at an idle after a fresh reboot and no programs open doesnt eat up almost 2 GB
     
  11. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #11
    That's where capacity planning comes in. Instead of just buying the maximum amount, plan your needs accordingly and budget for future expansion, and you'll spend the right amount of money instead of too much money.

    This goes for everything, not just ram (do you really need that Mac Pro to browse the web and play some WoW ?).

    Waste of money is considered harmful, at least to me. It's what started this whole economic crissis thing in the first place.
     
  12. luiso455 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    #12
    Ohhh.

    Thanks for all the reponses. I guess I'm "stuck" with my 4GB of ram. ;-)

    Apple FTW!
     
  13. bozz2006 macrumors 68030

    bozz2006

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #13
    you're not stuck with 4GB. as has been said here, you can go to 6GB 2GB + 4GB... problem is, it costs a lot.
     
  14. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #14
    And you lose dual channel support.
     
  15. NewMacbookPlz macrumors 68040

    NewMacbookPlz

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2008
    #15
    Generally, the effect of more RAM is greater than the loss of dual channel support.
     
  16. KnightWRX macrumors Pentium

    KnightWRX

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    Quebec, Canada
    #16
    Not if the extra RAM is sitting there unused because of poor planning. Right now, with only 2 GB installed, I have about 1 Gig of RAM that's free.

    Of course, I'm not actually using my computer besides from MSN and Firefox. For some people, 4 GB is already overkill, 6 GB is just a waste of money. For the people that need it, of course the extra RAM is better since swapping pages out is the bigger performance hit.
     
  17. bozz2006 macrumors 68030

    bozz2006

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #17
    i didn't say that you wouldn't have a performance hit. the guy said, "I'm stuck with 4GB", and I said, "No, you're not". And that is true. If you're going to upgrade to 6GB just for the sake of doing it, that's dumb anyway. But if you need more than 4GB, the benefit of having more will outweigh the performance hit with the loss of dual-channel. that's been tested and proven over and over.
     
  18. Jollins macrumors regular

    Jollins

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    #18
    A little exaggeration never causes too much harm but that's just false. On a system with 1GB+ of RAM installed, Vista will in general use a little over 512MB after booting, and thats with the sidebar and a few extra processes going on in the background.
     
  19. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #19
    You can never have too much RAM; if you have extra RAM, you can always mount the excess as a RAM disk for using as a scratch disk for Photoshop or Final Cut (way faster than any SSD and only a tad slower than directly accessing RAM.
     
  20. michael.lauden macrumors 68020

    michael.lauden

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    #20
    however... right now you may want to look at some benchmarks before you decide to spend a million dollars + lose your dual channel support...


    http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp11.html
     
  21. Boston Fan macrumors member

    Boston Fan

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Location:
    SE Pennsylvania
    #21
    Except that their conclusion is that 6gb is preferable:

     
  22. mbradyrn macrumors member

    mbradyrn

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    #22
    That is not exactly true... There are a lot of cases where a motherboard can accept more ram with a firmware/bios update (PC world).. So don't rule out that issue just yet. And There couuld be a firmware patch to fix the 8gb issue of macbooks.

    This is an interesting question -- In the past, limitations on Ram were sometimes because Apple put out specs before a bigger Ram size was available -- I have a wall street with 512k ram to prove it -- so sometimes times, all you have to do is try it and see.

    With the MBP you have it's a hardware issue, not solvable by software or firmware manipulation.

    That being said in an authoritative way -- I remember saying that my performa 6400 would never be upgradable because the cpu was soldered -- but then came daughter cards -- so, you never know.
     
  23. TheScavenger macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Location:
    Kansas City, MO
    #23
    I don't think the limitation here is due to firmware. It is most likely restricted by the chipset being used. In this case its an nVidia chipset.
     
  24. acurafan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    #24
    i would love 8gb of ram, then i can get better response out of my vm sessions and OSX :)
     

Share This Page