The RAM in the new Apple silicon-based Macs is NOT part of the fabbed chip, it is on-package & adjacent to the M1 chip...
I was coming to say the same, but @Deinocheirus nailed it...! ;^p
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
The RAM in the new Apple silicon-based Macs is NOT part of the fabbed chip, it is on-package & adjacent to the M1 chip...
I was coming to say the same, but @Deinocheirus nailed it...! ;^p
16GB seems like an odd limitation in 2020. I am a developer and when I open up a 32bit pixel frame buffer for an XDR display, there are 20m pixels and thus 80MB of memory. That is not going to change no matter what CPU it is using.
From the diagrams in the presentation, the DRAM is on the same package, but not part of the SoC die. It certainly part of the manufacture, but not the wafer fabrication.
I doubt we will see user-replaceable RAM any more, even on the iMac, with the possible exception of the Mac Pro, which I think will use a different architecture to the other Macs (add-on processor boards or similar).
The Mac mini they released today was meant to replace the budget/entry-level Mac mini they didn't release in 2018. The 2018/2020 model is considered a "pro" model. Which is why they are still selling it starting at $1099. If you notice they made no mention of servers or virtualization which they normally do for the Mac mini. it's because the new M1 chip can't be used for that. It's an entry level Mac mini like they had up through the 2014 model. That's why it's silver again also and not space gray.
This is a transition of several years. They are not replacing "pro" models yet like the higher-end MacBook Pro, the 'Pro' Mac mini, iMac Pro & Mac Pro. The M1 is meant to be an entry-level chip replacing the lower-end Intel dual & quad-core chips. Those under 2.0 GHZ clock speed. They have never said when they would stop selling or even making Intel models. They have never even confirmed they will stop Intel models. So we don't know. They may continue to release Intel models alongside Apple Silicon. We don't know because they haven't confirmed or denied anything. It's Apple.
I agree that we don’t know if the M1 framework has some rabbits hidden in the hat. However, one would imagine that Apple, in order to drive up sales and to communicate their wonders, would have told us so?
I agree that we don’t know if the M1 framework has some rabbits hidden in the hat. However, one would imagine that Apple, in order to drive up sales and to communicate their wonders, would have told us so?
I was just trying to expand what you were saying because it still seems people are very confused. If everyone would go back and watch the WWDC event, they would see that Apple said it would continue to release and support Intel machines alongside Apple Silicon for 2 years during the transition. And I would assume they would keep giving macOS support til at least 2025, probably longer given they just had new Macs earlier this year.
Yes it's not part of the chip fabrication, but the package has to assembled in a clean-room and tested as part of the binning process of the CPU -- I don't know exactly where that happens, but my point is it can't be done on the Mac assembly line where RAM has traditionally been installed or soldered.
Regardless of the exact moment when this happens, RAM installation is not something that can be replicated by Apple service technicians nor licensed third-party Apple Service centers.
Get over it.
In any case, the manner than Apple ARM CPUs use RAM versus Intel CPUs is expected to be markedly different, especially since Apple is treating this as UMA (CPU + GPU memory). Saying at 16GB or is not sufficient won't be readily apparent until real-world results from real-world applications has been established.
Get over it.
In any case, the manner than Apple ARM CPUs use RAM versus Intel CPUs is expected to be markedly different, especially since Apple is treating this as UMA (CPU + GPU memory). Saying at 16GB or is not sufficient won't be readily apparent until real-world results from real-world applications has been established.
We’ll see, 50-50 chance. They claimed they still would and rumors suggest 16 inch MBP refresh early next year will now be Intel based instead of Apple Silicon. Again just a rumor so may not happen but again they claimed they would still release and support Intel alongside for the 2 year transition. We’ll have to wait and see. I believe Intel is not 100% done yet as far as the Pro level Macs go...
Support for sure. You could be right for higher end models. I do not think it will take 2 years though.
What im hoping and believe is that support for larger ram, and hopefully user changeable ram for something like a 27" iMac, will be supported by the time the ARM processor makes it to the iMac and 16" MBP. I am sure the M1x (or whatever upgraded chip they put in larger Macs) will have expanded capabilities for ram support.
$200 to go from 8gb to 16gb memory... ?
I'm immediately turned off of the idea of buying.
I'm seeing a lot of rubbish speculation about how it's magic and maybe wont need as much memory, but... When you run out of memory, you run out of memory. Seems like this'll be a machine to wait for rev 2.
I'm immediately turned off of the idea of buying.
I'm seeing a lot of rubbish speculation about how it's magic and maybe wont need as much memory, but... When you run out of memory, you run out of memory. Seems like this'll be a machine to wait for rev 2.
Or, now hear me out, you could remember that Tim said this was the FIRST of a family of Apple Silicon Mac chips...
There will be more M1 variants, with higher performance & larger amounts of RAM...
Or, now hear me out, just don't charge $200 to go from 8gb to 16gb memory. I would accept $100 as Apple tax, given they just use the same bog standard memory as everyone else.
Mac Mini footprint is decent enough. I'm not using my main desktop enough for gaming, and the 5th gen NUC I use is starting to feel like an upgrade would be nice. This seems like a good little desktop, but it'll age prematurely without the upgrade.
Mac Mini footprint is decent enough. I'm not using my main desktop enough for gaming, and the 5th gen NUC I use is starting to feel like an upgrade would be nice. This seems like a good little desktop, but it'll age prematurely without the upgrade.
This is exactly the same amount that Apple has been charging and still charges to upgrade the Intel MacBooks and iMac from 8GB to 16GB, so I don't know why you make it sound like something new
Apple memory upgrades have always been expensive, unless you buy it yourself, which you can only do on the 27" iMac and Mac Pro
I remember paying $500 to upgrade from 2GB to 4GB on my 2007 MBP15.
Face it, the advent of the Apple Silicon Macs may very well be the death knell for end user upgrades...!
Maybe, MAYBE, the Apple Silicon-based Mac Pro has RAM slots, but I dunno...
Obviously we will find out more over the next few weeks in regards to how the new M1 chip & macOS Big Sur handle RAM, when reviews hit the internet & units reach end users...!
It looks like there might be two different types of RAM used with the M1; LPDDR4X for the MacBook Air (assuming, since it is the passively-cooled model), & LPDDR5 for the 13" 2-port MacBook Pro & the Mac mini...
Larger capacity RAM modules are supposed to be available next year, so then Apple will introduce the M1B chip (B for Bloomberg?) with up to 32GB of LPDDR5...?
And I would think, when it comes to the upper-middle-end & the high-end Macs, Apple will switch to HBMnext (formerly known as HBM3); M1X with up to 64GB, & M1Z with up to 128GB...!?!
I would think a safe bet would be to max the RAM (at whatever level of M1 variant chip you are getting into) and go for the 1TB SSD minimum...
But it is going to COST us dearly...! ;^p
This is exactly the same amount that Apple has been charging and still charges to upgrade the Intel MacBooks and iMac from 8GB to 16GB, so I don't know why you make it sound like something new
Likely because I've not been remotely interested in buying an Apple desktop/laptop for the last few years.
The fact it isn't something new, doesn't make it something right.
I use an iPad Pro, but for my desktop I'm not fussed what OS I use. I think the new Mac Mini is the most interesting product they've put out in a while, but not with that ram cost.
I'd totally expect Apple to go with RAM soldered to the board... that way they will always be guaranteed to get their Apple Tax... plus you will be more likely to upgrade your system more frequently than you do now. It's Apple's wet dream.
That being said, none of their offerings answered the GPU questions that I have. You show me someone playing an online FPS with high frame rates with high graphics settings and you will have said something... saying that it's 3X faster than the previous model that couldn't even do it doesn't say anything at all. All I see is a iPad with a keyboard and some extra ports.
If it is their contention that you don't need 128GBs of RAM with these new chips because stuff will just run that much better on less... prove it. Load up Maya. Load up some real apps that really push the limits of hardware. People buy 128GBs of RAM because their systems choke without it. Show us these systems can run with 16GBs and are on par with a system running 128GBs with an Intel chip in it, then you will have said something. Will have won the jury. The jury is still out.
If in the end they too require 128GBs of RAM to do the difficult stuff, then I doubt you will have proved much of anything. It's still throw everything and the kitchen sink at it to get it to run.
That being said, none of their offerings answered the GPU questions that I have. You show me someone playing an online FPS with high frame rates with high graphics settings and you will have said something... saying that it's 3X faster than the previous model that couldn't even do it doesn't say anything at all. All I see is a iPad with a keyboard and some extra ports.
If it is their contention that you don't need 128GBs of RAM with these new chips because stuff will just run that much better on less... prove it. Load up Maya. Load up some real apps that really push the limits of hardware. People buy 128GBs of RAM because their systems choke without it. Show us these systems can run with 16GBs and are on par with a system running 128GBs with an Intel chip in it, then you will have said something. Will have won the jury. The jury is still out.
If in the end they too require 128GBs of RAM to do the difficult stuff, then I doubt you will have proved much of anything. It's still throw everything and the kitchen sink at it to get it to run.