182,869 users have contributed to 42,261 threads and 254,943 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 0 new thread(s), 10 new post(s) and 34 new user(s).
Just wanted to mention that, despite what Apple says, the 4 core Nehalem machine which has only 4 memory slots will work if these slots are filled with 4GB chips (If you purchase these chips from Other World Computing it will cost you $770.00 for 4 chips) giving you a total of 16GB of memory.)
...which translated loosely means: "Dieses ist nicht die beste zu kaufen Maschine."
And in English: buy the 8-core.
Although Apple's advertising copy and specs suggest that the 4 core Nehalem model can only accomodate 8Gb of RAM - - and this statement has been repeated on this site, it is NOT in accordance with the facts. The facts are that the 4 core Nehalem machine has only 4 memory slots while the 8 core machines have 8 memory slots. However 4GB meory chips can be used in both machines so that the 4 core Nehalem machine can accodomate 16GB of RAM. The only limitation is that all 4 slots must contain matched 4GB chips. Other World Computing sells matched sets of 4GB chips for $770 for the 4 core Nehalem machine. (go to:
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/Mac-Pro-Memory
to see.
Apple does not offer this option and, if it did would, no doubt, charge an exorbitant price. (Apple charges $6100 for 8 x 4GB chips while Other World Computing charges $1480 for the same configuration.) The reason Apple's advertising suggests that the maximum amount of RAM available for this machine is 8GB appears to be the same as the reason they crippled it by offering it with only 4 RAM slots: Apple seems to want to suggest that if you are a "serious" user, you need to buy the more expensive 8 core machines. In other words, this is no more than a sales gimmick.
Ha! I did wonder about that, it didn't seem to make sense. [Cleopatra]I was shopping for a slave recently[/Cleopatra], and I remembered why I didn't have apple put 32GB in my 2x quad machine (I paid 500 over what 6GB would've cost, for 16GB. THEN, it's 5600 to populate the board with all 4GB, which just isn't what the 4GB sticks cost. I may buy a 24 GB kit. There's a lot of talk about DDR3 'triple channel', and I'm not sure about the gain of 32 vs 24; apparently what isn't 'in threes' goes back into the cfg as single channel.)
I do think this is the marketing reflecting what they're going to build in future, a split off into 'high end prosumer' instead of 'low end pro' with the quad, vs straight pro with the 8 core..
Thank you for this public service announcement!
Christian, I am thinking about more RAM for my MacPro. I was looking at the whole 3- channel thing, and it didn't seem that 32GB would be much of a gain over 24GB. I did see ... that what exceeded the 'triples' in a configuration would go back into the board as single channel memory, but I don't know how to use that information really. So, I should get a 24GB kit (6x4) then, yes?@cm said:
MIR has so far only been tested with a 4 core 3.2 GHz X58 1333MHz board and 12 GB RAM but we came to the conclusion that CPU speed is not so much a factor as fast memory - benchmarks indicate (and there are currently a lot of them floating around) indicate that 1066 MHz memory (as the current MacPros have) will decrease performance by ~15%
the 4 core MacPro is very similar to X58 PC boards but i'd recommend to always use triples of RAM modules according to the design of the nehalems (3 channel on-processor memory controller) for full speed - eg. 6 x 2GB
as example figure: loading every patch of the special edition (something you wouldn't do in any arrangement) requires 4GB memory and you shouldn't fill memory too close to the limit, so going with 12GB might be a good idea ...
christian
I did decide against a second machine (I have a MacBook Pro, which I think I will use for cubase and this 8-core with as much RAM as I can use maximally for vsts, until I see more about this supposed performance loss with 1066mhz vs the 1333. I'm not a windows user, though
the 3 channel thing: the onbord memory controller has 3 channels to access 3 memory modules paralell (write to, read from)
if now say 4 modules are installed, how can it access the fourth? over a single channel only =~1/3 of the speed compared to the 3-pack. ... similar principle applies to 8 modules compared to 6.
24 GB appears to be (at least to me) a reasonable amount of memory. say 2 GB for system and programs, 4 - 6 GB for impulses, leaving 16 GB free for loading samples. a reasonable basic template for orchestal arrangement can be 6 - 6.5 GB, double this amount for extras, finetuning, luxury .... still 5 GB headroom left.
if your approach is to have everything available loaded (eg. from a superpackage) and at your fingertips you may run short (you can easily create 24GB templates with VSL too) - your workflow decides about demands.
the memory bus frequency: current specification says that only having one memory module per channel can run at 1333 - having 2 per channel decreases speed to 1066 (remember: each physical processor offers 3 channels)
this scetching might provide further insight, christian
Thank you for that.
This makes sense, I think; the implication being that the extra RAM might even slow some types of processes down, in some cases (which are multi-threaded)? In any case, it can't be worth the extra dollars.
Here's my idea: I can use my MacBook Pro to run Cubase, a 32-bit host, and port via Vienna Ensemble to this system, 8 cores, we'll say the 24GB RAM, as the slave, hosting vstis, and then as a post production studio.
What I use is Kontakt 3.5 currently, some VSL (more to come since I like the articulations control), and BFD2. The former two will run at 64-bit.
I wouldn't be real concerned with running out of memory, I'm not doing a giant string orchestra or all these articulations all at any one time. And I approach composing/orchestration and mixing at different times, these are different tasks to me. The decision I make now depends on how VE Pro will deal with 32-bit vstis. That I think is my one caveat as far as using the MacBook to sequence from, with this one machine as the only slave.
@stevesong said:
Other World Computing sells matched sets of 4GB chips for $770 for the 4 core Nehalem machine. (go to:
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/Mac-Pro-Memo
****BE CAREFUL about buying RAM from OWC!! BEWARE!****
I purchased the 32 GB set from them for my 2009 8-core, and it plunged me into a world of pain. The 1st batch did not work properly, and so they sent me a replacement, which ALSO did not work. After the 3rd batch, I spent 2 months troubleshooting the machine with Apple, until they finally gave up and blamed the RAM.
My only option was to drive 5 hours to the nearest Apple Store (one problem when you live in the middle of nowhere), and test the OWC RAM on a similar machine. IT DID NOT WORK ON THE SIMILAR MACHINE!! I returned the RAM pronto and bought slightly more expensive RAM from www.datamem.com... And my troubles are over.
Do not buy RAM for your 2009 Nehalem Mac Pro from OWC!!! STAY AWAY!
You can get bad memory anywhere, whether you're a user or a vendor. It wasn't because your memory was more expensive that it worked, it was because OWC had a bad batch. I wouldn't rush to write them off; after all, they did try to solve your problem.
Excellent point- that's very true. And I can't deny that OWC customer service is AWESOME. They were always really helpful. But it was extremely frustrating to receive three bad products in a row over a 2 month period. And after the third batch, OWC blamed my machine... Which was incorrect, because the OWC RAM didn't work in an identical computer either.
Also, the RAM I received from www.datamem.com had higher-quality heatsinks on them. And I can't tell you how happy I was to be up and running after 3-4 months of back and forth with OWC and Apple.
