64 bit Standard(S) - Page 2

You don't even get 3.6 GB. It works out to 2.75 on an intel 915 chipset. I am not sure what it will work out to on a 945. The biggest factor is the address space for the video ram.

3GB is all the memory that the now iMacs will be able to address. It saves 1 $800 so-dimm and gives up dual channel memory access.

Vista is pretty damn stable for a beta... certainly more stable than XP ever was, even at release. AND more stable than OSX was as well when it was first out. So i'm pretty confident that at release, Vista WILL be the most stable OS that MS has ever put out (i didn't use Apple prior to OSX, so i can't say how stable OS8 and 9 were).

The point I am trying to make is that you won't be able to install more than 3gigs of RAM economically anyway even with Merom because of only two RAM slots in the Macbook Pro and I don't think they are going to change that because there simply is no place in the 1" case to accomodate more RAM.

4GB will fit in the form of 2x2GB modules. We probably won't see 4GB modules anytime soon though, the demand just isn't there. By the time larger modules (bigger than 2GB) arrive, notebooks based on Merom will have already become obsolete.

...And there's no reason 4GB shouldn't work. I have already seen about 5 people online claiming that they have 4GB running in their new Core 2 Duo iMacs, even though Apple only sells 3GB as their top configuration.

Actually, I expect that the Merom MBP will look a lot like the new iMacs. 3GB of 667mhz ddr2 in a 1gb x1, 2gb x1. That would mean giving up dual-channel access. Apple is selling it as a $750 upgade.

And that's what I expect as well... From Apple. But I see no reason why 4GB (2x2GB) won't work in such a system. It works in the iMac (or I haven't heard anything to the contrary and they're essentially the same computer in a different package). As for Apple's memory prices... They're criminal. Do that many people actually buy RAM from Apple? I suppose most people do... But I can put 4GB in a new Merom iMac (and presumably the new MBP when released) for less than $380 and I'll have the old memory modules to sell or save for a rainy day.

There is no reason it won't work the only benefit will be dual channel memory access. You will not be able to address any more than the 2 3/4Gb of any other system.

Er... But with Merom being a 64bit platform (40bit memory addressing) and with OSX providing full memory addressing on the Intel platform with the 10.4.7 update (and release of the Mac Pro), the full 4GB RAM will be available. Neat, eh? And this is why I keep twiddling my thumbs, waiting for the new Core 2 / Merom based MBP to arrive, even though I needed a new laptop like 2 months ago. I've seen a few reports trickling in of 4GB installed and fully addressable and usable on the Core2 iMacs. If it works there, it will work on the MBP. Anyway, I'll know first hand within the next week as a friend of mine ordered one of the new 24" iMac systems and will be putting 4GB in it. I'm expecting to see the MBP update to the Core2 processors either this tuesday or the following tuesday (Photokina) and will probably place my order as soon as Apple's store allows me to do so. BTW: The Intel 945 chipset supports 40bit addressing natively so I don't see a problem. I am not sure about the 915 chipset, I'm thinking it doesn't. :-/ Either way, I'll see what the new MBPs bring... If they truly don't allow for a full 4GB, then I just buy a Dell - Simple. I'll probably have to order the Dell if Apple doesn't get something soon here that I can have in my hands by mid-october. The only application set I use that isn't available on both OSX and Windows is Final Cut Studio and Shake. But I don't really do video editing, compositing, etc.. on my laptop. But I do a ton of 3D design and CAD and that's also where most of my RAM needs come up. Most of my projects require me to have a full 2GB free and usable and it's also nice to have Photoshop and some other things loaded up simultaneously along with the 3D software.

You should probably get a Mac Pro. It just doesn't make sense to spend all this money on a notebook. 2GB SODimms aren't cheap.

Smit

Actually, I've already got a G5 quad w/8GB at the office and another G5 quad w/4GB at home - both with the 7800GT video card and a 30" display (Apple display at the office, Dell display at home - I like the Dell one better) And I also have several other PC workstations and render nodes in various flavors and configurations. I'll add a Mac Pro at some point or whatever comes next, but I don't need another desktop system right now.

I do a lot of work on the road or in the field when working directly with clients and I need a powerful notebook for this. I have an HP ZD7000 (17" screen, 3.2GHz P4 CPU, 2GB, etc..), but it's 3 years old and is no longer capable of handling my workload and it's worn out. The biggest factor has become the RAM. 2GB just doesn't cut it with the amounts of data I'm pushing around. I know I'm in the minority, but many of us in the realm of 3D design have run into the 32bit memory wall long ago and I'm tired of improvising work-arounds to cope with insufficeint RAM for the task at hand.

The cost of the notebok is negligable -- it's just another tool for the job. Just as a pro photographer has to buy at least one nice camera and some lenses or a mechanic has to buy an adequate set of tools. ~$3600 for a computer that will more than pay for itself within a few weeks is a no-brainer.

I can currently buy 2GB PC2-5300 (667MHz DDR2 SODIMM 200pin) modules for about $195 each plus tax. ...Either Crucial/Micron or Mushkin -- both have local manufacture facilities and sales reps that I deal with. So, I can get the RAM, now I just need a notebook to put it in. If Apple falls through, I'm going with the Dell Precision Core2. It's the same as the XPS, but doesn't have all the extra lights and crap and it's nicer looking than the Inspiron version, and with a better video chipset and dual-link DVI. ...Gotta have the dual-link so when I'm back at my office or at home I can connect it to a 30" display.

I did some checking at Apple's discussion forums.

While you can put 4 gigs in the computer and have it be recognised in the About This Mac box, if you open Activity monitor you'll see that only 3 gigs are being addressed.

I don't understand why and so far I haven't seen any explanations for it.

If this is turning out to be the case (3GB addressable) then it most likely is an OS limitation. Or limitation within the system BIOS/ROM... Both the CPU and chipset support the extended addressing. But why would the system be crippled? Weird... Also adding to the weirdness and indication that this is an intentional limitation is that we're seeing an actual barrier at 3GB and not some other arbitrary memory location.

At any rate, my friend's iMac should be delivered on wednesday and him and I will give it a shot. If there is indeed a limitation at 3GB, then I guess it gives me more to think about. At least that's better than the 2GB I was working with and may be do-able. But other PC notebooks can utilize all 4GB under XP64 and Vista when it arrives. So for me it becomes a question of having the super-sleek Macbook Pro with 3GB usable and I get to use all my applications including Final Cut Studio and Shake. Or I can go with a PC notebook and sacrifice most of my video tools for the additional RAM to use with my 3D apps. ...I actually shouldn't weigh too much on the 3D app consideration with the Mac. Lightwave and Modo are still stuck in the 32bit realm on the Mac, which means they only see 2GB within their process space. Soooo... Hmmmm... I guess I'll see what happens when the new notebooks arrive. Dare I wish for a full 4GB capability on the MBP and let them keep their silly 3GB restriction on the Macbook?

Merom does support 40-bit addressing but the 945 chipset does not. Everything in the Intel docs says not more than 4GB. None of the Intel docs say 40-bit addressing. I am sure that when Santa Rosa chipsets are rolled out there will be 33 or 34 bit addressing. The most I know of on the windows side is 36-bit (64GB) in a Tyan server mother board

I am not sure what chipset they are using in the iMac could it be a 965?

BTW Dell will sell you a laptop with 4GB but it will not address more than 2.8 GB or so.

I would love to see a link with someone installing 4GB in an iMac

Thanks

We know it's not an OS limitation because the G5 iMacs can take 4 gigs. Also G5 PowerMac and the MacPro can take more than 4 gigs.

Plus OS X does indeed recognise 4 gigs of memory are installed but it can only use 3 of them if you look at Activity Monitor.

Easy to get confused with this stuff. Anyway, I dug through the technical details I could find on the various Intel chipsets and it looks like we are dealing with a chipset limitation as Gonzo has stated. I'm not sure which chipset is being used in the MBP and the Macbook -- the 945PM and 945GMS respectively, I think. Anyway, all these chipsets are limited to 4GB. Looking through some other discussions elsewhere, it seems that many people think that Intel released Merom (mobile Core 2 Duo CPU) as soon as it was ready even though its companion chipset is not ready. Yes, Merom is compatible with all current Yonah (mobile Core Duo CPU) chipsets, but is not 100% supported. So by installing a Core 2 Duo in a MBP or iMac right now, we get 64bit support and instructions from the CPU and the OS, but the primary chipset is still limited to 32bit functionality and addressing, so we're still stuck with the same 32bit memory limitation as with the Core Duo CPUs. The Core 2 Merom CPUs are probably still worth the wait if you're sitting on the fence right now (like I am) because they do offer a noticeable speed boost. ...They also run a bit hotter too.

So I guess we just wait and see what comes down the pipe. I wonder if Apple may hold off on new MBP's until the Santa Rosa chipset ships? In some ways that's logical, but it may also cost them a lot of sales in the mean time...