It is standard ram.

At the time I posted I thought I had a lead on the above ram, 2 gig worth for $141.29 shipped.. . so I was in a rush.

After I had confirmed my order, I was planning on posting the link to the deal, but it looks like the deal is dead.

Thanks for the info and your time, it is apperciated!!!

Anyone know where to get semi-affordable 2gb stick for the new MBP? I would love to bring this puppy up to its 3gb max if possible.....but I don't know if $500+ is worth it cost/benefit-wise. Any input?

I am looking into getting a new Apple macbook 2ghz core 2 duo w/ 1 gig of ram .. i don't have much experience with macs aside from the 1337 apple 2's i grew up on in grade school. the question is, for average use (web browsing, docs, lots of iChat AV, and moderate use of iLife '06) is 1 gig of ram enough? any ideas on how memory hungry mac os x is compared to windows xp? i have a windows laptop (xps gen 2) so parallels wont be necessary. Thanks.

1 gig is more than enough for average use.

But what about the difference when using moderately intensive programs or having 12 programs running at once? Is this more a CPU-intensive thing, or will the extra 1g of RAM (from 2g-->3g) make much difference?

not so sure about mac, but winxp's sweet spot for ram is 2 gigs; anything over that is pretty much never used. I have virtual mem set as low as i can (0mb in config, but truly disabling the page file just isn't a good idea) and i never run into low memory errors; even while playing bf2 at full settings (which is a particularly memory hungry game). vista, is going to want around 3.5 - 4 gigs; but again, i have no idea with mac specifically. My experience with Gentoo Linux also makes me feel that 2 gigs currently is the sweet spot for most uses. To answer your question, multi tasking eats ram as much as cpu if the programs you're running multiple instances of are doing something. (Ex. 12 web pages loading at the same time are all going to eat your ram, and top out your processor; where as 11 web pages idle and 1 loading is going to consume far less processing power, but only slightly less ram.) .... assuming things work similarly between win/Linux - and os x.

Is it better in XP to have more or less HD space set aside for VM?

That is helpful.....I run 2gb of high-end (Corsair's X-Treme) in my WinXP machine & it is quite snappy.....(although, I think the MBP is still snappier). I am just wondering if the cost/benefit curve goes the wrong direction when going from 2gb-->3gb.

i think it does. but mac os x is Unix based, not Linux based, small differences, but it could make a difference. As a note, win xp home can only address 3 gb of memory, xp pro x64 and i *Think* xp pro x86 can address more; where on the other hand Linux and Unix have been able to address far more, for a long time.

Can anyone link me to the ram for MBP and MB?
Thanks in advance!
[Edit] Would ram from my 5720 be equivalent?

You just need PC5300 SODIMMs, Siul

Hi,
we can now put 3gb of Ram in MacBook Pro on apple.com. can we put 4Gb ? (2x2Gb) ?
Thank you.
Jp

2x2GB will work but because of limitations to the current chipsets used on the motherboards—this is not limited to Apple, btw—only 3 gigs will be accessible to the system even though it will show you 4 are installed.

4200