- cross-posted to:
- hardware@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- hardware@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
Well yeah, they’re enough to meet the minimum use cases so they can upsell most people on expensive RAM upgrades.
That’s why I don’t buy laptops with soldered RAM. That’s getting harder and harder these days, but my needs for a laptop have also gone down. If they solder RAM, there’s nothing you can (realistically) do if you need more, so you’ll pay extra when buying so they can upcharge a lot. If it’s not soldered, you have a decent option to buy RAM afterward, so there’s less value in upselling too much.
So screw you Apple, I’m not buying your products until they’re more repair friendly.
I had a extra stick of RAM available the other day so I went to open my wife’s Lenovo to see if it’d take it and the damn thing is screwed shut with the smallest torx screws I’ve ever seen, smaller than what I have. I was so annoyed
The real question is why you don’t have a complete precision screwdriver set.
I thought I did! Until I got the smallest one out and it just spun on top of the screw
I bought the E495 because the T495 had soldered RAM and one RAM slot, while the E495 had both RAM slots replacable. Adding more RAM didn’t need any special tools. Newer E-series and T-series both have one RAM slot and some soldered RAM. I’m guessing you’re talking about one of the consumer lines, like the Yoga series or something?
That said, Lenovo (well, Motorola in this case, but Lenovo owns Motorola) puts all kinds of restrictions to your rights if you unlock the bootloader of their phones (PDF version of the agreement). That, plus going down the path of soldering RAM gives me serious concerns about the direction they’re heading, so I can’t really recommend their products anymore.
If I ever need a new laptop, I’ll probably get a Framework.
Yeah, it’s a Yoga
puts all kinds of restrictions to your rights
The document mentions a lot of US laws. I wonder if they try the same over in the EU.
I’m guessing it wouldn’t hold. But I’m in the US, so I’ll just avoid their phones going forward, and will probably avoid their laptops and whatnot as well just due to a lack of trust.
These days I don’t realistically expect my RAM requirements to change over the lifetime of the product. And I’m keeping computers longer than ever: 6+ years where it used to be 1 or 2.
People have argued millions of times on the internet that Apple’s products don’t meet people’s needs and are massively overpriced. Meanwhile they just keep selling like crazy and people love them. I think the issue comes from having pricing expectations set over the in race-to-the-bottom world of commoditized Windows/Android trash.
I upgraded my personal laptop a year or so after I got it (started with 8GB, which was fine until I did Docker stuff), and I’m probably going to upgrade my desktop soon (16GB, which has been fine for a few years, but I’m finally running out). My main complaint about my work laptop is RAM (16GB I think; I’d love another 8-16GB), but I cannot upgrade it because it’s soldered, so I have to wait for our normal cycle (4 years; will happen next year). I upgraded my NAS RAM when I upgraded a different PC as well.
I don’t do it very often, but I usually buy what I need when I build/buy the machine and upgrade 3-4 years later. I also often upgrade the CPU before doing a motherboard upgrade, as well as the GPU.
Meanwhile they just keep selling like crazy and people love them. I think the issue comes from having pricing expectations set over the in race-to-the-bottom world of commoditized Windows/Android trash.
I might agree if Apple hardware was actually better than alternatives, but that’s just not the case. Look at Louis Rossmann’s videos, where he routinely goes over common failure cases that are largely due to design defects (e.g. display cable being cut, CPU getting fried due to a common board short, butterfly keyboard issues, etc). As in, defects other laptops in a similar price bracket don’t have.
I’ve had my E-series ThinkPad for 6 years, with no issues whatsoever. The USB-C charge port is getting a little loose, but that’s understandable since it’s been mostly a kids Minecraft device for a couple years now, and kids are hard on computers. I had my T-Mobile series before that for 5-ish years until it finally died due to water damage (a lot of water).
Apple products (at least laptops) are designed for aesthetics first, not longevity. They do generally have pretty good performance though, especially with the new Apple Silicon chips, but they source a lot of their other parts from the same companies that provide parts for the rest of the PC market.
If you stick to the more premium devices, you probably won’t have issues. Buy business class laptops and phones with long software support cycles. For desktops, I recommend buying higher end components (Gold or Platinum power supply, mid-range or better motherboard, etc), or buying from a local DIY shop with a good warranty if buying pre built.
Like anything else, don’t buy the cheapest crap you can, buy something in the middle of the price range for the features you’re looking for.
That’s why I don’t buy laptops with soldered RAM.
Oh, that shit is soldered on…
I mean, I did see that on some laptops, but only those cheap things in €150 range (new) which even use eMMC for storage.It became pretty common even on higher end laptops when they switched to DDR5, but some manufacturers are starting to go back to socketed RAM.
Yup, all Apple laptops have soldered RAM for some years now…
That’s why I don’t buy laptops with soldered RAM.
In my opinion disadvantages of user-replaceable RAM far outweigh the advantages. The same goes for discrete GPUs. Apple moved away from this and I expect PC manufacturers to follow Apple’a move in the next decade or so, as they always do.
Here’s how I see the advantages of soldered RAM:
- better performance
- less risk of physical damage
- more energy efficient
- smaller
The risk of physical damage is so incredibly low already, and energy use of RAM is also incredibly low, so neither of those seem important.
So that leaves performance, which I honestly haven’t found good numbers for. If you have this, I’m very interested, but since RAM speed is rarely the bottleneck in a computer (unless you have specific workloads), I’m going to assume it to be a marginal improvement.
So really, I guess “smaller” is the best argument, and I honestly don’t care about another half centimeter of space, it’s really not an issue.
So that leaves performance, which I honestly haven’t found good numbers for. If you have this, I’m very interested, but since RAM speed is rarely the bottleneck in a computer (unless you have specific workloads), I’m going to assume it to be a marginal improvement.
This is where you’re mistaken. There is one thing that integrated RAM enables that makes a huge difference for performance: unified memory. GPUs code is almost always bandwidth limited, which why on a graphics card the RAM is soldered on and physically close to the GPU itself, because that is needed for the high bandwidth requirements of a GPU.
By having everything in one package, CPU and GPU can share the same memory, which means that you eliminate any overhead of copying data to/from VRAM for GPGPU tasks. But there’s more than that, unified memory doesn’t just apply to the CPU and GPU, but also other accelerators that are part of the SoC. What is becoming increasingly important is AI acceleration. UMA means the neural engine can access the same memory as the CPU and GPU, and also with zero overhead.
This is why user-replaceable RAM and discrete GPUs are going to die out. The overhead and latency of copying all that data back and forth over the relatively slow PCIe bus is just not worth it.
Do you have actual numbers to back that up?
The best I’ve found is benchmarks of Apple silicon vs Intel+dGPU, but that’s an apples to oranges comparison. And if I’m not mistaken, Apple made other changes like a larger bus to the memory chips, which again makes comparisons difficult.
I’ve heard about potential benefits, but without something tangible, I’m going to have to assume it’s not the main driver here. If the difference is significant, we’d see more servers and workstations running soldered RAM, but AFAIK that’s just not a thing.
The best I’ve found is benchmarks of Apple silicon vs Intel+dGPU, but that’s an apples to oranges comparison.
The thing with benchmarks is that they only show you the performance of the type of workload the benchmark is trying to emulate. That’s not very useful in this case. Current PC software is not build with this kind of architecture in mind so it was never designed to take advantage of it. In fact, it’s the exact opposite: since transferring data to/from VRAM is a huge bottleneck, software will be designed to avoid it as much as possible.
For example: a GPU is extremely good at performing an identical operation on lots of data in parallel. The GPU can perform such an operation much, much faster than the CPU. However, copying the data to VRAM and back may add so much additional time that it still takes less time to run it on the CPU, a developer may then choose to run it on the CPU instead even if the GPU was specifically designed to handle that kind of work. On a system with UMA you would absolutely run this on the GPU.
The same thing goes for something like AI accelerators. What PC software exists that takes advantage of such a thing?
A good example of what happens if you design software around this kind of architecture can be found here. This is a post by a developer who worked on Affinity Photo. When they designed this software they anticipated that hardware would move towards a unified memory architecture and designed their software based on that assumption.
When they finally got their hands on UMA hardware in the form of an M1 Max that laptop chip beat the crap out of a $6000 W6900X.
We’re starting to see software taking advantage of these things on macOS, but the PC world still has some catching up to do. The hardware isn’t there yet, and the software always lags behind the hardware.
I’ve heard about potential benefits, but without something tangible, I’m going to have to assume it’s not the main driver here. If the difference is significant, we’d see more servers and workstations running soldered RAM, but AFAIK that’s just not a thing.
It’s coming, but Apple is ahead of the game by several years. The problem is that in the PC world no one has a good answer to this yet.
Nvidia makes big, hot, power hungry discrete GPUs. They don’t have an x86 core and Windows on ARM is a joke at this point. I expect them to focus on the server-side with custom high-end AI processors and slowly move out of the desktop space.
AMD has the best papers for desktop. They have a decent x86 core and GPU, they already make APUs. Intel is trying to get into the GPU game but has some catching up to do.
Apple has been quietly working towards this for years. They have their UMA architecture in place, they are starting to put some serious effort into GPU performance and rumor has it that with M4 they will make some big steps in AI acceleration as well. The PC world is held back by a lot of legacy hard and software, but there will be a point where they will have to catch up or be left in the dust.
I understand the scepticism, but without links of what you’ve found or which parts in particular you consider dubious claims (ram speed can be increased when soldered, higher speeds lead to better performance, etc) it comes across as “i don’t believe you, because i choose to not believe you”
LTT has made a comparison video on ram speeds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-WFetQjifc
Do you need proof that soldered ram can be made to run faster?
Yes, and the results from that video (i assume, I skimmed it, but have watched similar videos) is that the difference is negligible (like 1-10FPS) and you’re usually better off spending that money on something else.
I look at the benchmarks between the Intel MacBook Pro and the M1 MacBook Pro, and both use soldered RAM, yet the M1 gets so much better performance, even on non-GPU tasks (e.g. memory-heavy unit tests at work went from 3-5min to 45-50sec from latest Intel to M1). Docker build times saw a similar drop. But it’s hard for me to know what the difference is between memory vs CPU changes. I’d have to check, but I’m guessing there’s also the DDR4 to DDR5 switch, which increases memory channels.
The claim is that proximity to the CPU explains it, but I have trouble quantifying that. For me, a 1-10FPS drop isn’t enough to reduce repairability and expandability. Maybe it is for others though, but if that’s the difference, that’s a lot less than the claims they seem to make.
The video has a short section on productivity (i.e. rendering or compiling). That part is probably the most relevant for most people. Check the chapter view in YouTube to jump directly to it.
I think a 2x performance improvement is plausible when comparing non-soldered ram to the Apple silicon, which goes even further and has the memory on the die itself. If, of course, ram is the limiting factor.
The advantages of upgradable, expandable ram are obvious. But let’s face it: most people don’t need and even less use that capability.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=b-WFetQjifc
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
“unified memory” is an Apple marketing term for what everyone’s been doing for well over a decade. Every single integrated GPU in existence shares memory between the CPU and GPU; that’s how they work. It has nothing to do with soldering the RAM.
You’re right about the bandwidth though, current socketed RAM standards have severe bandwidth limitations which directly limit the performance of integrated GPUs. This again has little to do with being socketed though: LPCAMM supports up to 9.6GT/s, considerably faster than what ships with the latest macs.
This is why user-replaceable RAM and discrete GPUs are going to die out. The overhead and latency of copying all that data back and forth over the relatively slow PCIe bus is just not worth it.
The only way discrete GPUs can possibly be outcompeted is if DDR starts competing with GDDR and/or HBM in terms of bandwidth, and there’s zero indication of that ever happening. Apple needs to puts a whole 128GB of LPDDR in their system to be comparable (in bandwidth) to literally 10 year old dedicated GPUs - the 780ti had over 300GB/s of memory bandwidth with a measly 3GB of capacity. DDR is simply not a good choice GPUs.
“unified memory” is an Apple marketing term for what everyone’s been doing for well over a decade.
Wrong. Unified memory (UMA) is not an Apple marketing term, it’s a description of a computer architecture that has been in use since at least the 1970’s. For example, game consoles have always used UMA.
Every single integrated GPU in existence shares memory between the CPU and GPU; that’s how they work.
Again, wrong.
While iGPUs have existed for PCs for a long time, they did not use a unified memory architecture. What they did was reserve a portion of the system RAM for the GPU. For example on a PC with 512MB RAM and an iGPU, 64MB may have been reserved for the GPU. The CPU then had access to 512-64 = 448MB. While they shared the same physical memory chips, they both had a separate address space. If you wanted to make a texture available to the GPU, it still had to be copied to the special reserved RAM space for the GPU and the CPU could not access that directly.
With unified memory, both CPU and GPU share the same address space. Both can access the entire memory. No RAM is reserved purely for the GPU. If you want to make something available to the GPU, nothing needs to be copied, you just need to point to where it is in RAM. Likewise, anything done by the GPU is immediately accessible by the CPU.
Since there is one memory pool for both, you can use RAM more efficiently. If you have a discrete GPU with 16GB VRAM, and your app only needs 8GB VRAM, that other memory just sits there being useless. Alternatively, if your app needs 24GB VRAM, you can’t run it because your GPU only has 16B, even if you have lots of system RAM available.
With UMA you can use all the RAM you have for whatever you need it for. On an M2 Ultra with 192GB RAM you can use almost all of that for the GPU (minus a little bit that’s used for the OS and any running apps). Even on a tricked out PC with a 4090 you can’t run anything that needs more than 24GB VRAM. Want to run something where the GPU needs 180MB of memory? No problem on an M1 Ultra.
It has nothing to do with soldering the RAM.
It has everything to do with soldering the RAM. One of the reason iGPUs sucked, other than not using UMA, is that GPUs performance is almost limited by memory bandwidth. Compared to VRAM, standard system RAM has much, much less bandwidth causing iGPUs to be slow.
A high-bandwidth memory bus, like a GPU needs, has a lot of connections and runs at high speeds. The only way to do this reliably is to physically place the RAM very close to the actual GPU. Why do you think GPUs do not have user-upgradable RAM?
Soldering the RAM makes it possible to integrate a CPU and an non-sucking GPU. Go look at the inside of a PS5 or XSX and you’ll see the same thing: an APU with the RAM chips soldered to the board very close to it.
This again has little to do with being socketed though: LPCAMM supports up to 9.6GT/s, considerably faster than what ships with the latest macs.
LPCAMM is a very recent innovation. Engineering samples weren’t available until late last year and the first products will only hit the market later this year. Maybe this will allow for Macs with user-upgradable RAM in the future.
The only way discrete GPUs can possibly be outcompeted is if DDR starts competing with GDDR and/or HBM in terms of bandwidth
What use is high bandwidth memory if it’s a discrete memory pool with only a super slow PCIe bus to access it?
Discrete VRAM is only really useful for gaming, where you can upload all the assets to VRAM in advance and data practically only flows from CPU to GPU and very little in the opposite direction. Games don’t matter to the majority of users. GPGPU is much more interesting to the general public.
Wrong. Unified memory (UMA) is not an Apple marketing term, it’s a description of a computer architecture that has been in use since at least the 1970’s. For example, game consoles have always used UMA.
Apologies, my google-fu seems to have failed me. Search results are filled with only apple-related results, but I was now able to find stuff from well before. Though nothing older than the 1990s.
While iGPUs have existed for PCs for a long time, they did not use a unified memory architecture.
Do you have an example, because every single one I look up has at least optional UMA support. The reserved RAM was a thing but it wasn’t the entire memory of the GPU instead being reserved for the framebuffer. AFAIK iGPUs have always shared memory like they do today.
It has everything to do with soldering the RAM. One of the reason iGPUs sucked, other than not using UMA, is that GPUs performance is almost limited by memory bandwidth. Compared to VRAM, standard system RAM has much, much less bandwidth causing iGPUs to be slow.
I don’t disagree, I think we were talking past each other here.
LPCAMM is a very recent innovation. Engineering samples weren’t available until late last year and the first products will only hit the market later this year. Maybe this will allow for Macs with user-upgradable RAM in the future.
Here’s a link to buy some from Dell: https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-camm-memory-upgrade-128-gb-ddr5-3600-mt-s-not-interchangeable-with-sodimm/apd/370-ahfr/memory. Here’s the laptop it ships in: https://www.dell.com/en-au/shop/workstations/precision-7670-workstation/spd/precision-16-7670-laptop. Available since late 2022.
What use is high bandwidth memory if it’s a discrete memory pool with only a super slow PCIe bus to access it?
Discrete VRAM is only really useful for gaming, where you can upload all the assets to VRAM in advance and data practically only flows from CPU to GPU and very little in the opposite direction. Games don’t matter to the majority of users. GPGPU is much more interesting to the general public.
gestures broadly at every current use of dedicated GPUs. Most of the newfangled AI stuff runs on Nvidia DGX servers, which use dedicated GPUs. Games are a big enough industry for dGPUs to exist in the first place.
What kind of disadvantages do you see?
User replaceable RAM is slow, which means you can’t integrate the CPU and GPU in one package. This means a GPU with it’s own RAM, which has huge disadvantages.
Even a 4090 only has 24GB and slow transfers to/from VRAM. The GPU can only operate on data in VRAM, so anything you need it to work on you need to copy over the relatively slow PCIe bus to the GPU. Then once it’s done you need to copy the results back over the PCIe bus to system RAM for the CPU to be able to access it. This considerably slows down GPGPU tasks.
Ah yeah, I see. That’s definitely a downside if you work with something where that becomes a factor.
Tim Apple be like “We’ve tried charging more money. Have we tried charging more money and delivering less stuff in exchange?”
Yes, they do constantly. Yet, people still keep buying. I hate that I have to use Apple for my job because of the software and interface is exclusive.
I really like my macbook for dev work, and I think that now that macos is essentially a linux distro it’s quite nice, but it’s not that much better than the free distros and it’s getting worse while they get better. Right now the only thing keeping me on a mac at work is that they gave it to me and the only thing keeping me on a mac at home is that it’s already paid for.
you wanna expand on why you think it’s basically a linux distro? Last i heard macos was more closely based on BSD than it was linux, and this was ages ago. Unless they rewrote it without my knowledge it really shouldn’t be anything like either one of the two.
because I can pop a terminal into zsh and beyond that I don’t really know the taxonomy
you can do that with WSL though.
All modern terminals are actually terminal emulators, unless you’re sitting in TTY. It’s pretty trivial to implement a proper UNIX/linux like CLI environment.
okay
and for completion sake here, technically windows implements a “terminal” through CMD, it’s not linux/unix like at all, but it is still a CLI interface, so.
Yup, same. I really don’t like macOS, but that’s what we’ve standardized on. I’m a Linux guy and use Linux at home for everything.
Lol, audio jacks come to mind. As well as a physical button. And shipping devices without cords or chargers.
I was using my 2016 (or so) MacBook Air the other day and getting low memory errors. I thought, wow, this thing only has 8 gb, maybe it’s time to upgrade, just to see this 😐
My 2009 Mac mini had 8gb of RAM. And it wasn’t even very expensive to do so when I did it in ~2013. Couple hundred bucks max.
Couple hundred bucks for 8 gigs of ram?
Yeah I didn’t even pay a hundred bucks for the 32GB of RAM in my current desktop, and it’s DDR5.
11 years ago. May very well have been less. Apples still probably charging more than that to go from 8 to 16 and I had to buy all 8 and replace both DIMMS.
Part of the difference is that the Apple silicon Macs aggressively use SSD swap to make up for limited memory. But that’s at expense of the SSD lifespan, which of course isn’t replaceable.
I’d never recommend a Mac, but the prices they charge to get a little more RAM or SSD over base are crazy. The only configurations offering any “value” are the base models with 8gb RAM.
Why tf can’t they sell mac with upgradable parts?? They are “so” into renewable and recycling stuff and saving planet and stuff. Then they should start selling shits with upgradable parts. Even cpu’s if possible. Now apple fan boys argue with that. And don’t bullshit me with soc should be near cpu for faster optimisation they can redesign the mobo.
There are legitimate advantages of the RAM being soldered right next to the SoC. However, if anyone could figure out how to create a proprietary RAM module, that slots in right next to the SoC (or even just an SoC module including RAM) that can be swapped out and that doesn‘t have any meaningful performance impact, it would be Apple. Just that it never could be Apple…
The problem is the electrical resistance of the socket. Most of the performance on apple silicon is achieved through extremely high bandwidth, low latency memory. Unfortunately that necessitates a socketless design at the moment, and you can see that happening on the snapdragon X too.
Yea, not just snapdragon and apple. Even intel and amd processors usually get paired with higher bandwidth soldered ram on many mobile offerings.
And on GPUs soldered VRAM has been a thing for a loooong time, with HBM memory being the prime example for what RAM close to the chip can do. AMD‘s Vega cards were highly sought after during the mining craze, even though they weren’t that fast in general computing, simply because their memory bandwidth was so beyond any other consumer cards…
Because that gives the user as much or more control over the device as Apple themselves have. One of the fairly consistent things about Apple over the years has been a desire to maintain tight control for themselves over the products they make.
Because then they can’t gaslight people into thinking their 8GB is magical.
They certainly used to. My wife’s 2012 MacBook Pro has upgraded RAM and SSD parts I’ve put in over the years and still runs fine, though it isn’t used much anymore and OS upgrades stopped a while ago.
Their current environmental marketing is pure greenwashing bullshit and their stances on upgradability and repairability are terrible.
It’s basically just greenwashing. They pretend to be into renewables and recycling only when it doesn’t disincentivize people from buying the newest product. Ex: iPhone trade in for recycling - Yes, they do recover some raw material but you can only do it if you’re buying a new iPhone with that credit, and its probably also an attempt to keep cheap used iPhones off of the market.
My basic web dev Docker suite uses about 13GB just on its own, which - assuming you were on 16GB (double Apple’s minimum) - wouldn’t leave much for things like browser tabs, which also eat memory for breakfast.
A fast swap is not an argument to short-change on RAM, especially since SSDs have a shorter lifespan than RAM modules. 16GB remains the absolute bare minimum for modern computing, and Apple is making weak, ridiculous excuses to pocket just a few extra bucks per MacBook.
Playing devils advocate here: As someone who deals with stuff like that, you also wouldn’t buy the base model mac. The average computer user can get by with 8GB just fine and it’s not like you can’t configure Macs with more than that.
That of course doesn’t justify the abhorrent price of the upgrades…
And here I am, putting 16gb in every machine I work on because it’s so damn cheap there’s no reason not to future proof
I mean, same. The difference in price for 8GB and 16GB is negligible, especially if you want dual channel on desktops
My girlfriends mum wanted to know why her laptop was slow… It was because HP thought that 4gb of ram is acceptable in 2022 (when the laptop was sold). Granted ram wasn’t as cheap then as it is now… Still I paid £30 for a brand new 8gb DDR4 sodimm, there’s not reason hp couldn’t do that. It’s annoying the corners these company cut.
My experience is, that 4GB is just about useable for a bit of web browsing and similar stuff. Even on windows 11. I have an old Surface Pro 4 laying around that, in a pinch, works perfectly fine with 11. Of course, it’s not fast. But it’s totally useable.
Her laptop just wasn’t having it, windows 11, windows was using 3.7gb ram took about 30 seconds for task manager to open. As soon as I upgraded the ram is was usable.
I checked for any surprising background services or anti virus software and there was nothing really
That sounds more like issues Windows would have running on an HDD (or maybe eMMC) instead of an SSD… Bit that wouldn’t explain why it got better, when you upgraded the RAM…
I just slap in 32GB on every computer I build because the MoBos can take 128GB and anything less feels cheap and silly.
The average computer user can get by with 8GB just fine
Hard disagree. The average computer user is idling at 5gb already because the average computer user is stupid.
Still leaves 3gb for the web browser and the average user isn’t using anything else anyways. And even on chrome that’s quite a few pages.
No they can’t. I ran 8gb of ram for years and it turns out that that’s why my computer sucked
Maybe you’re not an average user then. Most people just browse the web and maybe manage some photos or fill out a document once in a while. You could do that on 4GB if you wanted to, let alone 8.
I wouldn’t say 4gb is usable for the average consumer. Using the assumption they’re using windows 11 that’ll eat 3.7 ish GB of ram just idling.
You forget there though, that a lot of the RAM, that Windows (and most modern operating systems) uses, while idling, is a cache of programs you’re likely to open and that gets cleared, if you open something else. That has been a thing since Vista and was btw one of the reasons why Vista was criticized for high memory useage. Windows 11 is very useable with 4GB of RAM, if you’re not planning to do something bigger than browsing the web or editing a word document.
I’m not forgetting that, but it won’t just clear that ram it will want to put it into swap, and depending on your storage speed that can slow tasks down. Making it quite stuttery.
I mean, a (good) SSD is worth quite a lot, even on very old systems. I have an old 2008 MacBook laying around. It’s certainly not fast but with an SSD it’s totally useable, even on current macOS versions.
How? I have 108 tabs open and still use 2.67GB of RAM.
Tabs of what? Chromes ram usage is more of a meme than an actual ram issue, windows will only allow an application to use so much ram depending on ram availability
108 tabs in chromium. Mentioned RAM usage is total RAM usage including all system and kernel, but excluding page cache. Forgot to mention libreoffice in background.
PS5 has 16GB and it’s a toy.
My basic web dev Docker suite uses about 13GB just on its own
Skill issue
average webdev
The people need to know how you use 13GB of ram worth of containers for web dev.
Docker is awesome for a lot of things. But it’s not particularly good for RAM.
Wow! 13GB! I did some heavy stuff on my computer with like a shit ton of Docker servers running together + deployment and I never reached 13GB!
Without disclosing private company information lol what are you doing ;)
not OP, but I have to run fronted and backend of a project in docker simultaneously (multiple postgres and redis dbs, queues, search index, etc., plus two webservers), plus a few browser tabs and two VSCode instances open, regularly pushes my machine over 15gb ram usage
pretty much like this
That is basically my use-case. You add a DB service (or two), DNS, reverse proxy, Redis, Memcached, etc… maybe some containers for additional proprietary backend services like APIs, and then the application themselves that need those things to run… it adds up FAST. The advantage is that you can have multiple projects all running simultaneously and you can add/remove/swap them pretty easily.
RAM is cheap. There is no excuse for shipping a 8GB computer… even if it’s mostly going to be used for family photos and internet.
deleted by creator
Running a suite of services in containers (DBs, DNS, reverse proxy, memcached, redis, elasticsearch, shared services, etc) plus a number of discreet applications that use all those things. My day-to-day usage hovers around 20GB with spikes to 32 (my max allocation) when I run parallelized test suites.
Dockers memory usage really adds up fast.
What do you bist that takes that much memory?
Have you seen the difference between the 8 and 16Gb Macbooks, it is ridiculously expensive.
Nah its about £13 retail.
Oh wait, you mean from apple… Its £200 from them.
Yes, my bad, I wanted to say the difference in price between the 8 and 16Gb model, I know that RAM became dirt cheap nowadays and there aren’t any excuses for Apple to continue offering 8Gb model, as this is exactly a planned obsolescence.
Yeah I was just pointing out the insanity of their pricing, using sarcasm. Its the main way we communicate over here.
The price difference between the first 2 models where 8gb ram is the only change, is £200. Post 2025 I’m going to need some solution to replace my windows install which solely runs CAD/CAM software. If it wasn’t for this scumbaggery I’d buy a Mac to replace win10, but at present apple are such a shower of cunts I think I may have to put up with win11.
What a fucking choice…
You know there’s a third way…
I already run Linux for everything else. Its not an option for my CAD work unfortunately
There is exactly one reason why they do this: So they can charge you $200 to upgrade it to 16GB and in doing so make the listed price of the device look $200 cheaper than it actually is. Or sometimes $400 if it’s a model where the base model comes with a 256GB SSD (the upgrade to 512GB, the minimum I’d ever recommend, is also $200).
The prices Apple charges for storage and RAM are plain offensive. And I say that as someone who enjoys using their stuff.
That’s why I dropped them when my mid-2013 MBP got a bit long in the tooth. Mac OS X, I mean OS X, I mean macOS is a nice enough OS but it’s not worth the extortionate prices for hardware that’s locked down even by ultralight laptop standards. Not even the impressive energy efficiency can save the value proposition for me.
Sometimes I wish Apple hadn’t turned all of their notebook lines into MacBook Air variants. The unibody MBP line was amazing.
Sometimes I wish Apple hadn’t turned all of their notebook lines into MacBook Air variants. The unibody MBP line was amazing.
Typing this from a M2 Max Macbook Pro with 32GB, and honestly, this thing puts the “Pro” back in the MBP. It’s insanely powerful, I rarely have to wait for it to compile code, transcode video, or run AI stuff. It also does all of that while sipping battery, it’s not even breaking a sweat. Yes, it’s pretty thin, but it’s by no means underpowered. Apple really is onto something with their M* lineup.
But yeah, selling “Pro” laptops with 8GB in 2024 is very stupid.
Common apple L
Yeah, sure. Even if what they say about the OS resource usage is true, it’s only a fraction of the total usage. A lot of the multiplatform software will use the same resources regardless of the OS. Many apps eat RAM for breakfast, doesn’t matter if it’s content creation or software development. Heck, even smartphones these days have have this much or more RAM.
I won’t argue, I just won’t buy an Apple product in the near future or probably ever at all.
buys [insert price] laptop, top of the line, flagship, custom silicon, built ground up to be purpose specific.
Opens final cut pro: crashes
ok…
Especially paired with Apple’s 128gb integrated, non replaceable hard drives. Whoops you installed all of Microsoft office? Looks like you have no room to save any documents :(
ah yes, we can’t forget the proprietary non controller based nvme drives that use m.2 but arent actually nvme drives, they’re just flash.
No way. It isn’t NVME?!?!
it’s NVME in the sense that it’s non volatile flash, probably even higher quality than most existing NVME ssds out there today.
The thing is that it literally just the flash. On a card with an m.2 pin out, that fits into an m.2 slot, it doesn’t have a storage controller or any standardized method of communication, that already exists. It’s literally a proprietary non standard standard form factor SSD.
The controller is integrated onto the silicon chip die itself, there is no storage controller on the storage itself.
Yet another reason to never go back to Apple
apple, we innovate where no one else does, because for some reason, we like doing that.
Same. And I bet you the price will also go up with less ram.
I bought one of the early M1s and bought into a lot of the early reviewers that claimed 8 was enough on the ARM architecture. Honestly, for most folks, it’s probably fine. For me, it’s not.
My wife and I use the M1 has a multi-account family machine. And we’re both experience design directors, so we both have RAM hog design apps open under our accounts. The poor little Mac just can’t handle all that abuse with 8 gigs.
Our old ass Intel Mac with 16gig of RAM had no problems keeping a ton of crap open.
The battery life and low heat are absolutely amazing on the M1. That stuff was a monumental upgrade. But we absolutely can’t be lazy and just leave crap open unless it’s actually needed.
The fact that Apple is selling “Pro” machine with 8 gigs is a joke. 8 would be fine for my folks who fart around on Facebook all day, but it’s not enough for a lot of heavy multimedia work.
8 megs of RAM? I didn’t know they brought back the Macintosh II.
lol. Fixed. My brain is broken.
I dunno if you noticed or if that was the joke. But you said “8 megs” three times in your comment when I think you meant to say “8 gigs”. 1 gigabyte ~ 1024 megabytes. Just wanted to let you know in case it wasn’t a joke about how 8 wasn’t enough. That’s all, thank you!
Actually, 1 gigabyte (109 B) is 1000 megabytes (106 B), while one gibibyte (230 B) corresponds to 1024 mebibytes (220 B). I know that in some circles, 1 GB is treated as 1 GiB, so I don’t blame you. This system of quantities is standardised internationally in order to conform with the SI (mega must mean a million times and not 220 times), but many don’t conform to it, such as Microsoft as far as I know.
Thank you for the correction and details.
lol. Apparently my brain is broken.
I found for most CS-ish tasks 8GB is okay. I also bought an early M1 and haven’t had too many problems outside of running VMs, which I expected. I purchased one of the stocked configurations at an Apple store, so there were slim pickings with 16GB of memory that weren’t like double the price of the machine.
Yeah, my guess is 2x accounts is the cause of 90% of my performance issues. One person’s Adobe crap is fine, but two us too much for 8gigs without the occasional beach ball.
deleted by creator
Depends what you’re doing, but for branding and print media, Adobe still dominates most shops. If you’re doing UX, then you’re probably in Figma these days.
deleted by creator
Yeah, Figma is the new standard for UX design. Adobe was trying to buy them for the last couple years because most people no longer use Adobe tools for UX work.
Apple said some pretty dumb things to defend that 8gb, but let’s not pretend that most manufacturers do the same thing.
For years people have known it can’t be upgraded. You know that going in.
No one complains that video cards on (most) laptops can’t be replaced, yet many of them wind up being useless for anything but daily tasks.
For years people have known it can’t be upgraded. You know that going in.
Not sure that is true, lots of people see the marketing for a MacBook and think that any of them will be enough. Or see the price difference and think they are getting a good deal, or don’t understand why that is. I’ve had to tell people, sorry I know you spent a lot of money on this, but it does not have the storage for what you are wanting to do. Yes, the only way is to buy another one.
Otherwise yea, everyone tries to gaslight customers into thinking they didn’t get ripped off.
Sure, some people buy a computer without knowing anything about the computer.
Unified memory is not user accessible. If you think you’ll need additional memory, it’s a good idea to upgrade now.
They say it right there. Should it be red and flashing? Should there be a confirm button?
If you go into the Apple Store, someone who is trained to help is always available, and various models are typically in stock.
I’d like to firmly repeat, that Apple never should’ve said that bullshit. Also I feel that 16 gigs should be the standard amount for any Apple laptop. They are premium products. Perhaps the Mac Mini could start at 8.
And since you pulled out the gaslight, I’ll call you a misinformed accuser.
8GB RAM is what my phone has.
Having that in a laptop shows what they think of people buying their kit. They think you’re only buying it so you can type easier on Facebook.
TBF 8gb of ram on a phone is actually psychotic. You really shouldn’t be doing all that much on a phone lol.
Then what should I be doing on my phone?
Obviously using it as a thin client for this MacBook, duh.
nothing that requires 8GB of ram lol.
I’ve played the entirety of java minecraft on an old thinkpad with 4GB of ram. It didn’t crash (i dont use swap)
There literally shouldn’t be anything capable of using that much memory.
Is this bait? Because like, you could be rendering, simulating, running virtual machines. Lots of stuff that aren’t web browsers also eat ram
Web browsers also eat ram.
I was trying to mention things that weren’t just web browsers. Since it seemed the comment was about programs that use more ram than they seemingly need to.
Edit: There’s like photogrammetry and stuff that happens on phones now!
And games!
There’s like photogrammetry and stuff that happens on phones now!
No, the photogrammetry apps all use cloud processing. The LIDAR ones don’t, but that’s only for Apple phones and the actual mesh quality is pretty bad.
i suppose photo editing would be one? Maybe? I’m not sure how advanced photo editing would be on mobile, it’s not like you’re going to load up the entirety of GIMP or something.
As for photogrammetry, i’m not sure that would consume very much ram. It could, i honestly don’t think it would be that significant.
90% of which can be paged in the background, it’s not like most people are chronically browsing the web on their phones.
it’s not like most people are chronically browsing the web on their phones.
Yes, they do.
on a phone? Why the fuck would anyone be running virtual machines on a phone?
My man, have you been to selfhosted? People are using smart phones for all kinds of crazy stuff. They are basically mini ARM computers. Particularly the flagships, they can do many things like editing video, rendering digital drawings, after they end their use life they can host adguards, do torrent to NAS, host nextcloud. You name it.
yeah, i literally selfhost a server, running like 8 different services. I’m quite acclimated to it by now. Using a phone for this kind of thing is the wrong device. A chromebook is going to be a better alternative. You can probably get those cheaper anyway.
A big problem with phones is that they just aren’t really designed for that kind of thing, you leave a phone plugged in constantly and it’s going to spicy pillow itself. Let alone even trying to do that on something that isn’t an android. I cannot imagine the hell that self hosting on an android would be, let alone on an iphone.
I could see a usecase for it as a network relay in the event that you need a hyper portable node or something. GLHF with the dongling if you need those.
Unfortunately, if you already have a server, it’s going to be better to just spin up a new task on that server, as the cost of running a new device is going to outweight the cost of just using an existing one that’s already running. Also, you can get stuff like a raspi or le potato for pretty cheap also. not very powerful, but probably more utility, especially given the IO.
Something like the Samsung Dex app that basically turns your phone into a mini computer with kbm and a monitor wouldn’t bee too bad tbh for most people. Take all your shit with you in your pocket and dock it at home or at work or whatever.
It sounds a lot more cost effective to get a used mini-pc than a flagship phone for any sort of server stuff.
Does the JVM count?
thats really funny, but no.
deleted by creator
you could be rendering, simulating, running virtual machines
On a phone? I guess you could, although 4gb is probably enough for any video game that any amount of people use.
People use phone apps for photo and video editing these days. The common TikTok kid out there doesn’t use Adobe Premiere on a desktop workstation.
Phone apps often are desktop applications with a specialized GUI these days.
i mean yeah, but even then those aren’t significant filters, and what makes you think that tiktok isn’t running a render farm somewhere in china to collect shit tons of data? They’re already collecting the data, might as well provide a rendering service to make the UI nicer, but i don’t use tiktok so don’t quote me on it.
Those are also all built into tiktok, and im pretty sure tiktok doesn’t require 8GB of ram to open.
What about running a chrooted nix install and using a vnc to connect to it? While web browsing and playing a background video? Just because you don’t use your ram doesn’t mean others don’t. And no, I don’t use all my ram, but a little overhead is nice.
on a phone? I mean i suppose you could do that, but VNC is not a very slick remote access tool for anything other than, well, remote access. The latency and speed over WIFI would be a significant problem, i suppose you could stream from your phone to your TV, but again, most TVs that exist today are smart TVs so literally a non issue.
my example here was using a computer rather than a phone, to show that even desktop computing tasks, don’t really use all that much ram.
Well, then by that logic, since desktop computing tasks don’t really use all that ram: we shouldn’t need more than 8GB in a desktop ever. Yes, my example was a tad extreme, vnc-ing into your own VM on your phone, but my point was rather phones are becoming capable and replacing traditional computers more and more. A more realistic example is when I was using Samsung Dex the other day I had 80ish chrome tabs open, a video chat, and a terminal ssh’d into my computer fixing it. I liked the overhead of ram I had above me. Was I even close to 12GB? No. But it gave me room if I wanted another background program or had to spin something up quickly without disrupting my flow or lagging out/crashing.
Well, then by that logic, since desktop computing tasks don’t really use all that ram: we shouldn’t need more than 8GB in a desktop ever.
if this is the logic we’re using, then we shouldn’t have phones at all. Since clearly they do nothing more than a computer. Or we shouldn’t have desktops/laptops at all. Because clearly they do nothing more than a phone.
I understand that phones are more capable, my point is that they have no reason to be more capable. 99% of what you do on a phone is going to be the same whether you spend 200 dollars on it, or 2000.
Yeah, but if you have plenty of RAM on Android, there’s a chance those apps you left in the background will still be running when you go back to them, rather than doing the usual Android thing of just restarting them.
yeah i get that, but i often only have like 2 apps open on my android phone (maybe three). And even if you didn’t have enough ram there’s no reason android can’t cache old apps to page file or something. Then you don’t need to restart them, just load it from page. Given how fast modern phone storage is likely to be, this should be pretty negligible.
My phone was manufactured in 2022, cost under USD250, and has 8gb of ram. New phones generally come with 12gb or more.
Of course they do.
My X220 and T520 each have 16GB. The designed max was actually “only” 8GB, but it turns out 16 GB actually works. I replaced the RAM modules myself without asking Lenovo for permission. Those models came out in 2011.
This was also true for Apple computers before they started soldering the ram in place. I remember going way over spec in my old G4 tower. Hell, I doubt the system would crash if you found larger ram chips and soldered them in.
I doubt the system would crash if you found larger ram chips and soldered them in.
You can’t even swap components with official ones from other upgraded models. Everything is tied down with verification codes and shit nowadays. So I doubt you could solder in new ram and get it to work.
My HP Omen 17" was designed for a maximum of 32GB ram. I’m currently running 64GB on it.
Yeah lol my thinkcentre with a 6gen intel had only 8GB (I paid under 100€ for it) so I went shopping to double that on a second hand site, but the price for 4, 8 or the 16GB ddr4 ram stick (sodimm, there seems to be a flood of used ones) I bought was about the same, like 30€ shipping included, so now I got 24GB.
Apple is acting like this article does not exist.
My students with the 8gb version struggle to do basic audio work with only a few plugins. This is BS from apple. Unless you use your computer only for web browsing, in which case you shouldn’t get a stupid mac in the first place.
To be fair I have no idea why audio plugins need so much ram
to be fair, apple is the one literally curating this experience so it “just works” only to then fuck it up somehow.
Apple has a masterclass of tiering their products in just a way so that in every tier but the upper tiers, you’re giving up something really important. If you spend the least you possibly can on a MacBook, apple guarantees you’re going to have a very bad time for “doing the bare minimum to be seen with a laptop with an apple logo on it”. Their whole tier system is an exercise in “how can we get away with fucking up these things just enough so the customer feels like it is necessary to spend a little bit more” every step of the way. Then they make it unupgradable so you can’t sidestep their crafted feature tier system.
nvidia also does this. It’s actually insane.
Love spending 200 USD on 16GB of ram in 2024 because of apple, very cool, or however much they charge, it’s still too much.
Latency is a bitch. If you want anything to run on real time with zero latency, then it means everything, including those pretty large sample data, has to be stored as close to the processor as possible. Compressing/decompressing takes a shit tonne of time and effort, and to keep both delay down and fidelity up, you have to pay in absurd amounts of RAM to the DAW shrine.
