Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

elf69

macrumors 68020
Jun 2, 2016
2,333
489
Cornwall UK
true but 4GB and el cap is fine for average use.

web and docs etc.

I have a 17" mac with 4GB and el cap a friend is borrowing and it is fine for word doc, web and little excel.
 

jav6454

macrumors Core
Nov 14, 2007
22,303
6,257
1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
true but 4GB and el cap is fine for average use.

web and docs etc.

I have a 17" mac with 4GB and el cap a friend is borrowing and it is fine for word doc, web and little excel.

Not quite. At 4GB my late 2008 MacBook constantly started to page out to swap. That was under basic stuff (like using MR).
 

elf69

macrumors 68020
Jun 2, 2016
2,333
489
Cornwall UK
my 2009 macbook running sierra has 8gb ram but never uses more than 4.3GB (monitor in utilities)

In have thunderbird, skype, imessage, firefox (2 tabs) and chrome (3-5 tabs)

I only have the 2.26GHz model not the 2.4GHz.
works amazing for me.
 

bunnspecial

macrumors G3
May 3, 2014
8,317
6,373
Kentucky
it a pro of course.

I know never made 17" macbook

This is one of those places where being precise in wording is quite important.

Pre-2009 non-Unibody Macbooks will run okay on Mountain Lion, but not past there. I tend to keep them on Snow Leopard. The GMA950 or X3100 GPUs hold them back in newer OSs.

Depending on which revision of the 17" you have, you probably have either an 8600m or 9400m. These GPUs were officially supported(and worked quite well) up through El Capitan.
 

elf69

macrumors 68020
Jun 2, 2016
2,333
489
Cornwall UK
My 17" is running El Capitan at moment but as it Santa Rosa I'm told will not take sierra due to SSE4.

Most users here would know I meant pro as a 17" non pro was never made.

but yeah will watch that in future
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.