Attn: Quad Owners!!

[Frodo]

Your friendly neighborhood RAM-obsessed hobbit has a question for you...

Is anyone running 16GB in their Quads?

If so, how are you putting that 16GB to work?

If you have reasons why you've decided not to go 16GB, are then any technical reasons why? (price of RAM doesn't count...)

Thanks, kids.

[monkey man]

RAM, RAM, and yet more RAM.
You're gonna get us all addicted if you keep this up.

Bugger; methinks you've contracted RAMitis, Frods.
Please, tell me it's under control.

Speak to me, Hobby.

[HCMarkus]

If your still interested, my "old" PPC Quad, soon to be completely eclipsed by the OctaMac, shelters 6.5 gigs of stix. According to Magic Dave, this should handle DP and my OS with a little breathing room for misc apps while in session. I wish I could say I really knew what I was doing when I bought the memory, but it was just a wild shot tempered by, yes, $$$ considerations.

[Frodo]

Yeah, I know. The RAM thing again.

It just seems that we're being offered machines these days with more RAM now than we're told on the back end are "necessary", but am just wondering how 16GB+ can benefit what we're doing without sending the best CPUs into meltdown.

On another forum, one user was speaking to an Apple developer regarding 64-bit apps with respect to a certain 3-4GB software limit-- whether this barrier would ever be broken. The developer's reply was "What for?".

Good question. My follow up question is why make machines with higher RAM capacities if there is no reason to use them?

As for my RAM campaign in general, it's largely due to some users who are trying to run tons of VIs and plugins with 1-1.5GB of RAM. DP and OSX will use 750MB of that, which means that the CPU has to work a lot harder to shuttle data back and forth from Virtual Memory faster and in greater quantity. That's where half the bottlenecks occur and why we occasionally see the CPU meter spiking like mad in DP. I do agree, fwiw, that much more than 4GB on a dual is almost futile unless standalone apps are to be run concurrently outside of DP.

With that in mind, a Quad could *theoretically* do the work of four computers, but stats indicate that it 'just ain't be'. The CPU will spike before 16GB of data can be paged in time, or so I've been told. With four RAM segments, I'd love to load up a wind section, a brass section, a percussion section, and a string section but I'm only dreaming again. Mac stacking is still a reality for such projects. Can you say "network"?

So maybe this 8-legged monster Mac is the answer-- more CPU clustering to get the job done? Latest reports and spec cast a bit of doubt on whether any of the three versions of Intels new Quad Core chips will find they ways into an Apple right away-- but that keynote is tomorrow, isn't it? There's lots of chat and hype about gadgetry (iPhone, various devices to receive live TV on cell phones and other micro machines)...

But, that leads me to one other question: Will DP really be able to take advantage of 8 CPUs or what indeed is the point of diminishing returns with software, CPU and RAM?

[Phil O]

Your friendly neighborhood RAM-obsessed hobbit has a question for you...

Is anyone running 16GB in their Quads?

I read somewhere that there is limit to how much ram is assigned to an application in OSX. I suspect you may be overdoing it at 16 GB unless you plan on running several apps at once.

Just a thought. Also, too much rum. Time for bed.

Good night Mr. Frodo.

Phil

[Frodo]

Your friendly neighborhood RAM-obsessed hobbit has a question for you...

Is anyone running 16GB in their Quads?

I read somewhere that there is limit to how much ram is assigned to an application in OSX. I suspect you may be overdoing it at 16 GB unless you plan on running several apps at once.

Just a thought. Also, too much rum. Time for bed.

Good night Mr. Frodo.

Phil

Yes, Phil--

that's what the Apple developer was referring to-- there is a limit, and hence to some extent it's a bit of a waste to have 16GB if it's not going to be used.

It *can* be used outside of DP with standalone plugins. There seems to be a question of how much more can be run outside of DP's own allocation of 3GB according to certain geek squads, 4GB according to MOTU.

The difference is not 4x, in any case.

Did you say "rum"?

[Frodo]

FWIW:

Of the three new Quad-Core chips released by Intel on Monday, two are geared towards entry level PC systems.

Their "high end" chip is clocking between 2.13 and 2.4 Ghz... um.. fwiw...

Other considerations, all familiar (but more strongly confirmed)

1. AMD is bosting that the Intel Quad chips are just the old chips "glued together" but not truly efficient. AMD, of course, are releasing their own Quad chip later this year and claim that it will be a lot better than what Intel is now doing. (A third opinion would probably be closer to the truth.)

2. There are no *further* rumors yet about when Apple is getting a pair of these 2.4 Quads into their towers..., but then the Great Keynote speech is only a matter of hours away. We shall see..

3. The process of getting software coded to multi-thread to four cores remains a bit of a hurdle for developers.

Dunno-- sounds like a step in the right direction, but nothing to crack open a bottle of champagne about.

for more:
http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/01/08/intel/index.php?

[monkey man]

OK, I'm convinced; the RAMitis is under control.
Not.

Thanks for the overview and perspective, Hobby.

[Phil O]

Yes, Phil--

that's what the Apple developer was referring to-- there is a limit

Yeah, I saw that. er, umm. OK, so I definitely had too much rum. But it was late at night - really.

Phil

[Frodo]

Yes, Phil--

that's what the Apple developer was referring to-- there is a limit

Yeah, I saw that. er, umm. OK, so I definitely had too much rum. But it was late at night - really.

Phil

Sounds like you had more fun that I did-- and on a SCHOOL night, no less.

Don't you just love these 7 day weekends?

[drvmusic]

The RAM limit is per program instance - including plugins open within said program. I have been running my VIs in stand alone (G5 2x2) for some time now to maximize RAM and CPU efficiency. There is an article in the current Virtual Instruments magazine regarding the RAM limitations. Many musicians are able to use all 8GBs of RAM in a G5 dual. I don't see why the quad couldn't access all 16GB. It would be nice to have everything open by just clicking the DP project, but it sure is nice to have 7 GB of Kontakt2 sounds on one computer. I find it a fair working trade off.

A couple tips for running standalone:

Copy and paste will make extra versions of your VI program will allow you to run several instances simultaneously. I have run 4 instances of Kontakt2 very reliably. That's 4 instances with up to 64 MIDI channels!

Use more VIs and fill them less full. For some reason filling 2 VIs full of sounds (4GB) is harder on the CPU than filling 4 VIs only half full.

[Phil O]

The RAM limit is per program instance - including plugins open within said program.

So let me get this straight. A plugin counts as a program instance? So what you are saying is the total limit goes up for a project with plugins? That's great. Thanks for that info.

Phil

[WSVP]

The RAM limit is per program instance - including plugins open within said program.

So let me get this straight. A plugin counts as a program instance? So what you are saying is the total limit goes up for a project with plugins? That's great. Thanks for that info.

Phil I think you are misunderstanding what drvmusic wrote. There is a difference between a program instance and a plugin instance. If you use a plugin within an app like DP you have a max of 4GB ram for DP and the plugins to share. Standalone VI's run as separate apps and are routed into DP using something like rewire. Reason is an example of a separate VI app. Thus DP can have its 4GB and Reason can have its 4GB if its available.

[Phil O]

Bummer. I thought that was too good to be true.

Phil

[baanes]

If you're curious about RAM usage, fire up activity monitor. You can sort processes by real memory use, and check overall memory with the "system memory" tab.

I would expect most of 16gb would go to waste if each app can only use 3 or 4, but I'm curious to find out...