2 ms·
Where do you get that "3% lower memory bandwidth" figure from? LPDDR5 is running at 6400 MT/s on at least Apple and Intel platforms, and the fastest DDR5 SODIMM
by wtallis 4y ago
Where do you get that "3% lower memory bandwidth" figure from? LPDDR5 is running at 6400 MT/s on at least Apple and Intel platforms, and the fastest DDR5 SODIMMs I've seen so far are 5600MT/s: 12.5% slower, assuming equal bus width (only true for the base M1/2 processors).
- labcomputer 4y ago3%, 12% Potato, potato. It’s a small spec performance difference for a huge price difference. Meanwhile, for actual real-world workloads, not spilling to swap (because you have enough memory) will result in real-world performance that is many times (even an order of magnitude) better. Even with Apples blazing fast SSDs. Oh, and you can also spec a cheaper SSD because you don’t need one that can take a bajillion writes (because you aren’t treating your SSD as memory). AND the cheaper SSD will last longer too. In short, Apple could spec cheaper components AND get better real world performance by simply shipping computers that have enough memory. Edit: also 3% comes from shipping the absolute fasted DDR5 modules vs the second fasted DDR5.
- sliken 4y agoSure, that's 3%, but what about shipping 2x, 4x, and 8x as wide memory systems, largely enabled by not using industry standard dimms.