RAM and performance

Would doubling my RAM to 1GB be a really wise investment or would I waste my money.
Let's face it, I kept my old G3 (the gray one) as my main computer for 8 years until I bought a new Intel iMac, so as you can tell I have already experienced a warp speed increase since the switch. Obviously I am not the kind of person who needs the latest toy (heck, all of my old Macs are still with me starring at the new iMac with jealousy). I know that you can never have too much RAM, but being a price-conscious individual and already loving the speed of the new iMac, I'm not so sure. So would you still recommend getting more? Where am I going to see the most performance benefits?

The short answer is yes, but the long answer is maybe.
I believe this question is unique and appropriate considering the very young age of the Intel Mac and the availability of universal applications. Adding RAM is the easiest way to see increased performance on you machine. But at the same time, it depends on your PPC versus UB workload. If you are running UB memory hogs - and especially PPC memory hogs that have to emulate under Rosetta - than yes, additional RAM will decrease the amount of virtual memory needed and speed the user experience up a bit.
Ask yourself how many applications you've set to open at login. Figure out how much multi-tasking you do. Determine how long you are willing to wait for programs to open, etc.
My best advice is to open your Activity Monitor after a restart and 15 minutes of what you would consider normal (opening apps, etc) activity and check the page outs under the System Memory tab. Alot of people would suggest deleting PPC applications to keep things hopping. I disagree. Some of those PPC apps might be essential to your day-to-day life with your Intel Mac.
If the number of page outs (meaning your computer has to use the hard drive as virtual memory) number is 5000 or so, boosting memory will help your day-to-day experience in a way you can recognize. Otherwise, leave it alone.
That said - I started with the stock 512 and upgraded to 2G. And the reason I did that was to test the machine's "out of the box" capabilities and also to provide "real world" experience to others. Did the upgrade help me - yes. But I do enough intensive work on my machine to make the difference worth the money. It's an individual decision in my opinion, and should be based on the criteria I've outlined above.
You can bet that the "built to order" 2Gig people will pile on this thread, but unless they have experienced the machine at stock configuration as you and I have, their information is quite pointless as they have no reference and will only provide links and such to articles they've read.

Similar Messages

Adding Ram and Performance

I just added 4 more gig of Ram to our flash server (windows 2003) bringing it up to 6gig. I want to make sure that the flash server is using more of the ram efficiently. I typically only see 2-3 fmscore(s) running using about 1.5 to 2gig of the ram.
How do I increase the number of core(s) or have it use more ram per core?
Also, is there a performance document for the falsh media server?

A 32 bit process can't use more than 2GB of ram. If you want to make use of 6GB, you should create more fmscore processes. (Or wait until the 64bit version is ready)
>> Also, is there a performance document for the falsh media server?
It would be nice if Adobe had something on the forums for FAQs. This comes up every couple of weeks, and I can never find the link. Its out there somewhere though.

Performance with 2GB RAM and SSD

I own a late 2010 MBA, 13" baseline model with 2GB RAM, w/SSD. I am using Snow Leopard, and it runs perfectly. I would like to upgrade to ML to sync with ipad, but a concerned with performance. I use my MBA for word processing, emails, and internet surfing, including occasional movie downloads. I cannot upgrade the RAM on this model. I would therefore very much appreciate if someone who has run the latest versio of ML on this model can inform me of its performance w/2GB RAM and an SSD drive. (I know it can run; I want to know how it runs). Thanks very much!

Just went through the same situation with my 2006 iMac. Technically my memory tops out at 3gigs, but I can get 4 in there if I insist (though the machine won't take full advantage).
After a considerable amount of research, and hearing some horror stories of some folks who dove straight into Lion on older machines, I opted on upgrading memory to 3gig, backing up all my data, then running a clean install of Snow Leopard. I then reinstalled all my stuff, followed with a run of Monolingual (a shareware program that removes unnecessary languages and builds), then ran OnyX (another shareware) to run scripts and check/repair permissions.
Works fantastic. Machine is operating perfectly on 10.6.8 and with the memory upgrade and clean drive its running faster than ever. Definite new breath of life in the machine.
As per memory upgrade, I'd recommend going to Crucial. They're very Mac friendly, customer oriented, and reasonably priced. They have a small program you can download that scans your machine to determine the correct chip required, then brings you stright to an info and ordering page. I managed to get a 2gig chip with shipping for about $25. With the Snow Leopard upgrade total cost was under $60 for resuscitation.

How to check the usage of ram and cpu Performance for the particular application like sqlserver ,ms word

how to check the usage of ram and cpu Performance for the particular application like sqlserver ,ms word
ranki

Hi,
You can use Performance Monitor and add the required counters.
Check the below Technet article on Performance Monitor.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc749249.aspx
Below are the steps to monitor the process in Performance Monitor.
- Go to the Performance Monitor.
- Right-click on the graph and select "Add Counters".
- In the "Available counters" list, open the "Process" section by clicking on the down arrow next to it. Select "% Processor Time" (and any other counter you want).
- In the "Instances of selected object" list, select the process you want to track. Then click on "Add >>" button. Click on OK.
Regards,
Jack
www.jijitechnologies.com

Satellite S50T-B - Adding RAM and swapping HDD for SSD

HI there,
I have recently purchased the Satelitte S50t-B laptop and have a few question about upgrading:
1. What is the recommended RAM to add (8GB)
2. What is the recommended SSD to add?
3. Are there any instructions to add RAM and an SSD to my laptop?
4. Will I void my warranty by installing more RAM and swapping the current hard drive for an SSD?
Thank you for your help

This notebook is listed on Toshiba page:
http://www.mytoshiba.com.au/products/computers/satellite/s50/pspq8a-008008/specifications
- What is the recommended RAM to add (8GB)
The unit supports 16GB RAM, so you can add an second PC3-12800 8GB DDR3L (1600Mhz) SO-DIMM module (i.e PA5104U-1M8G)
- 2. What is the recommended SSD to add?
Its up to you there are different SSD drive on the market and most of the 2.5 SATA SSD drives should be compatible.
- 3. Are there any instructions to add RAM and an SSD to my laptop?
It looks like both parts (RAM as well as SSD/HDD) are not user upgradable since there is no separate access to the memory or HDD bay. This means that whole plastic cover at the bottom of the unit needs to be remove in order to get access to these part.
But as far as I know this would cancel the device warranty!!!
- 4. Will I void my warranty by installing more RAM and swapping the current hard drive for an SSD?
If you want to keep the warranty valid, such upgrade should be performed by authorized engineer.

Macbook screen cracked, HD and performance issues

I am definitely disappointed with my computer.
I have a Macbook 13.3" 2.4Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo 4Gb 160Gb HD, Serial#: W8**VM0P5, and within 1,5 year I have faced many issues, which are related here:
September 24th, 2008
O.S. CRASHES
I bought it in late September 2008, in Cologne, Germany, at the reseller "Compustore PC Gmbh", and also asked 4Gb Ram, and a Wireless mighty mouse.
After changing the Ram memory, i went home; and a few days later, the problems came. Sometimes, the system crashed suddenly, showing the grey screen: "You must restart your computer". I thought it was normal, and continued to use, when it became more frequently (Picture: http://picasaweb.google.com/gstorck/MacbookProblems#5476986272817173138). It was little strange for a new laptop, and then I took it back to the store to fix it. The seller just took a look, changed some configurations, and gave me back again. I did this twice, and had to get back to the store for the third time, due to new crashes and some lack of performance. Then the seller replaced the Ram memory, with new 4Gb.
After that, the system worked more stable; the problem happened some two or three times after some months, but it was ok.
November 9th, 2009
HD Problems
One year later, in late 2009, I purchased a Mac OS update, the Snow Leopard. I was back to Brazil, where I live till today. During the OS installation, something went wrong and it couldn't be completed. Mac asked me to restart the computer, but then the system didn't start anymore; some files were corrupted. I guess there was not enough space to install the update, so it was not completed; but it should be no reason to the corruption of the OS.
November 10th, 2009
I took my computer to the local Apple technical support, the "Omni Informatica", in Curitiba, PR, Brazil, to format the HD and reinstall the Snow Leopard. As I needed more space, I also changed my original 160Gb HD for a new 250Gb Western Digital HD. The service was finished in Nov 17th.
I noticed also little cracks in the laptop case, but I had no time to insist with the bad local technical support to repair it (I know Apple already acknowledged this problem.) They said, at first, that they would have to ask the Apple USA to send the body, or something like that.
(Pictures:http://picasaweb.google.com/gstorck/MacbookProblems#5476986477312032226)
January 12th, 2010.
SCREEN CRACKED
The reinstallation was ok, and the laptop was running well. Suddenly, when I take the Macbook from the case and open it on my desk, something pretty wrong appears: a large crack on the lower right corner of the screen.
It was not dropped, it was not crashed, and I did not "close it with a pen inside".
The screen simply cracked. And as so many similar problems with another users I could easily find on the web, I really expect Apple to admit it as a Manufacture's fault. The local technical support said it is no other thing except I hit the laptop, or dropped it, so it's all my fault. (See Picture 3)
The only thing they can offer me is to repair the screen for R$1200. I am definitely not going to pay for this; a "normal" and good pc laptop costs this price (And a new basic macbook costs today R$2400).
If the problems were just it, it would be not so bad.
(Pictures: http://picasaweb.google.com/gstorck/MacbookProblems#5476986361400585122)
February 11th, 2010
HD FAILURE
After 1 month, on Feb 11th, my new 250Gb HD simply stopped working. Different from the first time, that the HD was just corrupted, this time it has really broken, it died. I had it all backed up, but I have lost the HD.
Back again to the technical assistance, they said to me the problem was the same that cracked my screen: my fault, on letting the laptop fall, or hitting it with some kind of pressure. They couldn't do anything, and even the Western Digital 3-month Warranty would not cover this type of problem ("user's misuse").
May 28th, 2010
DECREASE IN PERFORMANCE
I'm working again with the original 160Gb HD (formatted and reinstalled), and some other external drives to store my files.
It's been quite difficult to deal with all this Data and Screen problems, and now the Macbook's performance is decreasing every day. It's been slower to process operations and to launch the applications. Sometimes, the system does not even sleep anymore when the laptop is closed, or it takes so long time to sleep that it just sleeps when I open it again. Besides, sometimes the mouse pointer disappear, and some bizarre graphics take its place.
Don't forget: It's a 1,5-year-old Macbook, with 2.4GHz, 4Gb RAM and the O.S. is installed for no longer than 4 months. It is supposed to work better, I guess.
I saved a lot of money to buy a good computer, and to get rid of the endless issues I had with PCs. That issues never were so serious with the ones I face now with Macbook.
Even if I pay R$1200 to replace the screen, with the money I don't have, I would still stand these performance issues, which seem to have come with this problematical laptop. I hope to have some solution from Apple, if it want to deliver what it promises and want to keep a customer.
Otherwise, I will have to change to another system platform and another computer manufacturer, to see if I stop throwing money away with these devices. I think that maybe at least, the cost-benefit ratio will be higher.
Did anybody receive contact from Apple support about these screen problems?
Guilherme R. Storck
Apple user since 2008
<Edited By Host>
gstorck (at) gmail (dot) com

Well, your first issue is pretty clearly just some bad RAM, and it sounds like even the replacement RAM was bad. Who knows if the people who put it in had any kind of clue what they were doing. I've seen repair shops where people are smoking in the same room they do repairs.
Second problem sounds typical of a failing HDD. It's a fairly common problem with laptops... Apple, Dell, Lenovo, HP, Acer... Probably the single most common problem with laptops no matter who makes them. People get this notion in their heads that the "portable" aspect of laptops means you can pick them up and carry them all over while turned on. Which you can... If you don't mind dramatically shortening the life of the HDD. What "portable" REALLY means with laptops, is that they are easy to move if you put them into a powered down state. They should NEVER be moved around when in normal operation. And since you seem to do a bit of traveling, if you're on a plan, and there's turbulence, you should shut the laptop off until it smooths out.
The screen cracking could have something to do with the rather sudden change in climate. Germany isn't exactly the frozen tundra, but it is a pretty different climate from Brazil, and changes in things like humidity could cause problems. The laws of thermodynamics tell us that things expand as they heat up, so if there's already a crack somewhere, it could easily get worse as a result of increased heat.
And since your initial hard drive was already starting to fail, it hasn't magically stopped failing since being removed from the system, so obviously performance is going to get worse.
At this point, it's pretty much impossible to tell where the damage was done, so you're probably just out of luck. The people in Germany could have screwed something up, or the people in Brazil, it could have been environmental damage, and it's possible the defect was always there, it just didn't manifest until recently. There's just no way to tell for sure. So Apple is unlikely to do anything for you.

Cache and performance issue in browsing SSAS cube using Excel for first time

Hello Group Members,
I am facing a cache and performance issue for the first time, when I try to open a SSAS cube connection using Excel (using Data tab -> From Other Sources --> From Analysis Services) after daily cube refresh. In end users
system (8 GB RAM), for the first time, it takes 10 minutes to open the cube. From next run onwards, its open up quickly within 10 secs.
We have daily ETL process running in high end servers. The configuration of dedicated SSAS cube server is 8 core, 64GB RAM. In total we have 4 cubes - out of which for 3 is full cube refresh and 1 is incremental refresh. We have seen after
daily cube refresh, it takes 10 odd minutes to open the cube in end users system. From next time onwards, it opens up really fast with 10 secs. After cube refresh, in server systems (16 GB RAM), it takes 2 odd minutes to open the cube.
Is there, any way we could reduce the time taken for first attempt ?
Best Regards, Arka Mitra.

Thanks Richard and Charlie,
We have implemented the solution/suggestions in our DEV environment and we have seen a definite improvement. We are waiting this to be deployed in UAT environment to note down the actual performance and time improvement while browsing the cube for the
first time after daily cube refresh.
Guys,
This is what we have done:
We have 4 cube databases and each cube db has 1-8 cubes.
1. We are doing daily cube refresh using SQL jobs as follows:
<Batch xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/analysisservices/2003/engine">
<Parallel>
<Process xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ddl2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/analysisservices/2003/engine/2" xmlns:ddl2_2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/analysisservices/2003/engine/2/2" xmlns:ddl100_100="http://schemas.microsoft.com/analysisservices/2008/engine/100/100" xmlns:ddl200="http://schemas.microsoft.com/analysisservices/2010/engine/200" xmlns:ddl200_200="http://schemas.microsoft.com/analysisservices/2010/engine/200/200">
<Object>
<DatabaseID>FINANCE CUBES</DatabaseID>
</Object>
<Type>ProcessFull</Type>
<WriteBackTableCreation>UseExisting</WriteBackTableCreation>
</Process>
</Parallel>
</Batch>
2. Next we are creating a separate SQL job (Cache Warming - Profitability Analysis) for cube cache warming for each single cube in each cube db like:
CREATE CACHE FOR [Profit Analysis] AS
{[Measures].members}
*[TIME].[FINANCIAL QUARTER].[FINANCIAL QUARTER]
3. Finally after each cube refresh step, we are creating a new step of type T-SQL where we are calling these individual steps:
EXEC dbo.sp_start_job N'Cache Warming - Profit Analysis';
GO
I will update the post after I receive the actual im[provement from UAT/ Production environment.
Best Regards, Arka Mitra.

In need of greater clarity on RAM and 64 Bit versus 32 Bit Apps...

i have 13 GB of RAM in my MacPro, and i am running Leopard. i noted, however, that Adobe Photoshop only appears to recognize 3072 mb of RAM (3 Gb) as it is still a 32 bit program. 32 bit programs can still only recognize a max of 3 Gb of memory.
i read somewhere that while Photoshop does not recognize all the RAM, that performance is increased even so, if you have more than 3 Gb of RAM; which would make sense as you can allocate that much to Photoshop and still have left over RAM for your system and other apps.
When i noticed that Photoshop did not recognize all my RAM i was extremely disheartened. After all, i did splurge quite a bit on the RAM in hopes of dramatically increasing performance in Photoshop.
But, as i think about it more, while Photoshop can only see 3 Gb of RAM, having 13 GB means that i can run more RAM intensive programs and each program will have enough RAM available. But i wonder what that means in terms of keeping up with the processors?
i have been in the habit of closing most programs when working in a RAM intensive program such as Photoshop to improve performance. But, i am thinking that i no longer have to really worry about this?
i would appreciate a discussion of this to add some clarity to the 32 bit/64 bit issue and RAM allocation on the MacPro.

Hello Gene.
My understanding is quite the same, 32bit programs theoricaly can't allocate more than 4G of RAM, maybe the 3G that you are talking about are anoter level of limitation, or caused by some allocations mechanisms beyond my knowledge.
When using your computer, take a look at Activity Monitor, and see how much RAM is free. As long as you have enough RAM, there is no need to close applications, since the memory manager will not start swapping on disk. Well, that said, I think it may improbe performance to close application to avoid memory fragmentation, but the impact is not the same.
And you're right, it is useless to have that much RAM for a single processus, but since Mac OS X has a pretty good multitasking, you can run lot of processes, each one allowed to use 4G of RAM, so that you keep performances even with lots of big applications launched.
Now, be patient, and wait for a full 64bit version of Photoshop to really enjoy your RAM
P.S. Maybe some plugins can detach new processes and get their own allocation space for some heavy filter operation ? If someone know, please clarify, that would be interesting.

What is kernel_task, and why is it taking up so much RAM and CPU?

I have recently upgraded to OS X Mavericks, and despite promises of extreme performance, my MPB has been running slower than ever before. According to Activity Monitor, "kernal_task" is taking up 600+ MB of RAM and hasn't dropped since I upgraded. It's also been taking between 4% and 8% of my CPU. When I first upgraded, there was a little alert message that said it was optomizing my system, and it may slow down the computer and decrease battery life. The message lasted for two days, then finally went away. (I didn't close it, so I assumed it had finished.) However, kernal_task, which I thought was the optomization, has been on the top of the list of RAM usage and top 3 on the list of % CPU since I upgraded. PLEASE tell me what it is, and how I can decrease it's toll on my performance! It won't let me stop the task or even get more information on it when I select it on the list of processes. Also, on a side note, Activity Monitor used to let you change its dock icon to a pie chart showing memory usage. Unfortunately, this feature seems to be gone. Is there any way I can get it back or use a different app? I don't want to have it open on top of my stuff or as a window, I would like to see it in the dock. In fact, the chart isn't even in the memory tab of the Activity Monitor application anymore!
Thank you so much to whoever can help me out in my panic and frustration. For the record, I am actually really great at computers, but I turned to the support community because I'm sure there's someone out there with more knowledge than me, even though I'm not a tech-illiterate person...
Dan
Specs: (Per the System Information App)
Model Name:          MacBook Pro
Model Identifier:          MacBookPro6,1
Processor Name:          Intel Core i7
Processor Speed:          2.8 GHz
Number of Processors:          1
Total Number of Cores:          2
L2 Cache (per Core):          256 KB
L3 Cache:          4 MB
Memory:          8 GB
Processor Interconnect Speed:          4.8 GT/s
Boot ROM Version:          MBP61.0057.B0F
SMC Version (system):          1.57f18
Sudden Motion Sensor:
State:          Enabled
Also, I'm on a MacBook Pro 17" with a 500GB hard drive (and only 70GB free, but I use an external 2TB as my main drive). It is a mid-2010 build, and I bought it certified refurbished.

That's not very high. Mine is over 1 GB. Typical is around 5-800 GBs depending upon what tasks are running.
You don't need to add more RAM, just be careful not to run more concurrent tasks than are appropriate for your memory usage profile. It's really not a big deal unless it gets to 600 GBs. Then you have a problem.
I disagree with McBlob about free disk space. Keep at least 10% of the drive's capacity as free space. For you that's 50 GBs, and that's adequate.

About Mac Pro RAM and one "Nehalem" Processor 2.8 vs 3.2

Hi,
Unfortunately I don't have so much money to spend but I find Apple products very high quality and in same time very expensive, specially for my country (Russia), according to statistic, it’s less then 1% of people that using Mac Pro in here, my country really poor :/
I never use Mac before, but I think that time is come and I would like to buy one on my birthday soon (22 November). I really tired of my crazy PC with Vista, it’s always bugs lags, and so on, it’s poor machine. I can buy new PC with i7, nice performances or buy Mac, but I think, Mac will be more quality and stable.
I'm web designer and programmer and using my PC with Adobe programs, normally Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, very rare with After Effect (1 day per month). Sometimes I’m playing games like Dragon Age or CS:Source, Starcraft2. But I got PS3, but unfortunately it’s connected to our main home TV, and I can’t play PS3 because all day this TV watching my family :/ lol
I’m not sure if there are any way to connect PS3 to TV and computer screen at the same time… but it’s another question.
Now about Mac I'm wondering of buying cheapest Mac Pro 2010:
# One 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Nehalem”
# 3GB (3x1GB)
# 1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive
# ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
# One 18x SuperDrive
But at the same time, I wondering about how long time I will be able to use this Mac, and enjoy it before it will come too old. Because I just can’t spend and buy Mac every 2-3 years.
I’m looking forward to use it for 4-5 years I think or so. I know it’s very hard question and I’m not really sure if it’s right to discuss it, but I’m saying just what I think.
And maybe because of this, it’s better to order processor with 3.2Ghz, and a bit more RAM (8GB (4x2GB))? What you think?
And what will be the different between this 2 processors and more RAM? Because it will be +800 USD or so, and it’s very expensive for me (pay addition 800 Dollars), I just want to ask you if it will costs this money. Unfortunately I can’t spend more money on Mac to buy 6-core Westmare and more RAM But I think cheapest Mac, for my tasks already very powerful and awesome, what you think?
And if you’ll advice me, not to pay addition 400 USD for +0.4Ghz, and the different is very little, then what you think about addition Ram for stock MAC?

Thank you hatter.
I'm appreciate for your help and answer, and this amazing links! They are very helpful.
I find some interesting information. And most interesting is SSD thing. But unfortunately it's very expensive for me
I got 2 ways to go, and I really confused now. I take a look what you said, about making a PC with i7. And here is what I find on our Russian market - only 1 company which offers high quality custom PC's with up to 3 years guarantee.
What they can offer:
Price: $2060
(Basic Config: DEPO Ego Z71i)
OS:
Microsoft® Windows 7 Home Premium RUS 32-bit
or
Microsoft® Windows 7 Home Premium RUS 64-bit
MotherBoard:
*ASUS P6T, Intel®X58 chipset , DDR3, ATX*
CPU:
*Intel® Core™ i7 Processor 930 (4-Cores, 2.80GHz, 4.8 GT/s, 8Mb)*
Intel® Core™ i7 Processor 950 (4-Cores, 3.06GHz, 4.8 GT/s, 8Mb) +$365
Intel® Core™ i7 Processor Extreme Edition 980X (6-Cores, 3.33GHz, 6.4 GT/s, 12Mb) +$1150
RAM:
*3Gb DDR3-1600 Corsair Dominator, Triple Channel*
6Gb DDR3-1600 Corsair , Triple Channel +$40
12Gb DDR3-1600 Corsair , Triple Channel +$260
HDD1:
*1TB SATA hard drive (7200rpm)*
2 x 1TB SATA hard drive (7200rpm) +$80
4 x 1TB SATA hard drive (7200rpm) +$230
2 x 2TB SATA hard drive (7200rpm) +$355
4 x 2TB SATA hard drive (7200rpm) +$790
HDD2:
WD VelociRaptor 150GB, 10000rpm, 16Mb cache, SATA-II +$175
2.5" 64GB SSD SATA II +$205
WD VelociRaptor 300GB, 10000rpm, 16Mb cache, SATA-II +$285
2.5" 128GB SSD SATA II +$405
RAID:
RAID0 (required minimum 2 HDD) +$10
RAID1 (required minimum 2 HDD) +$10
Optical Drive 5.25":
*DVD±RW/CD-RW/DVD 16x4x/5xDL/16x4x/16x/48x/24x/48x*
BD-ROM&DVD RAM&DVD±R/RW, 5x/5x/12(R9 6)x/6x/12(R9 4)x/6x/12x/24x/24x/32x +$130
SuperMulti Blu-Ray ReWriter +$235
Card Reader 3.5":
*Card Reader/Writer 50 in 1 (CF/MD/SM/MS/SD/MMC)*
Video:
*ATI Radeon™ HD 5870 (1024МБ, PCI-E TV-out DVI+HDMI)*
1536MB NVIDIA GeForce 480GTX PCI-E DVI +$110
2x ATI Radeon™ HD 5850 (1024МБ, PCI-E TV-out DVI+HDMI) +$230
2x ATI Radeon™ HD 5870 (1024МБ, PCI-E TV-out DVI+HDMI) +$490
Sound:
*Realtek 7.1 (integrated)*
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi™ Titanium Fatal1ty Champion Series +$400
Power:
*800W (12sm)*
1000W (14sm) +$50
1200W (14sm) +$55
WiFi:
*WLAN 802.11bg*
Mouse + KeyBoard: (lol)
Without mouse and keyboard -$75
Cordless Desktop® Wave Pro™ +$75
Maitance:
*1 Year*
2 Years +$10
3 Years +$20
Ok, that’s it.
DEPO - It’s our Russian company so I can’t give you link on English web page, but if you are interesting to view it, maybe with Google translate:
http://www.depo.ru/H/MDL658/1000004953/zconfigurator.aspx
And I’m not really sure, if they offer high quality components, and I can’t check it.
I just don’t want to repeat same experience like with my previous computer – I bought top computer for very high price with top components, but everything was bugging, it’s terrible, I’m working with this computer 3 years now (it’s cored 2 duo with radeon x1900 and vista :S video card - without supporting DX10-11, 2 Hdd 500Gb RAID 0, - maximum lags – I cant’ even make a diagnostics… crazy). And I’m so sad about this computer, and I don’t want to repeat same experience. That’s why I wonder about Mac Pro or any other quolity PC, but price is too high, or if I buy just normal Mac Pro:
• One 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Nehalem”
• 3GB (3x1GB)
• 1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive
• ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
• One 18x SuperDrive
• Apple Magic Mouse
• Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (English) & User's Guide
For 2499 USD, I still need to add more RAM, and It will costs 2874 USD with 8 Gb, but without changing Processor and/or HDD for SSD to speed up computer like **** and enjoy it every minute. I maximum can spend 3000-3200 USD for new computer. And all I want, to enjoy it’s stability and speed. To load photoshop in less then 5 seconds, working with AE a bit, 3dmax a bit, play a bit. Maybe I want to much :/

Ram and Final Cut Pro Questions...

Ok, so I have a 2.66 Mac Pro with 2GB of RAM. I am now starting to work with HD content, so I just got 2 more GB of RAM from OWC. But I've been reading that I should probably have more than 4GB of RAM to work with HD content. I have the ATI card on the Mac Pro btw.
I just want peoples' opinion on this. Is 4GB enough? If not, I get confused about the Ram's performance on the Mac Pro. Don't I have to get to 8GB of Ram in order to get the RAM to act quickly? I'm not sure how all that works, but I just remember reading on here ram should be doubled for its bandwidth to reach max potential. Does that mean 6GB of RAM will be fine? Or does it have to be 2, 4, 8, 16 GB of RAM for it to be the fastest it can be? Does it slow it down if I use 6GB of RAM?
I can probably afford 2 more GB of RAM, but I don't want to put 6 in my system if it actually slows it down. Thanks for your help!

Well, the system came with 4 X 512MB of Ram, so I'm
getting 2 x 1GB of Ram in the mail. That'll give me
6 DIMMS. I could've sworn that I had to match DIMMS
top to bottom for it to work. But you're saying to
put 4 DIMMS to fill up the top tray and then just
place the remaining 2 DIMMS on the bottom tray? Am I
understanding that correctly?
Yes. Each riser board has two pairs of slots, numbered 0 through 3. You MUST match 0 and 1 with the same type and size of RAM if you fill those slots on a board, and you MUST match 2 and 3. Otherwise, you can put whatever pairs you want on whatever boards.
Performance-wise, though, you get the best results by:
1) Filling both RAM boards' 0 and 1 slots with the same size and type of RAM. Same with 2 and 3 on both boards.
2) Placing dual rank (usually 1GB or higher capacity) RAM in 0 and 1 on both boards, as those are the slots that are usually hit first, and dual rank RAM is faster.
If you can afford it, you might consider getting an additional 2x1GB pair of the same brand you already have. Then, you could put those 4 modules in the 0 and 1 slots on each board and the 512 modules in 2 and 3. This will put your faster dual-rank RAM in the lower numbered slots, and will make sure that module sizes are matched across boards, which will maximize performance.
Also, I tend to have a lot of software open when I
edit. Soundtrack, Motion, Livetype, FCP, soon CS3
and other random software is usually open when I edit
(like iChat and Mail). Will 4GB still be enough you
think? I didn't mention all that in my first post,
so I apologize.
If you're running all of that, you might well find that extra RAM is helpful, particularly if you're processing in the background. Even if not, switching between applications will be smoother and faster with more RAM. This is another good reason to think about getting another 2x1GB pair.
Also, this whole Ram bandwidth thing has me confused.
If I do end up getting 6GB of Ram (4 x 1GB and 4 X
512MB)does that slow down my Ram? Does the fact
that I have 2 different types of DIMMS slow down my
Ram? It's all so confusing
A tiny little bit that you may not notice, and no.
Right now you have 4x512MB in your 0 and 1 slots. This is pretty optimal for a setup of 512 MB modules, because having the same type of RAM paired across boards in the same numbered slots increases your memory performance.
If you add 2x1GB in the 2 and 3 slots on one board, your existing memory (the original 4x512MB modules) will still be able to transfer data at just as high a rate as before. The 2x1GB modules in 2 and 3 will be slower because they're not paired with another 2x1GB pair on the other board, but that will only affect accesses to the data stored in those modules, which the system will tend to use last.
What will slow down somewhat is that each request the CPU makes to transfer data from your existing 4x512MB RAM will take a bit longer to start because you have put modules in the 2 and 3 slots on one of the boards. Once it gets going, the transfer will happen at just as high a rate, but the setup time is longer by a small amount.
Chances are, the performance improvement you'll see with the extra RAM running all those apps will totally overwhelm any such slowdown. Note that I don't know of anyone who's benchmarked a real impact of that, all the discussions I've seen about such a slowdown are just theory.
However: those 1 GB modules in 2 and 3 will operate at a slower rate than they could because you don't have another 1 GB pair on the other board matched up with them. That's why I suggested getting a 2nd pair of 1 GB modules for the other board.
Finally, if you do get 4x1GB, swapping those 1 GB modules into the 0 and 1 slots will ensure that they get used first, and since most 1GB modules are substantially faster than the 512 MB modules, you'll want that for best performance. However, unless you get a couple of additional 1 GB modules to fill out the set of four, I would not recommend swapping the 512 MB modules into different slots. The fact that you have a matched set of 4x512 in slots 0 and 1 is a big speed benefit if you don't get a matched 4x1GB set for your expansion.
I hope that I haven't confused the situation...
-- Mark
4-core 3 GHz Mac Pro w/ 4.5 TB HDD and 10 GB RAM, 17 Macbook Pro 2.16 GHz

Ram and Memory

Hi I was wondering if I upgrade my memory do I need to upgrade the ram too? For example if I upgrade my memory from 80 to 100 GB do I have to upgrade my ram from 1 to 2 gb's? Will there be an repercussions? Thanks

Just to help explain a little more... When you say "upgrade my memory from 80 to 100 GB" what you are actually saying is "upgrade your hard drive from 80 to 100 GB". It's not very uncommon for people to confuse the two. RAM and memory are actually the same thing (RAM=Random Access Memory). Think of it this way... the RAM is the computers memory... just like a persons memory. If someone asks you a question, and you know the answer, you can respond instantly. Think of your hard drive as storage... or like a library. If someone asks you a question, and you don't know the answer... you may have to look it up... which would take much more time than if you just knew the answer. Increasing your RAM (memory) in your computer will almost always give you a bigger performance boost than increasing your hard drive size (up to a certain point). There is no harm in upgrading one and not the other. A MacBook should run fine with 1GB of memory. Depending on what you use it for, 2GB certainly won't hurt.
My concern would be that it sounds like you may not be too familiar with computers. While replacing a hard drive in a MacBook is very easy, you should consider things like backing up any information you may currently have on your drive because you will need to either make a copy of your current drive and copy it on to your new drive... or do a clean install of OS X on your new drive and just copy over your data.
It's possible that you don't have a MacBook yet and are just asking because you plan on getting one and you're not sure if you get the larger hard drive, do you need to get more memory. If that's the case, feel free up upgrade to either. Like I said, 1 GB for a MacBook is generally fine. A larger hard drive is nice to have if you plan to install lots of programs, music, videos, etc... or if your work requires lots of storage.

Slow so i upgraded mem ram and still no faster

my new 2000 hp notebook came with 4gb ram and is really slow so i was told to upgrade it to 8gb and it would speed up my notebook alot. i bought the 8gb ram ($85) and installed it only to find out my notebook is no faster at all. why is that?? how do i make my notebook faster?? its brand new and this is aggrivating

Hi,
Normally from 1Gb to 2Gb you can see a lot faster; from 2Gb to 4Gb a little bit faster but from 4Gb to 8Gb you can't see this unless you open many applications at the same time and switching around specially if your applications support DIM (not frequently loading data from disk, keep data in memory). HP 2000 is a series of many models, what is yours ? What is it OS, 32bit or 64bit. From my testing, using SSD will gain much more benefit interms of price/performance.
Regards.
BH
**Click the KUDOS thumb up on the left to say 'Thanks'**
Make it easier for other people to find solutions by marking a Reply 'Accept as Solution' if it solves your problem.

We want new update on both rams and same update.

nokia x3-02 need new update. Please nokia make new update with those change log:
1.use nokia xpress in defult browsin in the phone.
2. Change all icons to symbin anna.
3.Improved phone network and internet
4. Internet disable application
5. Nokia maps built in this phone.
6. Update all application to new version(mail,chat,opera,store,maps,music player,radio player with save support, brightness control, high volum warning, and add more apps and games+ update built in apps)
7.add more style in menu.
8.add some touch feuture.
9. Improved performance and manageing items in phone.
This update should come or make for both rams and in all countrys. If you guys not make this update stop selling this phone and give our money back.

Wrong place,contact nokia support via links at end of page.
If i have helped at all a click on the white star below would be nice thanks.
Now using the Lumia 1520

System and performance slowing down even after Diskwarrior use?

i own a G5 Powermac
it seems to be getting slower. i have had it a year and a half. i have 2 G ram and it is a dual processor so i don't really understand why it should be going more slowly at all. I don' even burden it with heavy duty programs like Final cut because it is not right in the head.
what do you recommend?
does this happen often?
any ideas?
mediusCentral

Mac's get slower the more the boot drive is filled past 50% and really slow when nearly full.
Keep your boot drive less than 80% and ideally less than 50% filled.
Learn to clone your boot drive to a external drive and back again, this will optimize the drive and increase performance as Mac OS X is constantly accessing the boot drive for something or another.
You'll need a cloning software that will copy the entire drive, just copying folders won't work due to invisible and locked system files.

RAM and performance

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for