View Full Version : lightwave addressing more than 2gb

06-13-2007, 05:13 AM
this might be a stoopid question but here goes..

With the pc and windows xp32 & lw9.2 32bit, you can use upto 2gb of ram for a project but no more, even with the 3gb workaround, each individual process (i.e. one running copy of lightwave) can only address 2gb.

I have now moved to xp64 and one copy of vista 64 on my workstation pc using lw9.2 64bits, and can access the full amount of ram in my system no problems (in my case 4gb)..

There is not much mention of 32bits vs 64bits with osX, so...

Is osX capable of addressing more than 2gb of ram currently (i'd assume yes as u can buy a macpro with more than 2gb installed) and..

can lightwave 9.2 running on osX use scenes that exceed 2gb, i.e. does osX allow apps to address in 64bits...


06-13-2007, 05:59 AM
OSX does not allow apps with a GUI to access more than 3-4 GB, so basically: If it has a GUI, it isn't 64bit.
This will change with leopard (and is probably one of the major changes).


06-14-2007, 09:02 AM
Under Windows XP (32-bit) apps were limited to 2 GB, though there was a OS switch you could set to allow up to 3GB (albeit at a risk of reduced stability). OSX 10.4 allows apps access to at least 3GB possibly up to 4GB (as previously stated).

OSX 10.4 lets you access all the RAM you stick in your box though using the mac equivalent of PAE. Individual processes are limited to that 3-4GB limit, but having plenty of RAM does make things run a lot smoother if you do things like background rendering (like me - just upgraded my G5 quad from 4GB to 6GB)

06-15-2007, 01:25 PM
so at the moment then, the mac has no answer to simply buying a quad core pc (qx6700) sticking 8gig of ram in it and using lw 64bit, fprime3 64bit and win 64bit to get all 8 gig available in one scene..

i have one quad core pc with 8 gig at the moment, and was going to hold off buying another couple cos i really fancy one of those 8core mac pro's.. but if i buy one of those i will be unable to access all 8gig in lightwave for one scene.

leopard will indeed fix this, but then we'll have to wait again for the mac version of lightwave to adapt to take account of this (much as the 64bit lw followed the 32bit one on pc's).. and also worley will then have to release a ub version of fprime that can access all of the memory...

oh well, looks like i'm stuck with pc quad boxes for the forseeable future, shame really, as i soooo want to buy an 8 core mac pro beast... (i'm not quite brave enough to build a dual processor pc workstation... although that is an option..)

cheers for the replies guys..

06-15-2007, 03:22 PM
There's nothing stopping you from getting an 8 Core MacPro then running win XP64 or Vista64 on it using bootcamp. You could then switch to OSX once Leopard + LW64 UB are available (while having the option of using OSX for things like Final Cut). If you need that level of hardware, then the 8core macpro costs (last time I looked) the same or less than a comparable Dell, Alienware or BOXX system. I seem to remember Apple having an exclusive on the 3GHz Quad-core parts, though that might have changed now.

The intel switch was a pretty smart business move for Apple. A couple of people I know who would never previously considered a mac have since bought one because they knew it could still run windows as a fallback.

06-15-2007, 04:06 PM
Keep in mind that Apple's Boot Camp does not include X64 drivers. I believe some people have been sucessful in getting WinXP64 to work on the Mac Pros, but it's not officially supported be Apple yet... and may be a little tricky to get running.

P.S. I have an 8 core MacPro and it is a fast machine. Haven't tried XP64 on it.

06-18-2007, 10:42 AM
thanx for the responses guys..

i have decided to go with another quad intel box for now... i build them myself, so each one has cost me about 1300 (qx6700 + 4gig ram and all the other bits to build it) obviously without monitors..

i will most likely move across to an 8 core mac pro, but it will be towards the end of the year, and then these 2 quad's will simply slot into being render nodes (one of them is already)..