# Is the max ram for intel imac 2.0GHz 3 gig or 4?



## smellybook (Aug 31, 2006)

The Apple site says 3 gig max but I read somewhere; and I wish I could remember where that you can put in 4 gigs but profiler will only read 3, however the system will use 4.


Any thoughts on this, I will be upgrading soon and I want to get the max as I don't want to have to do it again later,,,


Will there be an update, perhaps Leopard will read 4 gigs?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

System only recognises 3. even 3 not worthwhile in my view.


----------



## CanadaRAM (Jul 24, 2005)

First, only the Core2Duo machines can take the 2 Gb module. 
Second, the OS cannot use any more than 3 Gb, so it is worthless to install 4

Thanks
Trevor 
CanadaRAM

Edit: The OS *on this motherboard *cannot use any more than 3 Gb. 
(I'm making the distinction between what may be reported as installed, and how much is actually addressable)


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Yeah should have clarified that = missed the 2.0.

CR I do believe it's not the OS but rather the Core2 itself - lots of confusion about it.



> Theres a 3Gig limit as the Intel chip used in the MBP can only address 3.2 GB, so apple just advertise it as 3GB. If you put in 4GB the you get 3.2.
> 
> PC's are the same, they advertise 4GB, but if you read the small print they usually mention that "some ram may not be accessible" or something like that.
> __________________


----------



## AppleAuthority (May 21, 2005)

Can't be the OS. The Mac Pro can address more than 3 GB and doesn't it run the same version of OS X?

Mind you, it is the Xeon chip versus Core 2 Duo.


----------



## Kirtland (Aug 18, 2002)

MacDoc said:


> System only recognises 3. even 3 not worthwhile in my view.


Hello MacDoc. I currently have 2 GB in my iMac and am considering maxing at 3. Why is 3 not worthwhile in your view?


----------



## John Clay (Jun 25, 2006)

Kirtland said:


> Hello MacDoc. I currently have 2 GB in my iMac and am considering maxing at 3. Why is 3 not worthwhile in your view?



Unless you need the 3GB, the cost/benefit ratio makes it really not worthwhile - compare $199 (give or take) for a 1GB SO-DIMM to upwards of $500 for 2GB SO-DIMM. Mind you, I'm getting those prices from retail stores, not online distributors.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

What he said.

•••••

If you NEED that much RAM you are likely in the wrong box.

Perhaps it might be justified in a 17" MacBook Pro for a video editor on the go.

If the upgrade costs from 1 to 2 in the Core2s gets down in the $250 range - which it is approaching then it maybe worthwhile.


----------



## Chealion (Jan 16, 2001)

The Core 2 Duo has a 32 bit memory chip restricting it to 4GB in total (usable is less than 4GB because of VRAM, and others) despite being a 64 bit chip. The next version (Santa Rosa) and the desktop Xeons (Mac Pro) can address more than 4GB.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Che was the G5 64 bit in that regard???


----------



## djstp (Mar 10, 2006)

speaking of upgrade? 

can you swap the processor in the 1st rev core duo to a current dual core?


----------



## Chealion (Jan 16, 2001)

MacDoc said:


> Che was the G5 64 bit in that regard???


As far as I know and have read, yes. It's a bit odd that the Core 2 Duo chips are 64 bit processors with only a 32 bit memory controller, it lead me to at first erroraneously believe that the Core 2 Duo wasn't a true 64 bit chip.

djstp - Yes. I believe there were a couple articles showing how to do it on a Mac mini when the Core 2 Duo was first released on Hardmac.com and Tuaw (The Unofficial Apple Weblog)


----------



## applebook (Aug 4, 2004)

MacDoc said:


> Che was the G5 64 bit in that regard???


Yes


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Thank you. I agree odd decision..to bottleneck a terrific chip that way 
ooooh 4 gigs in a MacBook Pro, iMac....rockin.


----------



## Mrsam (Jan 14, 2006)

djstp said:


> speaking of upgrade?
> 
> can you swap the processor in the 1st rev core duo to a current dual core?


Yes technically you can, but again it wouldn't be worth it and apple doesn't support CPU swapping. On top of that its not an upgrade to be done by the faint of heart.


----------



## applebook (Aug 4, 2004)

The upgrade really makes sense only for the Core Solo Mini and maybe the 1.66 Duo Mini.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

We just did one tonight - it was worth it as we scored an inexpensive Core2 and happened to have a trade in a solo so we'll use it as our office FrankenMac - worked like a charm.
But we priced it out and there seems little financial sense right now.
Maybe when a 2.33 comes down to $250 or so it will be feasible.


----------

