Page 2 of 2
Re: Macbook Pro 2.66GHz or 2.8GHz?
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 5:14 am
by Bizon
greatwhitedope wrote:Bizon wrote:I Don’t know if I would buy 8 gb of ram from apple.
I upgraded on my own and purchased the 8 gb of Mushkin ram about $160 cdn. Then, I sold my old ram on ebay for $65. Therefore, I really only paid less than $100 for the upgrade which is a steal! Additionally, Mushkin ram is better in my opinion.
Is
this what you bought?
Yes, this is what i bought.
I also recommend the antiglare screen. I also got the high resolution screen. Its great, you can fit a lot more items on the screen so you can see more tracks which I find important on a 15 inch screen
Re: Macbook Pro 2.66GHz or 2.8GHz?
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 5:37 pm
by greatwhitedope
Bizon wrote:greatwhitedope wrote:Bizon wrote:I Don’t know if I would buy 8 gb of ram from apple.
I upgraded on my own and purchased the 8 gb of Mushkin ram about $160 cdn. Then, I sold my old ram on ebay for $65. Therefore, I really only paid less than $100 for the upgrade which is a steal! Additionally, Mushkin ram is better in my opinion.
Is
this what you bought?
Yes, this is what i bought.
I also recommend the antiglare screen. I also got the high resolution screen. Its great, you can fit a lot more items on the screen so you can see more tracks which I find important on a 15 inch screen
The antiglare is only available in the high res screen, so it's a double upgrade. How's the memory treating you? I've heard some compatibility issues with the i7, but do they seem to be straightened out for the most part? Any problems?
Re: Macbook Pro 2.66GHz or 2.8GHz?
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:49 pm
by Bizon
greatwhitedope wrote:greatwhitedope wrote:Bizon wrote:I Don’t know if I would buy 8 gb of ram from apple.
I upgraded on my own and purchased the 8 gb of Mushkin ram about $160 cdn. Then, I sold my old ram on ebay for $65. Therefore, I really only paid less than $100 for the upgrade which is a steal! Additionally, Mushkin ram is better in my opinion.
Is
this what you bought?
The antiglare is only available in the high res screen, so it's a double upgrade. How's the memory treating you? I've heard some compatibility issues with the i7, but do they seem to be straightened out for the most part? Any problems?
No issues what so ever. It recognizes all 8 gb at all times the laptop runs great.
I will however, say there is not a great deal of improvement in Live, if any. Other applications like Serato for instance (when creating analysis files) seems to churn through the data faster. With live, I am not sure if I notice much of a difference. I imagine it’s the fact that it can't use more than 3 gbs of ram due to it being 32 bit.
I am thinking with Live 9, they will address this so I more less bought it in preparation for that day. And it just made sense at a net costs of less than $100!
Re: Macbook Pro 2.66GHz or 2.8GHz?
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:54 pm
by greatwhitedope
Bizon wrote:
No issues what so ever. It recognizes all 8 gb at all times the laptop runs great.
I will however, say there is not a great deal of improvement in Live, if any. Other applications like Serato for instance (when creating analysis files) seems to churn through the data faster. With live, I am not sure if I notice much of a difference. I imagine it’s the fact that it can't use more than 3 gbs of ram due to it being 32 bit.
I am thinking with Live 9, they will address this so I more less bought it in preparation for that day. And it just made sense at a net costs of less than $100!
Ableton only uses 3 GB? Logic 9 can use 4 GB in 32 bit, strange but doesn't make a difference when we're talking about 8 GB. I placed the order for the memory yesterday, so I hoping for a Friday delivery but Monday sounds a bit more realistic.
Re: Macbook Pro 2.66GHz or 2.8GHz?
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:57 pm
by Bizon
greatwhitedope wrote:Bizon wrote:
No issues what so ever. It recognizes all 8 gb at all times the laptop runs great.
I will however, say there is not a great deal of improvement in Live, if any. Other applications like Serato for instance (when creating analysis files) seems to churn through the data faster. With live, I am not sure if I notice much of a difference. I imagine it’s the fact that it can't use more than 3 gbs of ram due to it being 32 bit.
I am thinking with Live 9, they will address this so I more less bought it in preparation for that day. And it just made sense at a net costs of less than $100!
Ableton only uses 3 GB? Logic 9 can use 4 GB in 32 bit, strange but doesn't make a difference when we're talking about 8 GB. I placed the order for the memory yesterday, so I hoping for a Friday delivery but Monday sounds a bit more realistic.
Well, 3.8 gbs or whatever.