RAM pairs - a real benefit?

Hi,
I have 2.4ghz early 08 MBP with the original 2gb of ram. I need to upgrade the ram as the software I use is very memory intensive. I have been given a crucial sodim which is now running in the MBP but I am really wanting th max it out. How I thought of just buying another 2gb from crucial to give me 4gb altogher BUT I have just realised that one is advised to buy in pairs to that they preform better using duel channel. My question is just how much better will identical pairs preform compaired to if I just bought another single 2gb and popped it in next to my current crucial one?
Iv seached the forum here but I can't find anything that says exactly what the preformance difference wil be.
If identical pairs 2gb x 2 is 10 out of 10 what a new single 2gb and my current 2gb one give me out of 10?
Thanks
phil

If identical pairs 2gb x 2 is 10 out of 10 what a new single 2gb and my current 2gb one give me out of 10?
Check System Profiler's Memory report first. It will show how your two RAM slots are currently populated.
My Late 2007 MBP came with two 1G modules and I suspect yours may have that same arrangement. If both slots are already used, ordering two 2GB modules is the only solution to maintain the matching sizes.

Similar Messages

  • Black magic and Adobe After effect cs6 Ram Preview not real time

    Hello,
    I'm on a MAC PRO with the OS 10.6.8 and 8Go Ram, the problem is when i turn on my preview video on the Blackmagic the video monitor is not in real time and the after effect is so slow. When i put it off (computer monitor only) it's ok but i havn't my video monitor of course....and i need it. Is there some tricks for having my black magic (1080 i 50) ON and a RAM Preview in real time ??? ! My drivers Black magic is the 9.5.3 it's the highest driver for MAC OS 10.6.8 + ADOBE CS6+ FCP7.  Thanks for the read. ( i tried update adobe, change qt library, change aspect ratio, pixel, preview ram settings, change drivers black magic and other but nothing work )

    What is the color bit depth of your project? (8, 16 or 32?) Have you changed that recently, or have you changed the frame rate or frame size of your comp?
    Performance with video preview to an external monitor is almost always related to the pure bandwidth requirements of the frames you're sending to it. If the frames require more memory, it may be slower. Frame size, frame rate, and color bit depth all affect the memory requirements of the frames.
    If none of those parameters has changed, troubleshoot the general performance of your machine. If there are other processes (look in Activity Monitor) that are using significant processor and/or memory resources, they may be causing a bottleneck for the frames getting out.

  • Is there a real benefit between airport express and extreme if you do not have the platforms with ac norm?

    Is there a real benefit between airport extreme vs express if your pc is not in the same ac norm?

    Not a lot, unless you plan to connect to the AirPort using a wired Ethernet connection, or connect a hard drive to the AirPort.
    The Ethernet ports on the AirPort Extreme are 10 times faster than the ports on an Express. You can connect a hard drive to the USB port on the AirPort Extreme. You can't on the AirPort Express.
    There are more wireless antennas in the "new" AirPort Extreme and they are located up at the top of the "tower". That might improve things a bit as well.

  • After Effects will not RAM Preview in real time

    Recently I have started working on a new project and can't work on it because my RAM Previews are not in real time anymore. I have only had this problem since I started this project a few days ago. Every other project I have done I've never had this problem before.
    I have 10 GB of ram allocated to After Effects, my clips are in 59.94 fps which I have set the composition to as well. When I ram preview it tells me 50.019/59.94 I know what this mean, I understand it's telling me to change my composition's frame rate to 50 frames, however if I do this then music plays too slow. Right now my problem is that the clips aren't playing fast enough for me to see if my editing and time syncing is acurate. When I render the video everything is synced up fine but this is making my editing very inconvenient and I would like a fix please. I tried: Clearing my disk and media cache, unchecking "render multiple frames at once", taking off all effects on the clips, using different clips, AND even reinstalling After Effects CS6 but nothing has worked. I really badly need a fix to this problem. Any help would be greatly appreciated thanks!!

    > The clips are in 59.94 frames, so the composition is in 59.94 frames. If when I upload to the internet it goes down in frame rate so be it.
    You are misunderstanding the typical video workflow.
    Composition setting are supposed to match the characteristics of the intended output, not necessarily the characteristics of the imported footage. This is how you ensure that what you preview exactly matches what you output and what your viewers will see. Consider, also, that most compositions use assets with many different frame rates, sizes, etc.
    > I do have a large monitor but I've been using this monitor since December and haven't had a problem with it until now.
    Great. But you're having a problem now. And it's because of a bottleneck somewhere between your RAM and drawing the pixels to the screen. One more reason that this might be happening is that you're running a GPU-heavy application; note that web browsers can also be GPU hogs these days.

  • Performance in RAM pairs?

    I have a stock 1.83 macbook. If I was to upgrade to 1GB ram, using paired ram sticks, would the difference be much different than sticking 1gb atick in and having 1.25GB, when it is not in pairs?

    http://eshop.macsales.com/Reviews/MacBook/Testing/Memory_Benchmarks
    Obviously, it's in this shop's best interests to convince you to purchase as much memory as possible, but the benchmarks they show on their site show that whether you match or not, you'll see a big difference over the standard 512MB. In your position, I would purchase the 1GB single-stick upgrade. Then you'd have the option later of putting in another and having the full 2GB.

  • RAM Preview in real time with Matrox Mini

    I followed this thread with interest. I upgraded from Production Premium CS5 to CS6 last month. I haven't been able to get Realtime RAM playback since. I'm also monitoring using a Matrox mini and am wondering if this is factoring into the problem. I recently replaced my mini because I was losing communication with the box. I did notice, with the box out of the equation, that RAM playback was in realtime. My test comp runs 5 seconds at 29.97 fps, just a photo moving from point a to b to c, with blur, over black. When I try RAM playback, the message I see is: fps 11.xxx (xxx because the frames vary slightly throughout playback)/29.97. Note: Zoom in not 100%. Interesting thing is that when I delete the photo layer and just keep the black, RAM playback seems fine.
    I did adjust my RAM allocation a little, to no effect. Here are my specs:
    Computer:
    Windows 7 Professional, SP1
    i7-4930k 3.4 GHz (6 cores, 12 with hyperthreading)
    RAM: 32 GB
    GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
    Here are some memory settings:
    Installed RAM: 31.9 GB
    RAM for other applications: 6 GB
    RAM shared by AE, Premiere, Prelude, Encore, Adobe Media Encoder, Photoshop: 25.9
    Installed CPUs: 12
    CPU reserved for other applications: 2
    RAM per CPU: 2 GB
    Actual CPUs that will be used: 8
    Preview info:
    Texture memory: 796 MB
    Ray-tracing: GPU
    Open GL
    Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
    Versions: 2/1/2
    Total memory: 1.94 GB
    Shader model: 4.0 or later
    Cuda
    Driver version: 6.0
    Devices: 1 (GeForce GTX 770)
    GeForce GTX 770
    Current Usable Memory: 1.68 GB (at application launch)
    Maximum Usable Memory: 2.00 GB
    Let me know what else I can tell you. Thanks for any suggestions.

    If you disable video preview in After Effects to the Matrox device, does RAM preview run in real time?
    In After Effects CS6: Preferences > Video Preview, set Output Device to Computer Monitor Only. Matrox devices may also require you to disable WYSIWYG preview in their control panel.
    When video preview is enabled, every frame is transcoded on the fly at display time to the format (dimensions, PAR, frame rate) requested by the device. This requires some memory and processor power and has an impact on performance. If having video preview enabled is in fact contributing to the issue, you can reduce the memory requirements of the frame (and therefore the processing power required) by reducing the RAM preview frame rate or resolution values in the Preview panel, reduce the project color depth, or disable color management in the Project Settings.
    Worth noting here that After Effects CC 2014 (13.0) uses Mercury Transmit for video preview, instead of the older QuickTime and DirectShow technologies, and while it is still subject to the limitations above it provides better performance.

  • Ram (pairs)?

    i bought and installed 2 GB of patriot ram from newegg.com
    i did not get a 2gb pair (in the same package)
    i got two separate 1 GB sticks....
    is this a problem?

    Nope. I did the same thing and it works fine.
    Did you get THESE? If so, they are the same sticks I have and they have worked perfectly well since I installed them back in early July.

  • Optimized hotdesking - any real benefit?

    So in the advanced settings of the pool configuration, I see this option called "optimized hotdesking". It sounds great -- I mean we want everything optimized and fast right? We have 5 pools, so I enabled it on one and made sure it was not enabled on another, and then did a little basic testing. I disconnected and reconnected as fast as possible several times and timed myself. My results showed that I could connect, disconnect, and reconnect in 12 seconds with "optimized" hotdesking, and without it I needed 13 seconds on average. And that one second difference could simply have been a small correction in my password entry or something.
    Has anybody noticed any big advantage of using it vs not using it? Am I leaving processes open on my servers and using their memory?
    Also, what if a user initiates their session on one thin client connected to server A, then walks down the hall to a different thin client connected to server B -- uttsc has to be launched from the B server, so is that user seeing any benefit of this feature?
    I'm just hoping someone here can give me more than a 1 sentence description of this feature!
    thanks in advance
    daniel

    So in the advanced settings of the pool configuration, I see this option called "optimized hotdesking". It sounds great -- I mean we want everything optimized and fast right? We have 5 pools, so I enabled it on one and made sure it was not enabled on another, and then did a little basic testing. I disconnected and reconnected as fast as possible several times and timed myself. My results showed that I could connect, disconnect, and reconnect in 12 seconds with "optimized" hotdesking, and without it I needed 13 seconds on average. And that one second difference could simply have been a small correction in my password entry or something.
    Has anybody noticed any big advantage of using it vs not using it? Am I leaving processes open on my servers and using their memory?
    Also, what if a user initiates their session on one thin client connected to server A, then walks down the hall to a different thin client connected to server B -- uttsc has to be launched from the B server, so is that user seeing any benefit of this feature?
    I'm just hoping someone here can give me more than a 1 sentence description of this feature!
    thanks in advance
    daniel

  • Unmatched RAM pairs

    Long story short I had to get a national computer store to replace two 1gig RAM sticks I had bought. They only had one in the store and got the other thru their web site. They are 1 gig Centon PC 3200's. I plugged them in and find they have different CAS #'s. One stick of this and my two original sticks are all PC3200U-303300. The other Centon stick is PC3200U-25440. I believe three have a 3.0 ns speed and the other a 2.5 ns speed. Will this cause me any problems? I got one opinion from the manufacturer, but after the nightmare I just went thru, I need a second opinion. (everything seems to be working fine)
    Rick

    Hi,
    All the manuals ONLY say to install RAM of equal size - not CAS speed.
    http://www.info.apple.com/usen/cip/pdf/g5/memory_c.pdf

  • After Effects cs6 RAM Preview NOT REAL TIME

    So every time I create a new composition at 59.94 fps and insert a video file (.wmv file usually) that is as well at 59.94 fps and I try to RAM Preview just the raw footage it says the same thing every time (the picture). I always change the quality to Quarter and I tried the 33.3% zoom and it doesn't help. I have the Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously box checked and I'm using 2 of my 4 CPUs and 6.4 GB of RAM available for AE... Any help?  
    My Computer specs: I have a Intel Core i5-4440 CPU @ 3.10GHz processor, 8 GB of RAM, A NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760
    If you need any other information please let me know and I'll give it to you. Thanks.

    Are you doing a RAM to preview or just pressing the spacebar? Are you new to aftereffects?
    FAQ: Why does RAM preview only play part of my composition?

  • 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

  • FREE RAM XP PRO for MAC?

    Just wondering if there is anything similiar to the PC program FreeRAM for Macs?
    This is a program that automatically or manually restores wasted RAM but I think that it only runs on Windows.
    thanks,
    frank

    Hello,
    Those types of programs have been available for PC's and Macs for years (though I don't know of any current version for OS X).
    In short, every one that has ever been released has later been proven to fail to accomplish what it claimed. Most of them, actually decrease the amount of free RAM (at minimum by the amount of space required for the controlling program). But, at best, no real benefit has been proven.
    I've tinkered with a few several years ago, and it turned-out to be artificial gains. No real gains. Just perceived benefits and no real actual memory savings / increase. Often, the computer would report more memory available, but in truth that wasn't the case.
    I would personally recommend staying away from such programs. Every time one has hit main-stream popularity, there was a mad rush mere months later to find a way to get rid of it.
    You will not be doing yourself any favors installing such programs.
    Aside from that, there has not yet been a memory management system released yet that surpasses OS X's management yet.
    I hope this helps.

  • On which drive should I put samples?  Is EXS, Ultrabeat, etc. streamed/ram?

    Hey, i am setting up the new iteration of my home studio. I upgraded to 7 Pro recently and am taking advantage of the new 500GB internal hard drive. My question is, should I relocate (via alias) my EXS24 and Ultrabeat samples to my new 500GB along with BFD?
    I ask this because I am not sure if those Logic instruments stream the audio from your HD or if they are loaded into RAM.
    If they are indeed streamed I will plop them with my BFD and leave my native OS drive to just app running and as scratch recording (later putting the audio recordings on the secondary 500GB drive). Any advice? Thanks!

    Greetings, Scroto.
    This is not a straighforward answer...
    EXS24 does its best to move what it needs into RAM. For instance, check out Options > Preferences on the EXS24 panel. You can even get the EXS24 to keep common samples in memory when switching songs.
    However, I prefer to have anything that might make the drive work hard on my system disk. So, samples and video are normally on my system disk so that Logic can stream quite happily to my scratch disk. Having said that, I've sometimes had jerky video (Logic gives priority to audio) so moving that file to the scratch disk has given me silky smooth playback.
    So, for my working rpactice at least, there are benefits in both methods. I have worked with people who put all AV material, including samples, projects (therefore including freeze files) and anything else on their scratch drives and then wonder why they get mixed results, including the dreaded out of sync message.
    I only have two high-performance drives but can see the real benefit of having a third FW drive which can then hold all samples, video material and so on, leaving the scratch disk for audio alone. I'd appreciate comments from anybody who has tried this.
    Pete

  • Macbook pro 2010: does a 1333 mHz RAM (mac 2011)work also in a macbook pro 2010 (1033 mHz RAM)?

    And an other question: putting 8 giga 1333 mHz instead of 4 giga 1033 will increase too much battery consumption?
    thanks for your answers

    Mac's are very picky about RAM, thus it is advised that you only use RAM spec'd for your machine. While the 1333 may or may not work, you won't receive the benefit of the increased speed, as your machine will default to the lower speed. Yes, more memory means more battery usage, heat, etc. More memory will not speed up your computer. The real benefit to more memory is the ability to run more applications at the same time.

  • Benefit of diff nVidia cards f still image editing

    All,
    I searched a lot for "GTX 260" and "nVidia" and found manydiscussions focused on video, but I am building an i7 machine to do still-image editing in CS4. The right GPU card purchase seems to be a GTX260 from some good manufacturer. However, I am writing to confirm that CS4 users are convinced they get a real benefit from the 260 or feel that they should be using a 285-level card.
    I rejected the Quadro. I found a GTX260 from Gigabyte (who makes the mobo I will build with) is $220 w 890+GIG RAM . Good deal, it seems.
    Are the drivers OK? Work OK for folks out there?
    jonathan7007

    I am using an Nvidea 9600 GT OCX, Win 7 64 o intel DP55k mobo,
    512 and seem to have a possible issue with artifacting in ACR 5.6.
    You can see my post in camera raw postings, 157221.
    I haave updated the driver to the newest version, and seem to ber
    having less of an occurence of the problem. I have started using my
    Lightroom 2.3 for raw processing, then I move the edit over to PS.
    I did not have any issues with graphics until the 5.6 ACR was released,
    so I suspect you wouldn't either. Good luck with your build. I did read
    good things about the 285, and the price is good, though be sure the
    mobo from gigabyte has the extra sacrificial slot as the card will
    cover the adjacent pci-e. I have found, as I still image only, that the 512 is
    more than adaquete for onboard open GL etc. I use Genuine Fractals 6,
    and did a 500% blow up which took less than 2 seconds

Maybe you are looking for