Can I use only two 8 GB RAM modules with my mid 2010 27" iMac (2.8 GHz Core I5)? In other words, do you have to fill all 4 memory slots or are 2 filled slots sufficient?
IMac (mid 2010, 27″) minimum ram slots required to fill
imacmemory
Related Solutions
Mac Pro Memory – Should I use 8 RAM slots in dual-channel mode or 6 RAM slots in triple-channel mode
The direct answer to your question is you will get marginally higher peak memory bandwidth with 6 matched memory modules running in triple channel mode than you will with 8 matched memory modules in dual channel mode. However, there are no guarantees that your machine will perform the tasks you use it for any quicker in either mode. You need a more in-depth analysis than that. Firstly, here are the memory replacement instructions for your Mac. In summary, the instructions for your model go like so:
Dual-processor computers have eight memory slots, four per processor. You can install 1 GB, 2 GB, or 4 GB DIMMs. Each processor’s memory controller has three memory channels. DIMM slots 1, 2, 5, and 6 have their own channels; slots 3 and 4 share a channel and slots 7 and 8 share a channel. For optimal memory bandwidth, all six memory channels should be used, and memory should be balanced across the six channels. Note: Populating slot 4 or 8 slightly drops maximum memory bandwidth, but depending on the applications used, overall system performance may benefit from the larger amount of memory.
If you have Fill in these slots
Two DIMMs 1 and 2
Three DIMMs 1, 2, and 3
Four DIMMs 1, 2, and 5, 6
Six DIMMs 1, 2, 3 and 5, 6, 7
Eight DIMMs 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, 6, 7, 8
To determine whether you would benefit from more total RAM or from keeping your RAM in triple channel mode would require benchmarks. It's difficult without measuring usage to say whether there will be any benefit from adding more RAM. If you run a compile with Activity Monitor running are you using all the RAM you have? Is disk I/O particularly high? If disk I/O is high but your RAM is not fully utilised you may be better off with an SSD hard drive to run your compilations from rather than adding RAM, check for paging to disk during the compile. The important thing here is to find the bottleneck rather than hoping that adding RAM will make things run quicker. It may even turn out that the CPU or the compiler is the bottleneck. If you have two 6-core CPUs, can your compiler use all that processing power?
I know I've probably raised more questions than I've answered but it's worth considering them if you're looking for a performance improvement for your investment.
If you are a programmer you probably understand these concepts anyway but here's a link to a codinghorror article just explaining the process of finding bottlenecks which I think is easy to read. The OS in this case is windows but the principles are the same. You can use Activity Monitor or a third party resource monitoring tool to determine the bottleneck.
For example, to determine whether your system is running out of RAM, fire up Activity Monitor. Near the bottom of the window, select the tab button labelled 'System Memory' and take a look at the pie chart and figures listed beneath. Here's an example from my system.
The figures in this screenshot you should be interested in are Free and Page Outs. Free shows how much RAM is currently available, Page Outs is an indicator that your system is running out of RAM and has had to write temporary data to disk. Anything above 0 in Page Outs means you could potentially benefit from more RAM. You could perform whatever activity you expect to push your system with Activity Monitor open and monitor these figures throughout. This should help you determine whether you will get any benefit from more RAM. For completeness, here's what each item represents.
- Free: Memory not in use
- Wired: Data which must remain in RAM and can't be moved to disk
- Active: Data which is currently in memory and has been accessed recently
- Inactive: Data which is currently in memory but is no longer being used. For example, if you recently quit an application, its data is kept in memory for faster relaunch but it will be used by other application if you run out of Free memory.
- Used: The sum of Wired, Active and Inactive memory
Here's a really nice link too for Mac performance questions http://www.macperformanceguide.com/
The iMac Mid-2010 supports DDR3 10666 (from the Apple support site)
The first link is to the correct RAM for that Front Side Bus (FSB) speed The second link is to a slightly quicker set of RAM, but runs on a lower FSB.
The differences between the two are characterised by the two notes above, the FSB speed and the clock timings.
In the first, the FSB speed is higher, but the timings for the RAM are slower. In the second, the slower FSB allows the RAM to work at slightly faster timings.
If you want to know about timings, a search for RAS CAS delay is a good starting point.
Related Question
- IMac – 2012 iMac RAM Upgrade
- IMac 2012 RAM upgrade with mixed voltages
- IMac ram memory installing 16GB vs 20GB
- IMac – Installing and Upgrading Ram on a mid 2011 iMac (different size RAM)
- IMac 27″ Mid 2010 RAM Upgrade
- IMac – Is using mid 2012 MacBook Pro RAM in mid 2011 iMac 27″ an option
- IMac 27″, Mid 2010 (11,3 model)
Best Answer
Short answer to your question is YES.
But why would you limit the memory given the price of modules today?
According to Everymac.com, your "official" max is 16GB, however you can go all the way up to 32GB. I personally used Crucial memory modules in my iMac and MacBook Pro with no problems
I would go with 2 16GB kits (a "kit" being 2 8GB modules) for a total of 32 GB RAM (a total of 4 8GB RAM modules).