As I believe you are already on the Mac Pro Upgrade group on Facebook, you should be familiar with the flame war that comes up EVERY time this is mentioned.
There is the die hard camp that says (correctly) that the fastest operation is using only 6 of your 8 banks, all with matching memory of the same type, brand and lot.
However, I have also seen other sites that say that most real world testing only shows about a 2 to 4 percent reduction in speed when using the 4th bank of RAM also populated with matching RAM.
One of the reasons I think that a lot of this hand wringing about how fast your tons of RAM work is the simple fact that these machines are based on a chipset and design that is over 10 years old.
I am a fan of the more RAM camp, and as such, both of my 5.1 machines (not upgraded as far as yours, they have the 2.03ghz dual 6 core CPUs, and no card cage) have 128GB of 1333MHz DDR3 RAM.
My main reason for running 128Gb RAM is that I do a lot of things at the same time, including zillions of tabs of Google Chrome, which is the most notorious memory hog program ever made. (seriously, not exaggerating.)
I don't, however, do full blown online projects on my machines, so I can't give you a real world example of what does and doesn't work on mine…I still run them on High Sierra, so I am not on th bleeding edge like you.
One caveat, minor though it is…because the POST in the MacPro tests all your RAM every time you reboot, you will see longer boot times with more RAM, easily a full minute plus with the 128GB.
I have been running two MacPro 5,1 machines for a couple years with 128GB RAM and have no problems with them. (I run the fans faster with Macs Fan Control, to keep the heat down.)
My .02,
Dave Hogan,
Burbank, CA
On Aug 28, 2021, at 7:05 PM, John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:I'm starting to use baselight plug in and BCC Pan and Zoom on online. I have a mid 2012 12 core 5.1 64 GB Ram, CPU upgraded to 3.46GHZ, Radeon RX 580 8GB vram. I found that I get crashes saying something about out of memory when rendering an upper track safe color effect. I figured it had to do with the way BCC Pan and Zoom caches the stills into Ram memory but that's just a guess on my part. It also seems when there are more BCC Pan and Zoom effects not linked to the stills I get the crash. Once all are linked I can render the entire sequence without a crash.I might not be able to figure out what's really going on but the whole Triple Channel Memory thing, where Macs more efficiently address memory with three banks of ram than 4 has been brought up here. Now I have 8 slots of 8GB, It sounds like it would be more efficient and more capacity to go to 6 16 GB to get 96GB. Of course my thought of more is better and why not go to 8x16GB for 128 GB total. In googling this came up:"I've contacted OWC and they said this:Your computer is a triple channel computer. I can't begin to discuss what you would go for on this one as I have no information on how you would be using this computer. But there is one rule of thumb to fall back on. More memory trumps memory addressing".I might not notice any difference but curious what value increased memory access with Triple Channel compares to having more actual memory. The Above quote from OWC makes me think overall 128 might be a better idea.John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net
No comments:
Post a Comment