5 ms·

Huh. So they used to do this, but looking at the M series chips it seems like the architecture assumes the CPU-GPU-RAM are all on the same chip and hooked into

Huh. So they used to do this, but looking at the M series chips it seems like the architecture assumes the CPU-GPU-RAM are all on the same chip and hooked into each other, which enables zero copy. Someone more well versed in hardware could explain if this is even possible. Expandable internal storage would be nice, yeah. But I get the sealed, very tightly packed chassis they’re going for.

strangetortoise 3y ago
They haven't made slotted ram or storage on their macbooks since 2012 (retina macbooks removed the slotted ram afaik). It might save on thickness, but I'm not buying the slim chasses argument being the only reason, since they happily made their devices thicker for the M series cpus.
- pbmonster 3y ago
  > It might save on thickness, but I'm not buying the slim chasses argument being the only reason Soldered memory allows higher bus frequency much, much easier. From a high frequency perspective, the slots are a nightmare.
  - Jetrel 3y ago
    It's not soldered. It used to be, but ever since the M1, it's in-CPU. The ram is actually part of the CPU die. Needless to say it has batshit insane implications for memory bandwidth. I've got an M1, and the load time for apps is absolutely fucking insane by comparison to my iMac; there's at least one AAA game whose loading time dropped from about 5 minutes on my quad-core intel, to 5 seconds on my mac studio. There's just a shitload of text-processing and compiling going on any time a large game gets launched. It's been incredibly good for compiling C++ and Node apps, as well.
    - redeeman 3y ago
      the ram is not on die, and 5 min to 5 sec is obviously due to other things, if legit
      - thirdsun 3y ago
        Sounds like the iMac had spinning hard disks rather than SSD storage.
- pdpi 3y ago
  Yup. I’ve been looking at the Framework laptop, and it’s barely any thicker than the current MacBook Pro.
ffgjgf1 3y ago
> get the sealed, very tightly packed chassis they’re going for The Dell XPS 17 is only 0.1 inch thicker yet has fully replaceable RAM and 2(!) m2 slots. I’m pretty sure what Apple is going for is maximizing profit margins over anything else..
- dijit 3y ago
  The issue is often comparing apples (heh) to oranges. I understand the desire for slotted RAM, but the major limiting factor for nearly 10 years was CPU support for more than 16G of RAM. I had 16G of ram in 2011 and it was only 2019 when Intels 9th Gen laptop CPUs started supporting more. The Dell XPS 17 itself has so many issues that if it was a Macbook people would be chomping at the bit, including not having a reliable suspend and memory issues causing BSOD's. -- reliability of these devices, at least when it comes to memory, might actually be worse and cause a shorter lifespan than if it had been soldered. Of course it always feels good to buy an underspecced machine and upgrade it a year later, which is what we're trading off. But it's interesting that we don't seem to have taken issue with BGA CPU mounts in laptops but we did for memory, I think this might be because Apple was one of the first to do it - and we feel a certain way when Apple limits us but not when other companies do.
  - angoragoats 3y ago
    There’s a lot of flat-out wrong information in this post. For one, even the low-power (U-series) Intel laptop CPUs have suported 32GB+ of memory since at least the 6th generation[1]. Many machines based on these CPUs unofficially support more than that. I have a Thinkpad with an i7-8550u and 64GB of DDR4, and it runs great. On top of that, the higher-power laptop SKUs have supported 64gb or more since that time as well. Secondly, it’s silly to claim that having RAM slots somehow makes a computer inherently more unstable. Typically these types of issues are the result of the manufacturer of the machine having bugs in the BIOS/EFI implementation, which are exacerbated by certain brands/types of memory. If you don’t want to mess around with figuring that stuff out, most manufacturers publish a list of officially-tested RAM modules which are not always the cheapest in absolute terms, but are always night-and-day cheaper than Apple’s ridiculous memory pricing. [1] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/88190/intel-core-i56300u-processor-3m-cache-up-to-3-00-ghz/specifications.html https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/88190/i...

strangetortoise 3y ago

They haven't made slotted ram or storage on their macbooks since 2012 (retina macbooks removed the slotted ram afaik). It might save on thickness, but I'm not buying the slim chasses argument being the only reason, since they happily made their devices thicker for the M series cpus.

pbmonster 3y ago
> It might save on thickness, but I'm not buying the slim chasses argument being the only reason Soldered memory allows higher bus frequency much, much easier. From a high frequency perspective, the slots are a nightmare.
- Jetrel 3y ago
  It's not soldered. It used to be, but ever since the M1, it's in-CPU. The ram is actually part of the CPU die. Needless to say it has batshit insane implications for memory bandwidth. I've got an M1, and the load time for apps is absolutely fucking insane by comparison to my iMac; there's at least one AAA game whose loading time dropped from about 5 minutes on my quad-core intel, to 5 seconds on my mac studio. There's just a shitload of text-processing and compiling going on any time a large game gets launched. It's been incredibly good for compiling C++ and Node apps, as well.
  - redeeman 3y ago
    the ram is not on die, and 5 min to 5 sec is obviously due to other things, if legit
    - thirdsun 3y ago
      Sounds like the iMac had spinning hard disks rather than SSD storage.
pdpi 3y ago
Yup. I’ve been looking at the Framework laptop, and it’s barely any thicker than the current MacBook Pro.

ffgjgf1 3y ago

> get the sealed, very tightly packed chassis they’re going for The Dell XPS 17 is only 0.1 inch thicker yet has fully replaceable RAM and 2(!) m2 slots. I’m pretty sure what Apple is going for is maximizing profit margins over anything else..

dijit 3y ago
The issue is often comparing apples (heh) to oranges. I understand the desire for slotted RAM, but the major limiting factor for nearly 10 years was CPU support for more than 16G of RAM. I had 16G of ram in 2011 and it was only 2019 when Intels 9th Gen laptop CPUs started supporting more. The Dell XPS 17 itself has so many issues that if it was a Macbook people would be chomping at the bit, including not having a reliable suspend and memory issues causing BSOD's. -- reliability of these devices, at least when it comes to memory, might actually be worse and cause a shorter lifespan than if it had been soldered. Of course it always feels good to buy an underspecced machine and upgrade it a year later, which is what we're trading off. But it's interesting that we don't seem to have taken issue with BGA CPU mounts in laptops but we did for memory, I think this might be because Apple was one of the first to do it - and we feel a certain way when Apple limits us but not when other companies do.
- angoragoats 3y ago
  There’s a lot of flat-out wrong information in this post. For one, even the low-power (U-series) Intel laptop CPUs have suported 32GB+ of memory since at least the 6th generation[1]. Many machines based on these CPUs unofficially support more than that. I have a Thinkpad with an i7-8550u and 64GB of DDR4, and it runs great. On top of that, the higher-power laptop SKUs have supported 64gb or more since that time as well. Secondly, it’s silly to claim that having RAM slots somehow makes a computer inherently more unstable. Typically these types of issues are the result of the manufacturer of the machine having bugs in the BIOS/EFI implementation, which are exacerbated by certain brands/types of memory. If you don’t want to mess around with figuring that stuff out, most manufacturers publish a list of officially-tested RAM modules which are not always the cheapest in absolute terms, but are always night-and-day cheaper than Apple’s ridiculous memory pricing. [1] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/88190/intel-core-i56300u-processor-3m-cache-up-to-3-00-ghz/specifications.html https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/88190/i...