News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Mac Pro. Parent comment

Re:Mac Pro by bingaling on Monday June 10, 2013 @06:15PM (#5857773)
Why not 32gb dimms?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mac Pro by mbell on Monday June 10, 2013 @08:55PM (#5858793)
The linked dimms have 43% lower bandwidth than what Apple has specced (PC1866 vs PC1066) and are over twice the $ per GB.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mac Pro by beachstartup on Monday June 10, 2013 @10:30PM (#5859223)
wait a few months.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mac Pro by rorrr2 on Monday June 10, 2013 @10:56PM (#5859351)
I can't think of a single app that's RAM-speed-bound.

Pretty much everything is CPU- or GPU- or disk-bound.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mac Pro by alayne on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @12:35AM (#5859759)
Memory performance is a big problem. http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2158184/intel-memor...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mac Pro by seanp2k2 on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @03:06AM (#5860227)
(this is possibly why they opted to go for a chipset that supports 4 channels and only include 4 slots; 1 slot per channel)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mac Pro by reeses on Tuesday June 11, 2013 @03:01AM (#5860214)
If that were the case, we wouldn't have multi-level CPU caches and we really wouldn't care about misses stalling the processor.

Everything is RAM speed bound when it comes to CPU and GPU.

[ Parent | on HN ]