Got the iMac 5k. Should I go for RAM upgrade ?

[amitpahuja]

I finally got the apple 5k 3.3gig, 8gb, 2TB fusion as the was the Top end model available here in India. There was no option of just SSD so I went ahead and bought the Fusion with TB including 128gb SSD.

First impressions are great - of course after spending 3k$$ can't say bad Better performance than my 6y old MBA 11inch and 3y old MBP in every aspect. Screw is mind blowing.

I'll be using this for primarily the Photograph processing in LR and Photoshop and maybe Photos. Currently I'm transferring some data into i to check the performance but the NEF processing of D750 and D7100 are looking good. Lightroom has a slight lag and I'm not sure if that the way LR is or its because of 8GB RAM.

Question : should I upgrade immediately to 16GB? I see there are 2 more slots available for adding another 8GB of RAM. If yes, any brand recommendations?

Thanks.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Is it fast enough for you now? 4Gb runs OK for me on an Air with an SSD. I doubt you'll see a huge difference unless running several programs concurrently.

This is like wide angle lenses, people always recommend spending more!

 

[CameraCarl]

I upgraded my Retina iMac to 24GB of RAM since the original 8GB seemed to lag when processing 20 megapixel files in Lightroom. I used Crucial for my additional RAM.

 

[Pickedmypocket]

I recently got off B&H (love dealing with them) 3.3 i5 with M395 graphics and 3TB Fusion with 8gigs ram for $2200 it was on sale for a week or so. I sold the 2 four gig ram for 40.00 then purchased 32 gig ram Kingston (4X8 gig ram chips) for $170. So I have around 2400.00 for something Apple wants $2900. Love this iMac

 

[MiguelD]

Go for 32Gb third-party. It is worth it.

M

 

[bmoag]

The lag you are experiencing is quite possibly due to the anemic graphics processor in these machines, regardless of whether it is Intel or AMD.

The OSX video drivers will support 4k and 5k resolution, as will even Win 10 microsoft basic drivers. That does not mean the GPU has the horsepower to do much more than redraw relatively static images. Anyone can check this by plugging a Macbook Pro into a 4k monitor. It works but its laggy. If you have ever seen the difference running 4k using the Microsoft driver compared to using the AMD or Nvidia driver you have seen what a difference the video driver makes. That is not possible in OSX.

Fact check: no one benefits from more than 16gb of RAM unless running a server or using a RAM disk, neither applicable to your machine. I have never seen objective testing show otherwise but opinions are what they are. Nanosecond differences on a test chart have no relationship to human perception.

 

[Pickedmypocket]

I know this I was forced to use PC's due to business software for the company I worked now retired I'll never go back to using anything but iMac's.

 

[ourmanflint]

Is it fast enough for you now? 4Gb runs OK for me on an Air with an SSD. I doubt you'll see a huge difference unless running several programs concurrently.

This is like wide angle lenses, people always recommend spending more!

 

[jforkner]

Why not turn on the Activity Monitor & watch what it indicates as you do your processing? That will tell you if you’re using what you already have or need more. You might be surprised.

Jack

 

[Eric Nepean]

The price of RAM goes down with time.

The Mac will slow down over time as you install more demanding applications, and Apple deploys operating systems that demand more resources.

I would wait until I thought the machine was too slow and then upgrade the RAM.

If it's fast enough for you now, no point in spending money on an upgrade.

 

[amitpahuja]

Thanks all for your replies. Looks like 16gb is the way to go for a better performance than what it is as of now. One question to already iMac owners... Can I add 8gbx2 now on top of the preinstalled 4x2? Or I'll have to use only 8x2 or 8x4 ? Thanks

--
www.shotbyamitpahuja.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nikon D750, D7100, D90 - Nikor 18-105mm, 50mm, 35mm, 55-300mm, MB-D80, SB-700, Tokina 11-16mm

 

[Ryanide]

Thanks all for your replies. Looks like 16gb is the way to go for a better performance than what it is as of now. One question to already iMac owners... Can I add 8gbx2 now on top of the preinstalled 4x2? Or I'll have to use only 8x2 or 8x4 ? Thanks

 

[Ellis Vener]

Thanks all for your replies. Looks like 16gb is the way to go for a better performance than what it is as of now. One question to already iMac owners... Can I add 8gbx2 now on top of the preinstalled 4x2? Or I'll have to use only 8x2 or 8x4 ? Thanks

 

[Eric Nepean]

Thanks all for your replies. Looks like 16gb is the way to go for a better performance than what it is as of now. One question to already iMac owners... Can I add 8gbx2 now on top of the preinstalled 4x2? Or I'll have to use only 8x2 or 8x4 ? Thanks

 

[itguy08]

Fact check: no one benefits from more than 16gb of RAM unless running a server or using a RAM disk, neither applicable to your machine. I have never seen objective testing show otherwise but opinions are what they are. Nanosecond differences on a test chart have no relationship to human perception.

It all depends on your workload. I've seen Lightroom gobble up 4GB of RAM after a while using it. Seen Photoshop take up about the same if editing with multiple layers or large panoramas. Add in a 2GB Safari session and a few other memory hogs and you are darn close to 16GB used. OS X loves to cache and that DOES increase performance by a large bit.

I've noticed quite the speedup going from 8GB to 24GB on my 2013 iMac. Running multiple programs is effortless and LR is not the drag it was. OS X also does not compress memory (has a slight performance hit) until most of the memory is used.

I'd say max it out if you can, especially if you multitask. You WILL see a performance improvement.

 

[amitpahuja]

Thanks all. It looks like adding some chips will help. Gotta go shopping now

 

[robgendreau]

There are some tests of photo-specific chores and memory with various iMacs here: http://macperformanceguide.com/iMac5K_2015-diglloydPhotoshopBenchmarks.html

And yes, there are differences. Whether they'd apply to you, and whether those seconds (and there can be quite a few of those) matter depends on your use.

 

[Schroedingers_cat]

[No message]

 

[AndyGordon]

... Can I add 8gbx2 now on top of the preinstalled 4x2? Or I'll have to use only 8x2 or 8x4 ? Thanks

I've just bought an 8gb ram iMac (2x4) and added 2x8gb to take it up to 24gb which works fine

Andy

 

[noirdesir]

There are some tests of photo-specific chores and memory with various iMacs here: http://macperformanceguide.com/iMac5K_2015-diglloydPhotoshopBenchmarks.html

Note that these particular tests compare 32 with 64 GB RAM. From the same site, a 2011 MBP with an SSD was tested with 8 and 16 GB of RAM, where a Photoshop benchmark test was performed up to 4x as fast with 16 compared to 8 GB of RAM. With more modern SSDs, that difference is likely a good deal smaller.

The point with RAM is that the performance improvements only become very noticeable when your RAM needs noticeably exceed your base configuration. But when they do, then the performance improvements indeed become very noticeable. For example, your performance might be fine 90% of the time with 8 GB but during the remaining 10%, more RAM would really make a difference. And then 16 GB might be fine 99% of the time, but during that 1%, 24 or 32 GB would really make a difference.