Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Desktops > 4 GB Ram in Mac Mini Core 2 Duo?

4 GB Ram in Mac Mini Core 2 Duo?
Thread Tools
air
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: new york city
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2007, 02:12 PM
 
I know that OWC offers a 3 GB Ram upgrade
3.0GB (1GB+2GB Kit) PC2-5300 DDR2 667MHz... (53IM2DDR3GBK) at OWC

but i want to have matched Ram modules (2X2GB) to enable dual channeling? Has anyone successfully pulled this off?
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2007, 03:47 PM
 
There was a big thread about this a few months ago, I believe the answer was no.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2007, 04:05 PM
 
Yes, 2x2GB will work with the dual channel bandwidth, but you'll only be able to use ~3.1GB of it (due to addressing limitations).
     
AppleCore_LLC
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Denver, CO
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2007, 10:09 AM
 
Yes, you can install 4GB...but you can only utilize 3.3 GB.
     
FireWire
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Montréal, Québec (Canada)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2007, 05:22 PM
 
I'm a bit confused.. I received my new iMac yesterday and prior to buying it I did a little research, and according to what I read, this model doesn't support the dual-channel feature. Does it?

And secondly, I would be surprised that Apple would offer a 4 GB BTO configuration, knowing that only ~3 will be available.. Wouldn't that be false advertising?

By the way, the iMac is quite speedy even with the stock 1 GB! The 2 GB stick I ordered on eBay should arrive shortly, however

P.S: I've been directed to this thread on another forum and now it's even more confusing, who is right?
     
CheesePuff
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2007, 05:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by FireWire View Post
I'm a bit confused.. I received my new iMac yesterday and prior to buying it I did a little research, and according to what I read, this model doesn't support the dual-channel feature. Does it?

And secondly, I would be surprised that Apple would offer a 4 GB BTO configuration, knowing that only ~3 will be available.. Wouldn't that be false advertising?

By the way, the iMac is quite speedy even with the stock 1 GB! The 2 GB stick I ordered on eBay should arrive shortly, however

P.S: I've been directed to this thread on another forum and now it's even more confusing, who is right?
Not confusing here... you have an iMac. This thread is for the Mac mini.
     
bearcatrp
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Minnesota
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2007, 07:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Yes, 2x2GB will work with the dual channel bandwidth, but you'll only be able to use ~3.1GB of it (due to addressing limitations).
Is this a limitation of mac os or the chipset? Was curious if I would install 4gb and linux if linux use all 4gb.
Randy
2010 Mac Mini, 32GB iPod Touch, 2 Apple TV (1)
Home built 12 core 2.93 Westmere PC (almost half the cost of MP) Win7 64.
     
CheesePuff
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2007, 07:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by bearcatrp View Post
Is this a limitation of mac os or the chipset? Was curious if I would install 4gb and linux if linux use all 4gb.
Randy
Chipset. The Mac Pro's can accept 16 GB now.
     
FireWire
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Montréal, Québec (Canada)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 22, 2007, 05:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by CheesePuff View Post
Not confusing here... you have an iMac. This thread is for the Mac mini.
D'oh! Sorry, I have been reading so much "4 GB in iMac" threads recently, I must be seeing them everywhere

So.. the mini has Dual-channel capability but not the iMac?
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 22, 2007, 08:10 AM
 
All Intel Macs (and most G5s) are dual-channel capable. For an Intel Mac with discrete graphics the performance difference is negligible. For an Intel Mac with integrated graphics, there is a difference in graphics performance although it's not huge.

The current iMacs and MBPs use the 965PM (Crestline) chipset, which supports 4 gigs of RAM. Older Intel Macs as well as current Macbooks and Mac minis use versions of the older 945 chipset, which only supports a total 4 gig of addressing space for RAM and all other hardware. This means that the addressing space for RAM is just over 3 gigs.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 22, 2007, 12:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by bearcatrp View Post
Is this a limitation of mac os or the chipset? Was curious if I would install 4gb and linux if linux use all 4gb.
Chipset.

Originally Posted by CheesePuff View Post
Chipset. The Mac Pro's can accept 16 GB now.
Chipset supports 64GB, but due to the limited number of slots you can only put 32GB in a Mac Pro.

Originally Posted by FireWire View Post
So.. the mini has Dual-channel capability but not the iMac?
All Intel Macs support dual channel.
     
strandedinnz
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2007, 02:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Yes, 2x2GB will work with the dual channel bandwidth, but you'll only be able to use ~3.1GB of it (due to addressing limitations).
Hi there, just resurrecting this thread a little ... I've just put 2 * 2GB SODIMMs in my Mac Mini and System Profiler shows it as now having 4GB ... where does the 3.1GB usable showup ? Is OSX telling porkies ?

Thanks!

Mark
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2007, 02:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by strandedinnz View Post
Hi there, just resurrecting this thread a little ... I've just put 2 * 2GB SODIMMs in my Mac Mini and System Profiler shows it as now having 4GB ... where does the 3.1GB usable showup ? Is OSX telling porkies ?
System Profiler sees two 2 GB DIMMs. But that does not mean the addressing space extends to 4 GB. Read P's post above - he's got it all right. Your mini comes with Intel's Calistoga chipset which only has a RAM addressing space of a little more then 3 GBs. No matter what Sys Profiler says, you won't be able to use the full 4GB. Take a look at /Applications/Utuilities/ActivityMonitor > System Memory.
     
strandedinnz
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2007, 06:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
System Profiler sees two 2 GB DIMMs. But that does not mean the addressing space extends to 4 GB. Read P's post above - he's got it all right. Your mini comes with Intel's Calistoga chipset which only has a RAM addressing space of a little more then 3 GBs. No matter what Sys Profiler says, you won't be able to use the full 4GB. Take a look at /Applications/Utuilities/ActivityMonitor > System Memory.
Hmmm ... it says 4GB on the GUI underneath the pie chart, is that what I should look at ?

System Profile says:

Hardware Overview:

Model Name: Mac mini
Model Identifier: Macmini2,1
Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speed: 2 GHz
Number Of Processors: 1
Total Number Of Cores: 2
L2 Cache: 4 MB
Memory: 4 GB
Bus Speed: 667 MHz
Boot ROM Version: MM21.009A.B00
SMC Version: 1.19f0

Memory:

BANK 0/DIMM0:

Size: 2 GB
Type: DDR2 SDRAM
Speed: 667 MHz
Status: OK

BANK 1/DIMM1:

Size: 2 GB
Type: DDR2 SDRAM
Speed: 667 MHz
Status: OK
     
Cave Man
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2007, 10:05 AM
 
Try running 'top' from the terminal and sum "used" and "free" - what value does it give you?
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 26, 2007, 11:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by strandedinnz View Post
Hmmm ... it says 4GB on the GUI underneath the pie chart, is that what I should look at ?
No, look at actually used memory for tasks. Or use top if you're comfortable with the CLI. Wanna bet you won't see your apps using up 4 GB of actual RAM?
     
Murker
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2007, 01:54 PM
 
I just installed two 2gb DIMMs in a Mac Mini Core 2 Duo 1.83ghz.

Activity Monitor reported the following during a copy operation (I converted the GB to MB to make it clearer when adding).

1960.00 Free
384.32 Wired
634.61 Active
29.28 Inactive
1020.00 Used

4028.21 Total

---

I also tried the same test on a 2ghz PPC G5 with six 512K chips (3gb total).

938.06 Free
191.37 Wired
351.39 Active
1550.00 Inactive
2080.00 Used

5110.82 Total

Using my fragile logic, I subtracted the "Used" figure from the G5's total and got 3gb, which is the true total RAM. Doing the same with the Mini, you'd get 3gb (instead of the expected 4gb). This would appear to indicate that only 3gb is being addressed in the Mini, as stated by others in this thread.

Perhaps someone with knowledge of RAM usage and Activity Monitor could shed more light on interpreting these Activity Monitor figures.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2007, 03:26 PM
 
It's really quite simple:
Used = Wired + Active + Inactive
Free + Used = 3 GB which is the max your mini can address.

The 4th GB is installed and recognized (by Sys Profiler for example) but you can't address it. Chipset addressing issue. Nothing you (or anybody else) can do about it.
     
Wallstreet
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 8, 2007, 11:20 PM
 
I've got two Mac Minis here - A Core Solo 1.5 that's been upgraded with a C2D 2.33 and a C2D 1.83 that's been upgraded to a C2D 2.16. The C2D 2.33 unit won't even POST with 2 Corsair 2GB PC5300 SO-DIMMS. It'll POST (chime) with one and register 2GB. It'll post with 2x1GB Hynix (Apple) DIMMs as well. Now the C2D 2.16 (newer) system will chime with both Corsair DIMMs but won't display any video.

The C2D 2.33 will NOT POST or chime with 1 2GB DIMM and 1 1GB DIMM, but the C2D 2.16 is perfectly happy with that setup.

What brand 2GB DIMMS are -known- to work across all Mac Minis? This is driving me insane.
     
Murker
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2007, 12:17 AM
 
FYI-I used PC-5300 DDR2 667mhz SO-DIMM 200pin "Micron on Third" 2GB chips from OWC on my mini C2D 1.83.
     
Wallstreet
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2007, 01:34 AM
 
Okay, a little PEBKAC error - I didn't have the monitor completely plugged in. The Corsair 2GB DIMMs worked fine in the Mac Mini that was a Core2 to begin with. Evidently there's a difference between the Core and Core2 Mac Minis. The Core Mac Minis are really limited to 2GB. The Core2 (original) 2007 Mac Minis can run 2x2GB.

Solution was to swap system boards...the 2.33's running on the newer board with more RAM, the 2.16's running on the older board with less RAM.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2007, 07:03 AM
 
Yep. In Apple world this is what it boils down to:
CD mini: 2 GB max (chipset max would be 3 GB but firmware limits you to 2 GB)
C2D mini: 3 GB max (chipset limit; you can install 2 x 2 GB and Sys Profiler will recognize both DIMMs, but you can't address the last GB)

Since there has been no mini with a Crestline chipset 4 GB cannot be used on a mini.
     
Wallstreet
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2007, 01:06 PM
 
The fact that there hasn't been a Mini with a CrestLine/Socket P Merom really is discouraging for the Mini's future. There's really no reason they couldn't have rev'd the Mini along with the iMac/Macbook/Pro Either way, the 800MHz bus doesn't gain you much - Penryn's a different story though, and Penryn's going to run on both Crestline and Cantiga....
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 10, 2007, 03:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wallstreet View Post
Penryn's a different story though, and Penryn's going to run on both Crestline and Cantiga....
Intel's actually playing it fairly similar to Merom. Penryn will run on Crestline with an 800 MHz FSB (2.8 GHz X9000 max) and on Cantiga with a 1067 MHz FSB (3.06 GHz max). Just like there was a Merom for Calistoga at 667 MHz (2.33 GHz T7600 max) and for Crestline at 800 MHz (2.8 GHz X7900 max).
     
Wallstreet
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 11, 2007, 01:53 AM
 
Yep. Intel tends to release two chips per platform with a bus-bumped "old" chip being the baseline chip for the next chipset. Nehalem's gonna bring some interesting things.
Past Macs: Amiga 4000/040 /w EMPLANT card (Quadra 900 or so), Powerbook G3 PDQ, Power Mac 7300/G3, Power Mac 7600/G4 400, Power Mac G3 Gossamer (/w G4 450), Power Mac G5 dual 2.5GHz, Pentium 4 3.8GHz /w OS X Hackintosh, C2D with OS X 10.4.10 Hackintosh

Current Macs: Mac Mini C2D 2.33GHz, Mac Mini 2.16GHz, Dual Woodcrest 3.0GHz Hackintosh
     
Nr9
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Taipei, Taiwan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 11, 2007, 04:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Yep. In Apple world this is what it boils down to:
CD mini: 2 GB max (chipset max would be 3 GB but firmware limits you to 2 GB)
C2D mini: 3 GB max (chipset limit; you can install 2 x 2 GB and Sys Profiler will recognize both DIMMs, but you can't address the last GB)

Since there has been no mini with a Crestline chipset 4 GB cannot be used on a mini.
would there be a way to change the firmware to allow 3GB on an upgrades CD mini?
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 11, 2007, 04:59 AM
 
Hasn't been done. And probably also won't be done. It's not like Apple documents how to muck around in their firmware.
     
Wallstreet
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 12, 2007, 02:05 AM
 
Through everything I've tried, the CD mini wouldn't recognize more than 2GB...since Apple only advertises that ALL Mac Minis can only support 2GB, there's no impetus for them to allow the CD mini to access more, unfortunately.
Past Macs: Amiga 4000/040 /w EMPLANT card (Quadra 900 or so), Powerbook G3 PDQ, Power Mac 7300/G3, Power Mac 7600/G4 400, Power Mac G3 Gossamer (/w G4 450), Power Mac G5 dual 2.5GHz, Pentium 4 3.8GHz /w OS X Hackintosh, C2D with OS X 10.4.10 Hackintosh

Current Macs: Mac Mini C2D 2.33GHz, Mac Mini 2.16GHz, Dual Woodcrest 3.0GHz Hackintosh
     
canadaspy
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 10, 2008, 09:06 PM
 
I currently have 3GB (1GB+2GB), bought from transintl.com, in my 2.0GHz Core 2 Duo mini and it's been running fine, but I read that it degrades the graphics performance for not having matched RAM modules. Would upgrading that 1GB stick to a 2GB, thereby having matching modules (2x2GB), alleviate that graphics performance bump?
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2008, 04:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by canadaspy View Post
I currently have 3GB (1GB+2GB), bought from transintl.com, in my 2.0GHz Core 2 Duo mini and it's been running fine, but I read that it degrades the graphics performance for not having matched RAM modules. Would upgrading that 1GB stick to a 2GB, thereby having matching modules (2x2GB), alleviate that graphics performance bump?
It depends very much on what you do. There have benchmarks done with 3D games that show up to ~15% frame rate increases with matched DIMMs. That's a small difference. Also, it's not just all graphics that suddenly run faster with matched pairs. It's only those heavy duty graphics tasks that are bottlenecked by video memory bandwidth. PS for example or Office, Safari, etc. will not see a benefit.
     
canadaspy
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2008, 12:40 PM
 
Thanks for the reply Simon. I spend most of my time in Photoshop and Illustrator. Not exactly 3D programs, but pretty graphics intensive nonetheless. I'm hoping that upgrading that 1GB stick to a 2GB stick might alleviate some of the hiccups (redrawing issues) that I'm having occasionally moving large files around in Photoshop. Maybe I'm just dreaming.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2008, 12:59 PM
 
With PS I wouldn't expect a difference from matched pairs. PS needs RAM and CPU, the GPU is hardly taxed at all.

The problems you're having with PS are probably due to the fact that you're using a heavy duty app on the slowest Mac you can buy. When it comes to apps like PS an iMac or MP is much more suitable.
     
nagolslut
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 20, 2008, 07:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Yes, 2x2GB will work with the dual channel bandwidth, but you'll only be able to use ~3.1GB of it (due to addressing limitations).
Have you found any documented information that dual channel bandwidth is supported with 2x2GB instead of 2x1GB. Even though only 3.1 is addressed.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 05:03 PM
 
See here. Check out the Halo test, compare the 1+1, the 2+0.5 and the 2+2 tests of the mini.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2008, 05:33 AM
 
The C2D Mac mini in the Halo test on that page performed 16% better with 4GB matched vs. 3 GB unmatched. On non-graphics benchmarks the difference was a whole lot less and, taking into account the measurement uncertainty, can be considered negligible.

I think this is pretty much consistent with previous advice: Going for 4GB instead of 3GB which you can actually address on these systems only makes sense if you have money to spend and are worried about getting every last fps increase you can. Somebody trying to get the Mac mini's overall performance up in everyday tasks like web, email, Office will not see a benefit when upgrading from 3GB to 4GB of RAM.

Also note that CS3 performance for the C2D Mac mini increases for 1GB->3GB, but there's nothing for 3GB->4GB. Again that illustrates what CS3 really depends on: Having a fast CPU and enough RAM. OTOH raw graphics performance is pretty irrelevant in CS3.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2008, 07:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by nagolslut View Post
Have you found any documented information that dual channel bandwidth is supported with 2x2GB instead of 2x1GB. Even though only 3.1 is addressed.
Read the Intel chipset docs or just check in CPU-Z on a machine with 2x2.
     
Houston2007
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 25, 2008, 06:36 AM
 
I just added a Kingston 4GB Kit (two 2GB PC2-5300) yesterday to my Mac Mini Core Duo 2 2GHz. I brought it from Fry's Electronics for $79.99. I'm on the Mac Mini. I been in Activity Monitor I see 4GB Pie Chart but adding the usage and all it is 3GB. Honestly, I see a big speed difference then the 1GB including programs like Garageband especially playing large tracks with a lot instruments example like the 1GB or larger demos of Jam Pack Symphony Orchestra, iPhoto where as I got over 5,000 photos, iTunes with 1.6GB MPEG-4 Videos of movies brought from iTunes, and finally Safari 3.1 including 1080p Trailers from Apple and websites with a lot of media! Some instances of these programs because it was so instantly accessible and responsive I felt if I had a Solid State Drive. If you really think about I recommend getting two 2GB DIMMs, #1 matching pairs, #2 128-bit addressing, #3 you have a 1GB more to use than the Apple recommended maximum. Finally #4 The performance truly justifies the price. Installing it was actually easier to me because of Mac Mini RAM Upgrade Tutorial this was the site I printed it up and use as a guide to install. Took me actually less than 30 minutes including testing it before putting the case back on. I love the Mac Mini Core Duo 2 it's really working for me until I get enough money to get the Mac Pro hopefully with a New HDCP 30" with Blu-Ray Drive and four 2TB SATA II HDDs!
     
hwojtek
Forum Regular
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: a small village in western Poland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 25, 2008, 07:30 AM
 
8TB, that's quite enough to download the whole Internet.
Wojtek

All Macs still running: iMac G3 Trayloader 333MHz, iMac G3 350 MHz, iMac G4, PM G4 DP 1.6 GHz, 2 x eMac 1 GHz, PBG4 12" 1.5 GHz, Mac SuperMini™ C2D 2.33GHz/802.11n/200GB, Mac Pro Quad Core 2.0 GHz/4GB.
     
Houston2007
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 25, 2008, 06:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
It's really quite simple:
Used = Wired + Active + Inactive
Free + Used = 3 GB which is the max your mini can address.

The 4th GB is installed and recognized (by Sys Profiler for example) but you can't address it. Chipset addressing issue. Nothing you (or anybody else) can do about it.
According to help Top in Activity Monitor:

Mac OS X has a memory management system that allows you to run many applications at once and use extremely large documents without running out of memory. You can use Activity Monitor to see how system memory is being allocated on your computer. As you open, close, or use applications, you can watch the memory allocation change.

To see how system memory is being used:

Click System Memory in the button bar.

Here is an explanation of some of the information displayed at the bottom of the memory pane:

Wired: Wired memory is information that can’t be cached to disk, so it must stay in RAM. The amount depends on what applications you are using.

Active: Active memory is currently in RAM and actively being used.

Inactive: Inactive memory is no longer being used and has been cached to disk. It will remain in RAM until another application needs the space. Leaving this information in RAM is to your advantage if you (or a client of your computer) come back to it later.

Used: Used memory is being used by a process and not immediately available.

Free: Free memory is not being used and is immediately available.

VM size: Virtual memory, or VM, is hard disk space that can be used as memory. VM size is the amount of disk space memory being used. Mac OS X can use more memory than the amount of physical RAM you have. A hard disk is much slower than RAM, so the virtual memory system must automatically distribute information between disk space and RAM for efficient performance.

Page ins/outs: The number of times Mac OS X has moved information between RAM and disk space.

You can change the color of items in the chart by clicking the color box next to each item.

It's really weird how this system can boot with over the maximum amount of memory stated by Apple. Can actually be detected by the system and then not utilize 25% of the memory. In all honestly as long as I messed with computers which is over 20 years. I never seen this. It's odd that one simple firmware update can make this system even more faster! To me computers go hand and hand with mathematics usually every equation has a resolution. In computer there are only absolutes such as yes or no. This 4GB in Mac Mini it's like in between, a Maybe or it's a possibility. Whatever the case I guess we never see applications dip below the 1GB of Free Memory which represent the memory not utilized. Either or I'm still fine with 1GB over the 2GB Maximum that Apple stated and 128-bit addressing well as way better performance. I can't help but to wonder how much better it would be with that 1GB included.
     
Houston2007
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 25, 2008, 07:26 PM
 
Well yeah I guess we never going to get the firmware update because of the same reason Apple will not get 802.11n update for Mac Mini.

"Apple's making is that it *can't* give you the 802.11n-unlocking software for free. The reason: the Core 2 Duo Macs weren't advertised as 802.11n-ready, and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act supposedly prohibits Apple from giving away an unadvertised new feature for one of its products. Hence, said the Apple rep, the company's not distributing new features in Software Update any more, just bug fixes because of Sarbanes-Oxley compliance issue."
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 25, 2008, 09:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Houston2007 View Post
VM size: Virtual memory, or VM, is hard disk space that can be used as memory. VM size is the amount of disk space memory being used. Mac OS X can use more memory than the amount of physical RAM you have. A hard disk is much slower than RAM, so the virtual memory system must automatically distribute information between disk space and RAM for efficient performance.
There's absolutely no relationship between VM size and hard disk space (total or free). VM size is just that, the current size of the virtual address space. There is no requirement that the entire virtual address space be pageable. See the Wikipedia entry on virtual address space for more details on what that term means.

Originally Posted by Houston2007 View Post
Well yeah I guess we never going to get the firmware update because of the same reason Apple will not get 802.11n update for Mac Mini.

"Apple's making is that it *can't* give you the 802.11n-unlocking software for free. The reason: the Core 2 Duo Macs weren't advertised as 802.11n-ready, and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act supposedly prohibits Apple from giving away an unadvertised new feature for one of its products. Hence, said the Apple rep, the company's not distributing new features in Software Update any more, just bug fixes because of Sarbanes-Oxley compliance issue."
Apple has misrepresented this IMO, and it has been widely debunked. What Apple is doing is their choice; they can give away whatever they want, they just have to account for it in the books. My theory is they're testing to the waters to see what people will put up with: $2 drivers, $5 iTouch apps, etc.
     
Houston2007
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2008, 01:37 PM
 
My next goal is putting a 128GB 2.5" Solid State Drive in the Mac Mini and based on this review Hell Yeah it's a go!

Memoright 128GB SSD Review
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2008, 04:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by Houston2007 View Post
It's really weird how this system can boot with over the maximum amount of memory stated by Apple. Can actually be detected by the system and then not utilize 25% of the memory. In all honestly as long as I messed with computers which is over 20 years. I never seen this.
What happens is this: The RAM is allocated from the bottom of the address space and up. Other things that take up the same addressing space are allocated from the top down. If the two overlap, the other hardware takes precedence over RAM. 32-bit XP does the same thing (due to driver issues) on any chipset, as do 64-bit Windows on any 945M chipset.

As for examples from history... the Mac LC II supported adding 12 MB of RAM, but only 10 MB could be used because of the exact same issue. It has happened every now and then.
     
f1000
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2008, 02:18 AM
 
Just a heads up: Kingston KVR667D2SO/2GR ValueRAM doesn't work in pairs. One chip will work in either slot, but adding a second prevents the mini from booting. I have tried everything, from reseating the AirPort card to pressing the little PRAM reset button, but nothing works. Pairing a Kingston chip with one of the stock Apple 512MB RAM chips also prevents the mini from booting.

The Kingston chips run fine alone, though. If you only want 2GB without interleaving and no possibility of adding a second chip, then this is an option.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2008, 05:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by f1000 View Post
Just a heads up: Kingston KVR667D2SO/2GR ValueRAM doesn't work in pairs. One chip will work in either slot, but adding a second prevents the mini from booting. I have tried everything, from reseating the AirPort card to pressing the little PRAM reset button, but nothing works. Pairing a Kingston chip with one of the stock Apple 512MB RAM chips also prevents the mini from booting.

The Kingston chips run fine alone, though. If you only want 2GB without interleaving and no possibility of adding a second chip, then this is an option.
Is that a Core 2 Duo mini or a Core Duo / Core Solo mini?
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 27, 2008, 10:31 PM
 
ZOMG teh zombie threads are attakin.
     
f1000
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2008, 02:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
ZOMG teh zombie threads are attakin.
This IS the right thread for me to post in. No point in being an attention-whore by posting a new thread on an old topic.
     
f1000
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2008, 02:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Is that a Core 2 Duo mini or a Core Duo / Core Solo mini?
It's a Core 2 Duo 1.83GHz. Newegg's website seems to imply that these chips aren't compatible, because it doesn't list the ValueRAM under its Mac memory section.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2008, 03:07 PM
 
Any C2D Mac mini should support 3 GB RAM (and take 4 GB w/o making actual use of the last GB).

Interesting RAM you're using.
     
f1000
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2008, 04:40 PM
 
Newegg sent me a 2x2GB mushkin RAM kit specifically labelled "Apple OE", but I am getting the same error upon installing. I've tried Googling for info, but I haven't seen anyone post about not being able to get two good chips to work simultaneously in two good slots.

This is a refurb Mac mini, so I wonder if that's the problem? So far I've taken out the lithium battery, removed the AirPort card, pressed the motherboard PRAM reset button, unplugged all peripherals, et al, but am clueless. I'm worried that the more I play around inside, the more chance that I'll do some real damage.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:20 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,