Is this correct? Did I miss something? I was ready to upgrade my machine and get a new M1 device with 64 GB of RAM, but it maxes out at 16 GB. I wonder if this will be fixed next year or if we are going to be stuck at 16 GB for a while.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Max RAM limited to 16 GB?
- Thread starter ikkysleepy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is an entry level chips for entry level models, so 16GB cap makes sense. It's most likely limited by the package technology. I'd expect this RAM to be faster than what you usually get.
"Real" pro-level Apple Silicon will be released over the next few years. This right now is only entry-level consumer stuff.
"Real" pro-level Apple Silicon will be released over the next few years. This right now is only entry-level consumer stuff.
I noticed this immediately. This is quite a downgrade. Also the RAM of the Mac Mini is not user upgradeable anymore. By contrast, the previous models supported 64 Gb...
Yes and No, the Mac Mini they replaced used to be configurable up to 64GB which is a shame. BUT I think you're on to something, I think a second variant with the mid-tier chip is coming and will allow more ram.
16GB cap seems a bit low for MBP and Mac Mini type of devices. I wonder if the so called High Bandwidth memory is HBM2(e) or LPDDR4x/LPDDR5 
I think because the RAM is integrated directly into the Apple Silicon SOC now to support unified memory, it is not possible just to upgrade the RAM chips. More RAM would actually have to integrated at the chip fab.
Obviously chips for more powerful machines are not being released yet...
Obviously chips for more powerful machines are not being released yet...
In their animations you can clearly see that the RAM is packaged with the SoC. Just can't have that kind of stuff user-upgradeable. That's one price to pay for performance and energy efficiency.
16GB cap seems a bit low for MBP and Mac Mini type of devices. I wonder if the so called High Bandwidth memory is HBM2(e) or LPDDR4x/LPDDR5
It's most certainly not HBM2, can't get it at this price level. I'd guess it's some form of LPDDR packaged in a way that resembles HBM. I'd expect memory bandwidth in ballpark of 80GBps or more.
16GB is low, but notice that these M1 models only replace the low-end of the Mac Mini and Macbook Pro 13". The high-end Intel versions of each still remain. The MBA on the other hand is replaced entirely, which makes sense.
I agree with Leman that it's probably a package technology issue. This chip is almost certainly an A14X with tweaks to IO and such, and likely limited in that way. Will be an interesting choice for some people for a while though: buy the almost certainly faster M1 variants with only 2 ports and 16GB RAM, or buy a slower Intel version with 4 ports and more RAM.
It's possible that the 8x4 chip, certainly coming in the 24" iMac Spring / Summer next year, could be backloaded into the top variants of the Mac Mini and 13" MBP, I suppose, which probably also changes the RAM and IO equation. If not, we'll have to wait for the supposed Fall 2021 redesigns I expect for higher-powered and more beefy configurations.
I agree with Leman that it's probably a package technology issue. This chip is almost certainly an A14X with tweaks to IO and such, and likely limited in that way. Will be an interesting choice for some people for a while though: buy the almost certainly faster M1 variants with only 2 ports and 16GB RAM, or buy a slower Intel version with 4 ports and more RAM.
It's possible that the 8x4 chip, certainly coming in the 24" iMac Spring / Summer next year, could be backloaded into the top variants of the Mac Mini and 13" MBP, I suppose, which probably also changes the RAM and IO equation. If not, we'll have to wait for the supposed Fall 2021 redesigns I expect for higher-powered and more beefy configurations.
There is no way that they will offer less RAM or ports than the Intel Mac they replace. I expect next versions of M chips to come with stacked RAM of some sort and more USB/Thunderbolt controllers.
If the "unified" RAM can be accessed much faster than standard DDR then 16GB should be enough for most users. Especially for those lower-end models.
Yeah, that's what I thought as well but still wanted to believe
A quick Google search suggest that LPDDR4x seems to caps out at 8Gb per chip (and also 8GB per package) and LPDDR5 caps out at 12Gb per chip (but at 16GB per package using mix of 12Gb and 8Gb chips). 16Gb chips seem to be planned for production later this year giving Apple a chance to use them next year hopefully for 32GB total RAM.
No need for conjecture. The chip overlay clearly shows two modules integrated on package. We are looking at LPDDR4 (4/4X or 5X). HBM would only require one package to support 16GB.16GB cap seems a bit low for MBP and Mac Mini type of devices. I wonder if the so called High Bandwidth memory is HBM2(e) or LPDDR4x/LPDDR5
This is a First Generation M1 chip. Give them time, folks! I'm sure more memory options will be available in the future.
Only 16 GB RAM means that the MacBook Pro is quite useless for a lot of Pros. Video and Audio (at least when working with virtual instruments) need much more RAM.
Yes, it’s true that you can build a 16GB HBM2 package using 8 stacks of 16Gb chips but Z-height could be an issue. 16GB or 24GB HBM2 packages seems to be more suitable for Server/HPC use cases. Thus, if Apple would use HBM2 on the SoC, I believe they might go with 2 separate packages to reduce number of stacks per package (and height). Or it would be also possible that they use 8Gb chips in the stacks thus need two separate packages. I still have some hope that it might actually be HBM2 rather than LPDDR4x/5
Was ready to buy, but 16 GB of RAM? Not nearly enough for audio work in Logic. Need 64 GB for plugins.
True, this is from the Finnish Apple Store. Can't wait for some reviews. However since it clearly showed two stacks it could be 4-stack 16Gb HBM for 16GB or 4-stack 8Gb HBM for 8GB.Yes, it’s true that you can build a 16GB HBM2 package using 8 stacks of 16Gb chips but Z-height could be an issue. 16GB or 24GB HBM2 packages seems to be more suitable for Server/HPC use cases. Thus, if Apple would use HBM2 on the SoC, I believe they might go with 2 separate packages to reduce number of stacks per package (and height). Or it would be also possible that they use 8Gb chips in the stacks thus need two separate packages. I still have some hope that it might actually be HBM2 rather than LPDDR4x/5
Uhm, why would those people buy an entry level device?
The Pro customers that you're talking about didn't buy the Macbook Pro that this one replaced either.
Oh and you know this because you've used an Apple Silicon Mac with 16 GB of RAM?
You forgot to add: "....when working with Intel machines that gobble up RAM like its nothing, which is of course my only experience since I've never used an Apple Silicon and have no idea how these will stack up."
Well it is integrated into the chip, so the cpu-controller-memory is tightly integrated as well, I am not sure if talking about DDR or HBM is really the right question to ask here. It would be interesting to see how Apple have done the integration, as everything is under their control.16GB cap seems a bit low for MBP and Mac Mini type of devices. I wonder if the so called High Bandwidth memory is HBM2(e) or LPDDR4x/LPDDR5
Feels small, but I will reserve judgment until I see the application memory usage on the AS chips.
With that said, I expect that later AS chips will support larger amounts of memory.
With that said, I expect that later AS chips will support larger amounts of memory.