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

Eta on 32g of Ram for M1/M2? When can we expect the new Mac Book Pro 16’?

jumpcutking

jumpcutking

macrumors demi-god
Original poster
Nov 6, 2020
323
239
As a media guy, I’m looking to update to the latest innovation but I’m waiting for the M1/M2 chip to get 32g of ram support (or more). I’ll be fine with the current version if we could get a 16’ Mac Book Pro.

Anyone anywhere got an idea when that might happen? WWDC? Fall?

Anyone heard any whispers from the Apple gods?
 
My guess is that it’s not possible for M1. It’s rumoured that M2 is under production now so it’s anyone’s guess when we’ll see it. I’m hoping for late summer but that’s just a guess.
 
leman said:
We'll certainly hear something during the WWDC in June.
Click to expand...

More inclined to believe we will hear about it in September for an October launch.

SOC production ramp up takes about 2-3 months and then another 1-2 months for laptop supply chain (other parts, assembly, delivery to the US).

Hoping that I am wrong. Need a new MacBook in July. My Retina MBP is completing 5 years and showing its age.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacCheetah3
JohnnyGo said:
More inclined to believe we will hear about it in September for an October launch.

SOC production ramp up takes about 2-3 months and then another 1-2 months for laptop supply chain (other parts, assembly, delivery to the US).

Hoping that I am wrong. Need a new MacBook in July. My Retina MBP is completing 5 years and showing its age.
Click to expand...

For clarification: I don't think the new models will launch in Summer, it will be autumn at earliest IMO. But I am sure there will be some information about them on the WWDC. Apple seems to be on a "blast from the past" trip lately, and WWDC is an event where they would traditionally announce new Pro hardware. It would make perfect sense for them to revive that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnnyGo, pshufd and BigMcGuire
I would expect "an announcement" in June, possibly at WWDC.

I recall reading a few days ago (may have been right here on macrumors) that the "next generation" of m-series chips go into production (and shipping?) in July, so it will probably be at least 30-60 days after that before any production units would start shipping.

So I think we'll see the 14" and 16" "new design" MBP's shipping late September or early October.

That's a totally-uneducated guess on my part.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire
OP: Is there a reason you need more than 32GB of Unified Memory ?
Is there a specific app that requires that much more memory?
Have you tried a 16GB machine to see what this new M1 does ?

I have a base 8GB UM M1 Mini and it does NOT need any more UM ("RAM").
My 8GB Unified Memory runs circles around any Intel Mini with double or triple or quadruple the "RAM" and does it with coldness (no fan spin ups).

At work I use a 2020 Mini CTO / BTO with 6 core i7, 10GBe upgrade, and 64GB of RAM - runs hot as a pistol (needs a cooling fan), system fan ramps up constantly, and apps start to delay opening.

So crazy as it is, still can't match the performance of the base (8GB) M1 Mini.

I think the UM is not the same as DDR memory - Apple's UM runs more efficiently than traditional PC / Intel based DDR memory.

Can't compare Apples to Apples in this case as the Intel based RAM is an "orange".
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire and ElectronGuru
I agree with @4sallypat . I went from an iMac late-2012 Core i7 3.4 GHz machine with 32 GB of RAM to a MacBook Air with 16 GB of unified memory. It runs circles around my iMac. Can't wait for my 16 GB Mac Mini to arrive tomorrow.

I run a lot of apps open at the same time including Acrobat with 700+ page PDF documents, Word with multi-hundred page documents, etc. It's pretty fast. Not sure it would benefit me to have more memory.

Having said that, I recognize there are people who need more memory than the rest of us. I thought I needed it, but turns out I don't. This thing has been the best computer I've ever owned hands down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire, ElectronGuru and 4sallypat
4sallypat said:
OP: Is there a reason you need more than 32GB of Unified Memory ?
Is there a specific app that requires that much more memory?
Click to expand...

Depends on your workload. I for example regularly work with datasets that occupy more than 8GB in RAM. Apple Silicon is less reliant on RAM as application cache, since it can swap memory in and out extremely fast, but if your workflow needs a lot of active RAM, fast swap won't help.

And besides, as prosumer Macs will come with more CPU cores, they will need more RAM (and more bandwidth) to allow those cores to work tot heir full ability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EzisAA, Tagbert and ader42
4sallypat said:
OP: Is there a reason you need more than 32GB of Unified Memory ?
Is there a specific app that requires that much more memory?
Have you tried a 16GB machine to see what this new M1 does ?

I have a base 8GB UM M1 Mini and it does NOT need any more UM ("RAM").
My 8GB Unified Memory runs circles around any Intel Mini with double or triple or quadruple the "RAM" and does it with coldness (no fan spin ups).

At work I use a 2020 Mini CTO / BTO with 6 core i7, 10GBe upgrade, and 64GB of RAM - runs hot as a pistol (needs a cooling fan), system fan ramps up constantly, and apps start to delay opening.

So crazy as it is, still can't match the performance of the base (8GB) M1 Mini.

I think the UM is not the same as DDR memory - Apple's UM runs more efficiently than traditional PC / Intel based DDR memory.

Can't compare Apples to Apples in this case as the Intel based RAM is an "orange".
Click to expand...
After effects. 'nuff said.
 
  • Love
Reactions: ader42
andrewstirling said:
I’m confident it can’t. There is zero reason why more ram wouldn’t have been added as an option if it could handle it.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of very valid reasons, the main being density of LPDDR4X memory modules. M1 by design comes with two RAM modules integrated on the package. As far as I know, largest commercial available modules of this type are 8GB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CWallace and Fomalhaut
leman said:
There are plenty of very valid reasons, the main being density of LPDDR4X memory modules. M1 by design comes with two RAM modules integrated on the package. As far as I know, largest commercial available modules of this type are 8GB.
Click to expand...
Technically different, yes, but leads up to the exact same thing, doesn't it? (M1 not being configurable with 32GB by design)
 
  • Like
Reactions: VaruLV
lars666 said:
Technically different, yes, but leads up to the exact same thing, doesn't it? (M1 not being configurable with 32GB by design)
Click to expand...

That is of course true. But it does not mean that the underlying technology is incapable of using more than 16GB RAM. The existing M1 RAM capacity limitation is simply a business choice, not a technological limitation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacCheetah3 and VaruLV
They definitely have to find a way when the new 16" MacBook Pro and the bigger iMac comes out – even Apple won't get away with 16GB max for professional heavy video /photo users with some kind of "with M-chips, 16GB is like 32GB" sorcery narrative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VaruLV
leman said:
That is of course true. But it does not mean that the underlying technology is incapable of using more than 16GB RAM. The existing M1 RAM capacity limitation is simply a business choice, not a technological limitation.
Click to expand...
I guess the memory controller could be the limiting factor. Otherwise Apple could have used the M1 in a bigger package with four memory modules in the new iMac, matching the memory options in the replaced Intel models.
 
JouniS said:
I guess the memory controller could be the limiting factor. Otherwise Apple could have used the M1 in a bigger package with four memory modules in the new iMac, matching the memory options in the replaced Intel models.
Click to expand...

But that would require using a different package which means increased costs (both directly and indirectly). Using the same M1 package across a wide range of consumer devices allows Apple to achieve incredible economy of scale. They can bin the chips, putting less power efficient ones into the iMac and more power-efficient ones into the MacBook Pro for example. Again, I don't think it's a technical limitation. To me, it looks like a deliberate business decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fomalhaut, VaruLV, Apple Knowledge Navigator and 1 other person
lars666 said:
They definitely have to find a way when the new 16" MacBook Pro and the bigger iMac comes out – even Apple won't get away with 16GB max for professional heavy video /photo users with some kind of "with M-chips, 16GB is like 32GB" sorcery narrative.
Click to expand...

Well of course. Prosumer chips will also need more memory bandwidth to feed the larger CPU/GPU clusters. I don't think we will see many surprises here to be honest. Looking at how Apple has been approaching things, there is exactly one obvious solution: more memory channels, which in turn means more memory chips, which means higher peak memory capacity. I expect four memory channels (256-bit bus) and LPDDR5 or DDR5, with bandwidth of 200GB/s and maximal configurable RAM either 64GB or 128GB (the later is unlikely though since high-density DDR5 chips are not in production yet AFAIK).
 
  • Like
Reactions: jumpcutking and BigMcGuire
leman said:
There are plenty of very valid reasons, the main being density of LPDDR4X memory modules. M1 by design comes with two RAM modules integrated on the package. As far as I know, largest commercial available modules of this type are 8GB.
Click to expand...
12 GB is available from Samsung.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back