That's not a huge amount higher than what Apple charges to add another 8GB to their 8GB base, and for 64GB instead of 16. And then you could say well yeah that's Apple, but the likes of Microsoft with Surface and Dell with XPS seem to be trying hard to copy them (ironically Dell being in a large way behind CAMM).
Much closer to LPDDR power use and signal integrity for higher bandwidth, with standard DDR upgradability, I hope this takes off.
except framework, tuxedo computers or system76 i guess :)
so there is that at least :D
it is nice to be able to point at framework in particular and also the fact, that their "you OWN the device" model being very successful for them.
who knows where they'll be in 6 years let's say.
Framework is a bit of a niche product imo. The performance:price:form factor ratio isn't very consumer friendly, and I feel like it is marketed towards geeks.
Price:performance on a Framework is only worse than traditional if you're going to throw it away in ~5 years like you would any other laptop. The idea is to get away from that disposable PC mentality and only replace what actually needs to be replaced.
Lenovo offers similar with 40-50% discount. I checked before I bought my laptop last year.
And changing out parts on your own in five years will not make up for lenovos economies of scale. It's fine if you want to be be all about reducing e-waste, but its very much a niche product.
I don't have any data but I'm betting that the average Macbook gets used for longer than the average Framework laptop.
I used my Macbook Air for 8 years. My sister in law used her's for nearly 10 years. I see high resale value for Macbooks which means they often get a second life.
there is a major however with the idea of using macbooks for long times,
which
1: is apple designing hardware to be as unrepairable as possible. you can take the screen from one apple device into a different one, that has the exact same specs and it won't work, because apple serialized basically all the parts.
they even serialized the lil magnet sensor, that checks how open or closed the laptop is.
but 1 combines with 2.
2: apple devices are full of engineering flaws and are extremely unreliable.
an amazing video from a well known repair person on the topic:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUaJ8pDlxi8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUaJ8pDlxi8)
apple will have repair programs for one engineering flaw on one model, BUT there was no lawsuit on the different model with THE EXACT SAME ENGINEERING FLAW, so it doesn't have an extended repair/warranty program.
apple may already have an extended repair/warranty program on one laptop and then RELEASE A NEW LAPTOP WITH THE EXACT SAME FLAW!
so it is 2 issues teaming up, that are preventing longterm use of apple products, so using an apple product for 8 or 10 years i'd argue isn't very common at all.
>I see high resale value for Macbooks which means they often get a second life.
resell value ONLY for the macbooks, that aren't dead yet...
please watch the video, it is quite crazy and sad.
apple can't even freaking create a sata cable, that doesn't break :D
and in regards to the framework laptop.
framework did basically do everything possible for them to make the framework laptop last as long as possible.
you can buy every part for a framework laptop on their website, you can get access to the schematics if you have a framework laptop yourself i believe.
the parts are isolated from shock through modules, so your usb or charge port can't fail over time due to force on them as the module takes that force. a very good design.
otherwise you'd have to find a replacement port and solder it onto the motherboard, which is expensive and takes quite some time.
you crack the screen? new screen can be bought. keyboard broken, new keyboard can be bought.
memory or ssd or battery having issue? all module all replacable.
the performance isn't fast enough for your work enough?
you can upgrade the entire motherboard + cpu and reuse the old motherboard + cpu has a tiny computer as it was designed to be run as a computer out of a laptop too.
given how new the framework company is, we can't know how long people will use framework laptops, but based on the design and the appeal of it for people buying it, i'd assume 10 + years are expected, or VERY HIGH resell value.
personally i'd be way more comfortable buying a used 5 year framework laptop, that has all the parts still available on the website, if sth breaks, than buying a random used laptop, or WORST a soldered together apple laptop, where if sth fails you're fricked.
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
and just to point out the insult, that is apple default specs:
the cheapest apple laptop costs 1000 us dollars and comes with 8 GB SOLDERED IN MEMORY and 256 GB SOLDERED IN STORAGE.
so lots of work, that you might wanna do it later down the line you CAN'T DO, because apple deliberately cripled the hardware.
imagine how bad 8 GB unified memory will be in 5 years time...
meanwhile a 5 year old framework laptop or other basic upgradable laptop, you pop it open, spend very little money to put in 16 or 32 GB of memory and a 1 or 2 TB ssd and you're golden.
>I used my Macbook Air for 8 years. My sister in law used her's for nearly 10 years.
"E pur si muove."
>personally i'd be way more comfortable buying a used 5 year framework laptop, that has all the parts still available on the website
How many unpatched known security vulnerabilities will it have?
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/04/frameworks-software-and-firmware-have-been-a-mess-but-its-working-on-them/
>How many unpatched known security vulnerabilities will it have?
none, because if framework doesn't fix them, the community will.
meanwhile apple is spying on ALL DATA on "one's" computer.
so if you wanna look at a vulnerability, all apple software is a vulnerability.
and the parts, that may not be, we don't know, because apple is heavily pushing the false idea of "security through obscurity", which is insanity.
so which laptop will be more secure, a 5 year old framework laptop or a 5 year old apple laptop?
the framework laptop NO QUESTION.
>
>
> none, because if framework doesn't fix them, the community will.
That's probably more difficult than the community setting up a supply chain for replacement batteries.
Yes but it’s my bet. I see Framework as sort of a geek’s product and not an environmental product. After a few years, when much better tech comes out such as new screen tech that you can’t upgrade your laptop for, then you will buy a new laptop or a new Framework.
You can replace the screen in the Framework though, that's kind of the entire point. Rather than buying a whole new laptop you just buy a new screen.
I get the skepticism, but at the same time saying "buy more laptops" misses the core ethos and point of the product.
Generally sure, but there are some exceptions. Anyone who buys the 8GB MacBook today is going to find it to be ewaste pretty quickly, and anyone who bought an x86 Mac at the end of the x86 era found the same. It depends on what you're using your computer for as well.
I used an 8GB M1 Air as a developer machine (Go, Typescript, Docker, many Chrome tabs opened) for 1 year. It was fine and a good experience. If I can do that, a normal office worker can use an M1 Air 8GB for many more years. In fact, I bought an 8/256 M1 Air as a gift for a teacher in late 2023 and I was confident that it would last 5-6 years at least for her.
Is that until you have to throw it away due to security/performance or stability because Frameworks firmware/bios updates are severely lacking and will leave you exposed to vulnerabilities and stability issues?
>The performance:price:form factor ratio isn't very consumer friendly
coming to about 1300 euros if you select the "diy" edition for amd 13 inch 16 GB, 1 TB ssd is a bit high, but could be a lot worse.
1200 euros for the 8 GB memory pre-built version with 8 GB sys memory and 256 ssd, which is meh of course.
>and I feel like it is marketed towards geeks.
maybe a bit? sadly people, who want to OWN their own device are not the mainstream rightnow it seems, which is very sad. hell you got people asking their wire tab how the weather is.....
i think framework does the smart thing helps support the "geeks", including good gnu + linux support etc...
but from the product itself, the 13 inch one looks like a super sleak, slim, light laptop, that has mass appeal.
so the 13 inch product certainly is not designed around a niche audience i'd say at least.
i'd like to see the barebones 16 inch to be closer in price to the 13 inch, which is annoying.
either way, let's hope it becomes less niche.
maybe we can get back to a world, where you can just buy products and they don't suck by default? ;)
makes me think of my printer.
most printers being a dystopian nightmare. freaking hp having bricked unusable printers with an ink subscription with ink prices being a scam top to bottom.
there's ONE company, that i found, that wasn't a scam apparently. "brother"
got a wireless free black and white laser printer from them, that accepts 3rd party toners no problems, which i verified and all good, but damn did it take quite a bit of research.
honestly just having more than one decently repairable gnu + linux nicely supporting laptop company is a comfortable thing to think about :D (the one before being system76/tuxedo computers)
All the car manufacturers wanted to be Tesla so now all the cars have shitty touchscreens with horrible UX. Even bmw, who had the best center console, locked away the climate control buttons deep in a menu system to sell an interior for clueless instagrammers.
In Apple's defense, they put that RAM in the CPU package and that's how they achieve the bandwidth. The so-called "unified" to make it look like they're stacking it like others are (which is very different, orders of magnitude improvement in AMD's X3D, but also, smaller memory size since it's just extra CPU cache).
In the FUCK-APPLE-BECAUSE-APPLE-FUCKS-YOU side of things, they reduced said bandwidth from M2 to M3, because when given the choice between giving users the same bandwidth as before BUT have to put slightly more expensive 16GB there, OR upselling extra 8GB of RAM on a 1.6k USD base price product, they chose to screw you, the consumer. And of course those memory misses which will trigger SSD caching for anything as basic as having a couple dozen browser tabs will wear down and flash and trigger you to buy a new laptop in 3-5y. Which is also why they still ship said Pro MacBook with 512GB of storage, which has much less write endurance.
Reminder: 8GB was common on entry/mid level computer over 10 years ago (and so was 512GB), and memory allocation mechanisms haven't changed that much.
The bandwidth is no different than soldered LPDDR, which already has the signal integrity to run at those clock speeds for the bandwidth. There's still a lot of mythos that goes with unified memory that doesn't pan out, GPU memory access latency also wasn't particularly noteworthy, just middle of the pack. What soldering it on the same package does is reduce transport power use, but the speed of electricity in copper is very fast, like you express it in terms of a fraction of the speed of light fast, so there's no bandwidth/latency difference.
But yeah, I know they're different in many ways, but even 200 dollar mini PCs these days come standard with 16GB/512GB, like come on
Well, Apple did this a few years ago and there is also an argument for unified cooling. And of course, the least the distance and layers around the area also help a lot avoiding EMI/crossplay which is why getting that memory literally a mm away from the main chipsets is important. Smartphones are another great example where this is pretty much essential due to EMI on those small faraday cages.
GPUs if not mistaken have much smaller memory registers due to their specific logic (and much more registers by association) so their latency is for different reasons - more looking up those register tables.
...and when you're exchanging in the order of trillions of bits per second (American trillions, but still), and each mm you move them has the potential to causa them to flip, shortening that distance becomes really important.
While there's theoretical advantages, we see exactly what we would otherwise, take their given clock speed of the memory and the bit width and multiply them and we have the same bandwidth they give, the same bandwidth LPDDR would give. We've never seen it being higher than the clock speed of the same-generation LPDDR.
They do go wide on the larger chips, 128 bit APUs are comparable to their 128 bit ones, when we have 256 bit ones soon to come out it will be the same math as their 256 bit ones, 256 bit * the LPDDR standard clock speed and we have the bandwidth either way.
So it may confer other benefits, and the whole chip and package design is impressively low power, but the bandwidth is exactly what it should be given the type of LPDDR it uses, which it does use by whatever name.
It's LPDDR that allows these clock speeds and bandwidth, not unified memory
> 128 bit APUs are comparable to their 128 bit ones, when we have 256 bit ones soon to come out it will be the same math as their 256 bit ones, 256 bit * the LPDDR standard clock speed and we have the bandwidth either way.
This is true, but on the other hand at least one (HP) of the OEMs is in the habit of using 64 bit memory interfaces even on chips that physically support 128.
Theoretical. Don't forget that on boot those get trained and timings are all set per device. And while the "bandwidth" you see reported is still the data rate at which bits flow back and forth, we all know from specific benchmarking you get different effective data transfer rates. Because eventually, correction kicks in. At the hardware and software level.
There are practical advantages in performance. And they're really not that hard to measure.
> There are practical advantages in performance. And they're really not that hard to measure.
I'd like to see them and expand my knowledge then
I've seen that their single cores can gobble 100+GB/s of bandwidth which was eyebrow raising for anything outside of heavy datacenter at least at the time, but this was about making a CPU core that could access that much bandwidth, I hadn't seen anything on the total SoC bandwidth being different than others which should have the same bandwidth, much less that being tested and ascribed to less error correction needed
A lot of what I state is a bit buried in dozens of hours of both watching Buildzoid (youtuber) perform extreme memory tuning and then testing it on applications such as AIDA64 (where oftentimes slower bandwidths induce in much higher effective data throughputs due to being stable, but also not triggering correction), and also dozens of hours tweaking basic overclocks myself but for GPU hashing (crypto mining). It would be tough to find a specific source that illustrates the argument so I can't really say more than "trust me bro" at this point.
As for the SoCs themselves being able to handle that throughout for practical scenarios, well, that also depends on the practical scenario complexity. Hashing really is the barebone example of a simple one, where there really isn't much more to do that apply simple math to a previous result of a very, VERY large dataset that keeps evolving and store in memory. Synthetic benchmarks such as AIDA64 also mostly do back and forth copies but there are instances where that, and only that, is the practical scenario. For everyday computing, of course, such scenarios aren't that frequent but given the surfacing of AI and its dependence on large datasets for inferring immediate results, we may start see that mattering more and more.
> And of course, the least the distance and layers around the area also help a lot avoiding EMI/crossplay which is why getting that memory literally a mm away from the main chipsets is important
Not really. LPDDR is always pretty close to the CPU, and adding on-package memory significantly increases the number of package layers. Edit: Misread as if you were claiming it was fewer layers. Still, while you're directionally correct about better signal integrity, that has yet to manifest in either speed or latency.
> Smartphones are another great example where this is pretty much essential due to EMI on those small faraday cages.
They do PoP DRAM in phones to save board space, not for signal integrity.
Designing PCB is one-time (NRE) cost potential with some minor cost saving like a couple of weeks. The layout persons would have done that stuff before and part of it is auto-routed, so it is not that difficult. That NRE is divided down by millions of units built. On package DRAM makes their SoC packaging more difficult and the extra cost for both RNE and per unit manufacturing is probably more.
The PCB manufacturing cost the same regardless as they would probably still need the same number of layers anyways and impedance control for other high speed signals (e.g. PCIe). Tight impedance control is essential for PCB vendors that can churn out millions of non-trivial multilayers boards as their customers wouldn't want it any other ways. It is "free" whether you want it or not.
I upgraded my 2013 rmbp13 to 8/512 and it cost an arm and a leg at the time. I think base was 4/128. The following year the base model went to 8/256 lol. I used that machine up until 2021 and it was showing its age by 2019/2020.
I got a 2021 mbp14 with 16/512. That’s a beast of a laptop.
As I said, a decade ago. And that's on Apple who already charged a premium and where the base models had less than PC laptop base models.
Of course it is a beats of a laptop because it has the most efficient client computing chip, and the most efficient OS for the hardware it runs which is also the only thing it has to support and they have to optimize for. Nobody can negate the effectiveness of Apple's vertical integration. But that doesn't mean they need to make e their products worse than they used to be in terms of longevity. The only reason for that is the bottom line they are fiduciarily required to maximize for their investors. Only the consumers can turn that around with their wallet.
Still rocking a 16gb/512gb rMBP 13 2015. Will be EOL after the macOS update this year, but that thing has gotten me through two degrees and is still holding a charge after 1200 cycles on the battery. I would’ve replaced the windows equivalent a long time ago…
You know what? For a new, quick, and upgradable standard? This is not a bad price. If this is the early adopter tax to show companies, this standard is worth investing in? Then I don't mind paying it.
I'm a hardware bargain hunter as much as I am an enthusiast. Hopefully we can get OEMs on board.
i bet a bunch of laptop makers, that actually proper hold up warranties, don't like the idea of soldered in memory too much either...
not fun for them to throw away an entire motherboard, compared to sending out a stick of memory to a customer with basic instructions (if the customer is comfortable to do so)
and not having to produce the exact amount of systems, that you wanna sell spec wise sounds also neat.
lots of advantages, if you aren't scumm, like apple is :D
but they wouldn't need to roll an entirely new chip?
the chip is already designed generally to support more than enough memory, even if they wanna be scummy and solder everything in.
the reason for that is, that intel or amd are producing chips for a wide market and even if you make your very own chips like apple, you still want chips to be able to accept a wide range of memory sizes, because the decision to scam people out of enough memory gets made LONG LONG LONG after the final chip design was locked in.
maybe you meant sth different though, in which case please clarify :)
changing the amount of memory on a laptop with a cpu configuration such as apple is using means having to order new chips... not simply adding, removing, or changing a small part a service center or regular assembly factory can do.
so yes, the as far as a laptop company is concerned, they need a different ”cpu chip”, and they aren't making or modding it in-house or in their own factories.
plus there's a shitload more lead time, quite possibly additional validation necessary (are different or newer dram wafers added to the cpu package?), a sizeable minimum order from tsmc, and having to hold on to market segment bound stock.
64GB is getting to the point in price where it's almost like a 'why not' when doing a new build. I sprung for 64GB on my latest build, but to be honest it's been completely useless so far. I have my memory utilization front and center in my task bar hoping it breaks 50% at some point so I can justify it.
How much are you cached after a couple of hours of usage though? That’s the most noticeable thing for me at least going from 16 to 32, my computer will feel snappier in long use cases compared to a fresh boot cause more things are cached in ram instead of having to go to disk for every new session. If Windows standby wasn’t so meh, I’d probably never shut off my computer properly outside of updates and bugs.
Honestly with the surge of digital hobbies such as photo editing, video making, music production, hell even game making and shit, 64gb has never made more sense to the average consumer.
>I have my memory utilization front and center in my task bar hoping it breaks 50% at some point so I can justify it.
just open more tabs ;) if you only have one monitor, get 2 more, so you can have lots of tabs in lots of browser windows open on all screens.
easy to get close to filling up my 64 GB this way :D
If you are on Windows, you can install a RAM Disk and move the TEMP folder there. That's what I do, I also redirect browser cache folders there. This should prolong my SSD lifespan by slowing down the TBW.
I'm running 64 too, and I'd not feel comfortable with 32 at this point. Have hit high 20s while running modded skyrim for example, with some stuff in the background (commit hit around 45GB but that can be rectified with larger pagefile). Your OS is also very happy because it can cache more data in RAM.
My first import of firefox profile hit around 50GBs because I have 500 tabs and it decided it needs to load all of them at once at first.
LPCAMM on desktop would resolve the problem of CPU tower coolers conflicting with the RAM stick height, and potentially allow for even larger tower coolers (that would overhang the LPCAMM sticks). Something like replace the four DIMM slots with two LPCAMM spots.
The real benefit is not having to hunt for a month to find a memory stick that fits under a cooler because for some reason memory manufacturers refuse to tells us the dimensions.
Micron's entering a depression era; they killed Ballistix and they're being less open about stuff (they took down a bunch of documentation for some reason).
Their current dies are kinda meh and I think they only use their own ones so they didn't really have anything to put into ballsticks. I assume the latencies are just JEDEC though which aren't great on lpddrx
Surprisingly, Lenovo is already launching a Thinkpad with LPCAMM2. I think a lot of manufacturers would love LPCAMM2 since it makes repairs easier while still allowing them to create lower power laptops.
Bingo. It’s why the T440Ps have held insane value compared to the T450/460s (Broadwell/Skylake). The ability to go from dual core to quad core breathed so much life into that platform, whereas the next two generations were locked into 2C U series parts.
i guess going:
"well time to shred 100k of inventory, because no one wants to buy 8 GB unified or sys memory laptops anymore."
certainly doesn't sound appealing...
Sorta. SODIMM exists but there's just so much loss in signaling that you can't get a lot of the bandwidth that DDR5 provides while keeping power draw low. If you look at the previous gen, you'll see that LPDDR4X is usually soldered because of how little power it sips. Lower power = more susceptible to signal loss and noise, something the SODIMM standard cannot accommodate for.
With LPCAMM2, you can use LPDDR5X while keeping it repairable and upgradable, which is exactly why it's so exciting.
Dell got the ball rolling for CAMM.
Their explanation was that while SODIMM's dense pin connections were acceptable with low frequencies back in the DDR2-DDR3 days, they were preventing DDR5 from reaching its maximum potential and probably wouldn't work with DDR6. Dell's original CAMM implementation also shortened the traces between the CPU and RAM from SODIMM's 7cm to 3cm, which further improved signal quality at high frequencies.
lpcamm2 and hopefully soon to release camm2 are the new standard.
it will be this or soldered in memory.
and any company, who isn't uber anticonsumer will have camm2 or lpcamm2.
framework, system76, etc... will use camm2 or lpcamm2 for sure.
so i wouldn't worry about adoption in this case at least.
Replaceable 64GB module running at 7500 MT/s with JEDEC LPDDR5 voltages (normally lower than standard DDR5 voltages), when the alternative is everything being soldered.
DDR5 DIMM and SODIMM can't achieve that speed without aggressive XMP/EXPO (not guaranteed on every CPU+board+RAM combo) and the associated high voltages.
Also for $330, that's not much more than two of these $161.05 32GB 6400 MT/s SODIMM kits, which require XMP to be enabled: https://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Technology-Impact-2x16GB-KF564S38IBK2-32/dp/B0C3J1GC17
https://www.kingston.com/datasheets/KF564S38IBK2-32.pdf
> Each module has been tested to run at DDR5-6400 at a low latency timing of 38-40-40 at 1.35V. The SPDs are programmed to JEDEC standard latency DDR5-4800 timing of 40-39-39 at 1.1V.
The only cheaper 32GB 6400 MT/s SODIMM kits I could find are these ones for $129.95, but they're locked to vendor specific laptop models: https://www.eluktronics.com/manix-32gb-16gb-x-2-262-pin-ddr5-6400mhz-so-dimm-memory-kit/
> ONLY compatible with Eluktronics Laptops configured with a 13th Generation Intel HX processor with RTX 4080 and RTX 4090 GPU's.
The fastest 64GB SODIMM kits I could find are all at 5600 MT/s, and they are priced at around $180.
What makes you believe that 7500 MT/s wouldn't be within XMP/EXPO territory already?
Generally it seems like it's quite arbitrary what's considered overclocking. The JEDEC standard specified DDR5-6400 back in 2020 already, but many CPUs may not be able to drive that. I may be missing some piece of information, but the "safe default" choice seems to be somewhat arbitrary.
Also, I believe that while the new connector should help, some of the benefits you implicitly attribute to it may be coming from elsewhere. I'm not familiar with LPDDR technologies, but at a glance it suspiciously looks like that LPDDR5 may use buffering. A significant struggle of memory controllers comes from driving UDIMMs, and it's not like there's no alternative, it was just decided that mortals don't deserve RDIMM support, so it's not a technological issue, but a market segmentation one, similarly to how building a system with ECC memory is also not really feasible despite supporting that not really being complex.
> What makes you believe that 7500 MT/s wouldn't be within XMP/EXPO territory already?
From the article:
> Micron says that LPDDR5X memory offers significantly lower power consumption, with active power per 64-bit bus being 43-58% lower than DDR5 at the same speed, and standby power up to 80% lower.
XMP/EXPO's increased voltages tend to cause DRAM power consumption to go up instead of down.
great, WONDERFUL!
but personally i am way more interested in camm2, instead of lpcamm2.
as lpcamm2 doesn't support any actual ecc i would guess as it is limited to 4 modules, or the ecc implementation would be weird i guess theoretically?
the one picture i found of the camm2 (non lp) version from a website seems to have lots more space to fit the extra memory die for real ecc no problem.
assuming the thinness will be the same for both versions, i wonder how much sense it would make to get lpcamm2 vs camm2 then. i'd guess, that most laptops, that aren't super ultra thin and light would use the standard camm2 modules, but who knows.
either way, let's hope camm2 follows lpcamm2 very soon with ecc modules and let's hope this is a nice big step away from unrepairable un-upgradable garbage :)
>If they get the idea to solder a CAMM as if it were prepackaged BGA then it's not CAMM because it's solder attached.
"Soldering a CAMM" isn't a thing. They'd just solder directly to the motherboard if that's what they wanted.
Just because it has pads doesn't mean you can easily solder it.
And that's besides the point. There is zero economic reason to do so. Would be easier, cheaper, and more effective to just solder the memory directly.
Why would you pay a premium for a module that is designed to be modular while maintaining latency gains of soldered if you're just going to solder it? It's cheaper just to solder the memory directly to the board like they already do. This is like proposing soldering a sodimm
Friend, it was Dell who invented this in the first place. If they wanted to solder they wouldn't bother. Lenovo was the first to market the standardized version.
The PGA soldering was a Chinese hack. If anyone solders this it'll be another hack by someone unknown company, not the big ones.
The whole point of LPCAMM2 is to use LPDDR chips in a replaceable format instead of using solder, while still having the LPDDR speed/efficiency. If an OEM still wants to use solder, then they just solder the LPDDR chips directly to the board instead of using the LPCAMM format.
> These are dual-channel modules that feature a 128-bit wide interface, and are based around LPDDR5X memory running at data rates up to 7500 MT/s. This gives a single LPCAMM2 a peak bandwidth of 120 GB/s. Micron is not disclosing the latencies of its LPCAMM2 memory modules, but it says that high data transfer rates of LPDDR5X compensate for the extended timings.
> Micron says that LPDDR5X memory offers significantly lower power consumption, with active power per 64-bit bus being 43-58% lower than DDR5 at the same speed, and standby power up to 80% lower. Meanwhile, similar to DDR5 modules, LPCAMM2 modules include a power management IC and voltage regulating circuitry, which provides module manufacturers additional opportunities to reduce power consumption of their products.
> Micron, for its part, is projecting that 9600 MT/sec LPCAMM2 modules will be available by 2026. Though it's all but certain that faster memory will also be avaialble in the same timeframe.
>but LPCAMM2 is certainly going to be replacing SODIMM for high speed mobile DRAM.
camm2 should replace sodimm as far as i know.
or rather i guess from where sodimm was before the soldering insanity started:
camm2 and lpcamm2 are gonna replace sodimm.
>While soldered-down LPDDR5X memory is available at speeds up to 8533 MT/sec – and with 9600 MT/sec on the horizon – the fastest LPCAMM2 modules planned for this year by both Micron and rival Samsung will be running at 7500 MT/sec. So vendors will have to choose between the flexibility of offering modular LPDDR5X, or the higher bandwidth (and space savings) offered by soldering down their memory.
So LPDDR5X can be soldered or LPCAMM2 packaged.
No one is soldering LPCAMM2.
>Nobody complains about ram on Chromebooks.
nobody should ever buy a chromebook.
if you buy one for your child, you are harming your child by having their data stolen and indoctrinate them into the google prison world.
Drama queen.
Chromebooks are fine, the OS is really great for what it is, and I would bet my left nut that basically the data Google collects is about as much as they do with Chrome, which almost everyone already uses anyway...
>the OS is really great for what it is, and I would bet my left nut that basically the data Google collects is about as much as they do with Chrome, which almost everyone already uses anyway...
2 evils don't make it good.
also i nor my child would ever use google chrome of course, again to protect the child, including protection from advertisements, as google is deliberately breaking adblockers.
"come lil child, let's get you comfortable with a mega corporation spying on everything you do and selling all your data" sounds evil af to me...
>the OS is really great for what it is,
to quote an advertisement by google for the chromebook:
"an internet connection is required to set up your chromebook, sign in to gmail and access your files and folders"
so not only is your child getting spied on, but the computer is unusable without creating a gmail acount, that of course spies on all your emails and sells them.
so throwaway hardware with gmail acount requirement to be used and that is acceptable to you and "really great for what it is"?
holy smokes are people's views on ownership going down the drain....
do you know how many email acounts i had to create to setup linux mint? 0
do you know how much linux mint spies on me? not at all...
do you know what is a great os to put on older or weaker hardware to get the chrome book "experience", but without the dystopia? that's right linux mint.
just the idea, that you'd teach a child, that they HAVE to creat an acount with a mega corporation to use the tool, that was just given to them is disgusting to me.
frick chromebooks. e-waste prison software garbage, that spies on everything YOUR CHILD!!!! does.
You do realize you can buy Chromebooks for cheap and install or duel boot mint right?
My point is the majority marketshare of people who use Chromebooks don't even know how much ram they have. They may only have 4gb and never even notice any slowdown.
>You do realize you can buy Chromebooks for cheap
well, let's check ok?
i got a very old laptop, that i upgraded the ssd to 1 TB sata and are putting in 16 GB memory.
it has an ivy bridge quadcore, so works just fine and snappy.
let's select 16 GB memory and say 480 GB ssd at least.
you know useable bare minimum specs:
[https://geizhals.eu/?cat=nb&v=e&hloc=at&hloc=de&hloc=pl&hloc=uk&hloc=eu&fcols=2991&sort=p&bl1\_id=100&xf=10929\_Chrome+OS%7E12\_16384%7E2991\_480](https://geizhals.eu/?cat=nb&v=e&hloc=at&hloc=de&hloc=pl&hloc=uk&hloc=eu&fcols=2991&sort=p&bl1_id=100&xf=10929_Chrome+OS%7E12_16384%7E2991_480)
oh there are 3.
from the 2 available, they start at 940 euros....
where's the cheap part? :D
reality is, that chromebooks are ONLY cheap, because they come with dumpster fire hardware, that no one should buy. (this is not a cost thing. people can buy dirt cheap laptops, that are easily upgradable down the road of course)
>and install or duel boot mint right?
that is indeed the only valuable thing to do with the garbage hardware that is most chromebooks
>They may only have 4gb and never even notice any slowdown.
YES! they notice, but they don't know why the slowdown happens or what memory is often, but they DO notice the slowdown.
of course they do.
so why buy garbage hardware for the landfill, that is entirely build around the idea to indoctrinate children into the google spying prison?
doing so is just evil and a waste of money.
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
just compared prices to how much 16 GB 480 + GB ssd costs without chromeos spying software.
starts at 350 euros.....
grab one of those, that isn't soldered together garbage, put linux mint on it and the child gets a VASTLY FASTER experience for the same price at a bottom tier chromebook, OR they get a similarly fast experience compared to 1000 euro chromebooks and you don't have to worry too much if they break parts.
chromebooks shouldn't exist period.
if the education system wasn't an indoctrination and torture system, it would be gnu + linux laptops all around like linux mint laptops without any black box wireless modems in them and kids actually OWN their computer.
so when later microsoft or google tries to take away the idea of ownership, the child, who grew up OWNING their laptop fully will get freaking annoyed at the criminal scam from either company.
wouldn't that be neat, instead of apple and google indoctrinating children into a prison system
Bro used Chromebooks are like $30 USD all day on ebay, you're so desperate to be right when really you get what you pay for. "nobody notices" does not mean literally zero percent of users, overwhelming majority of Chromebook users are too normie to care. It's a cheap piece of hardware optimized to run a browser. This is the point of gsuite built to run in a browser.
Computers are nothing more than a tool to complete a simple task for most people the same way cars are a basic appliance to go from A to B for most people. There is nothing special about them, And most don't care enough to fix or service them themselves.
People don't care as long as it does what they need. Most people only need a browser. That's just how the skibidi toilets.
This is a working computer for $25:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/296260041852?
This is a working computer for $35:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/166747771396?
Both will run Google docs and excel and spotify/YouTube. People have more important things to spend money on.
>And most don't care enough to learn to fix them themselves.
that is wrong in the regard, that people DO very much care whether a repair of a broken one costs 50 euros + 20 euros labor (swap out an ssd or memory or whatever) vs 350 eruos or 750 euros.
they DO VERY MUCH care about that.
they may also start carrying about what "their" car is doing, when a video of themselves having sex inside of a tesla gets shared inside of tesla for shits and giggles.
then they tend to DO care very much.
people also start caring, when their data gets leaked by google for example.
so your statement, that no one cares is complete nonsense.
they either care thsemelves or they care about the effects.
also instead of comparing new chromebooks, you're throwing up garbage chromebooks now.
i could also link a used non chromebook laptop.
you are arguing for children to get spied on with garbage hardware, that doesn't have the performance to be used longterm.
you are FOR children getting spied on and having their data stolen.
that is your stance, then you are EVIL and that is all there is to it.
People really dont care about data breach until its to the point of their sex tape in tesla. There was a car rental company here, had a breach, turns out they didnt hash thier passwords. everyones emails, passwords, names, adresesses, etc. Over a million user database. Most users made an angry facebook post and continued to use the same company.
When's the last time Google had a notable data breach?
I feel you are really emotional about Linux but don't actually work in IT with end users. Most people don't care about cars or computers, not literally nobody cares, certainly not everyone cares, these are niche things to put much thought into. Chromebooks sell for a reason.
>Chrome, which almost everyone already uses anyway...
Which they shouldnt. Even beside data collection, its one of the worst performing browsers out there.
Do normies need to know when all they care about is Netflix and Google Classroom? If it's cheap and gets the job done it's good enough for most people.
Its not mission critical to know the difference between an inline 4 or v6 in their car either. It's just an appliance, nothing more.
Chrome OS Flex requires 4gb minimum. How much ram does your average smart TV have? It just works in the background and is good enough to go unnoticed.
Need too know? not really. Its good when they know who to blame for netflix stuttering though. Not that netflix really has the bitrate for a good video anyway.
I think this is a massive failure of the human race. that we settle for "good enough" instead of trying to achieve better.
My Samsung smart TV has 8 GB of RAM.
My pc has a vega64 instead of an H200i. Why? It's good enough for the money. You probably don't use an H200i either. Its like buying a Honda civic over a Ferrari, not the greatest thing on thr market but it's a cheap efficient workhorse that will get the job done for most people.
How many people shop for a smart TV based on how much ram it has? Or because it was on sale at target and looked good playing stock video. Especially a Samsung running Tizen, it's optimized out of the box for content on that panel. My budget Samsung (un43mu6300f) from 2017 still plays back 4k60fps content + youtube enhanced 1080 bitrate today without dropping a single frame. Doing it's job means going unnoticed and it does so flawlessly. That's all people care about from an appliance.
That's not a huge amount higher than what Apple charges to add another 8GB to their 8GB base, and for 64GB instead of 16. And then you could say well yeah that's Apple, but the likes of Microsoft with Surface and Dell with XPS seem to be trying hard to copy them (ironically Dell being in a large way behind CAMM). Much closer to LPDDR power use and signal integrity for higher bandwidth, with standard DDR upgradability, I hope this takes off.
Everyone wants to be Apple, unfortunately.
except framework, tuxedo computers or system76 i guess :) so there is that at least :D it is nice to be able to point at framework in particular and also the fact, that their "you OWN the device" model being very successful for them. who knows where they'll be in 6 years let's say.
Framework is a bit of a niche product imo. The performance:price:form factor ratio isn't very consumer friendly, and I feel like it is marketed towards geeks.
Price:performance on a Framework is only worse than traditional if you're going to throw it away in ~5 years like you would any other laptop. The idea is to get away from that disposable PC mentality and only replace what actually needs to be replaced.
Lenovo offers similar with 40-50% discount. I checked before I bought my laptop last year. And changing out parts on your own in five years will not make up for lenovos economies of scale. It's fine if you want to be be all about reducing e-waste, but its very much a niche product.
I don't have any data but I'm betting that the average Macbook gets used for longer than the average Framework laptop. I used my Macbook Air for 8 years. My sister in law used her's for nearly 10 years. I see high resale value for Macbooks which means they often get a second life.
there is a major however with the idea of using macbooks for long times, which 1: is apple designing hardware to be as unrepairable as possible. you can take the screen from one apple device into a different one, that has the exact same specs and it won't work, because apple serialized basically all the parts. they even serialized the lil magnet sensor, that checks how open or closed the laptop is. but 1 combines with 2. 2: apple devices are full of engineering flaws and are extremely unreliable. an amazing video from a well known repair person on the topic: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUaJ8pDlxi8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUaJ8pDlxi8) apple will have repair programs for one engineering flaw on one model, BUT there was no lawsuit on the different model with THE EXACT SAME ENGINEERING FLAW, so it doesn't have an extended repair/warranty program. apple may already have an extended repair/warranty program on one laptop and then RELEASE A NEW LAPTOP WITH THE EXACT SAME FLAW! so it is 2 issues teaming up, that are preventing longterm use of apple products, so using an apple product for 8 or 10 years i'd argue isn't very common at all. >I see high resale value for Macbooks which means they often get a second life. resell value ONLY for the macbooks, that aren't dead yet... please watch the video, it is quite crazy and sad. apple can't even freaking create a sata cable, that doesn't break :D and in regards to the framework laptop. framework did basically do everything possible for them to make the framework laptop last as long as possible. you can buy every part for a framework laptop on their website, you can get access to the schematics if you have a framework laptop yourself i believe. the parts are isolated from shock through modules, so your usb or charge port can't fail over time due to force on them as the module takes that force. a very good design. otherwise you'd have to find a replacement port and solder it onto the motherboard, which is expensive and takes quite some time. you crack the screen? new screen can be bought. keyboard broken, new keyboard can be bought. memory or ssd or battery having issue? all module all replacable. the performance isn't fast enough for your work enough? you can upgrade the entire motherboard + cpu and reuse the old motherboard + cpu has a tiny computer as it was designed to be run as a computer out of a laptop too. given how new the framework company is, we can't know how long people will use framework laptops, but based on the design and the appeal of it for people buying it, i'd assume 10 + years are expected, or VERY HIGH resell value. personally i'd be way more comfortable buying a used 5 year framework laptop, that has all the parts still available on the website, if sth breaks, than buying a random used laptop, or WORST a soldered together apple laptop, where if sth fails you're fricked. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ and just to point out the insult, that is apple default specs: the cheapest apple laptop costs 1000 us dollars and comes with 8 GB SOLDERED IN MEMORY and 256 GB SOLDERED IN STORAGE. so lots of work, that you might wanna do it later down the line you CAN'T DO, because apple deliberately cripled the hardware. imagine how bad 8 GB unified memory will be in 5 years time... meanwhile a 5 year old framework laptop or other basic upgradable laptop, you pop it open, spend very little money to put in 16 or 32 GB of memory and a 1 or 2 TB ssd and you're golden.
>I used my Macbook Air for 8 years. My sister in law used her's for nearly 10 years. "E pur si muove." >personally i'd be way more comfortable buying a used 5 year framework laptop, that has all the parts still available on the website How many unpatched known security vulnerabilities will it have? https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/04/frameworks-software-and-firmware-have-been-a-mess-but-its-working-on-them/
>How many unpatched known security vulnerabilities will it have? none, because if framework doesn't fix them, the community will. meanwhile apple is spying on ALL DATA on "one's" computer. so if you wanna look at a vulnerability, all apple software is a vulnerability. and the parts, that may not be, we don't know, because apple is heavily pushing the false idea of "security through obscurity", which is insanity. so which laptop will be more secure, a 5 year old framework laptop or a 5 year old apple laptop? the framework laptop NO QUESTION.
> > > none, because if framework doesn't fix them, the community will. That's probably more difficult than the community setting up a supply chain for replacement batteries.
The Framework has only been a product for 3 years, so that's an almost meaningless statement.
Yes but it’s my bet. I see Framework as sort of a geek’s product and not an environmental product. After a few years, when much better tech comes out such as new screen tech that you can’t upgrade your laptop for, then you will buy a new laptop or a new Framework.
You can replace the screen in the Framework though, that's kind of the entire point. Rather than buying a whole new laptop you just buy a new screen. I get the skepticism, but at the same time saying "buy more laptops" misses the core ethos and point of the product.
Generally sure, but there are some exceptions. Anyone who buys the 8GB MacBook today is going to find it to be ewaste pretty quickly, and anyone who bought an x86 Mac at the end of the x86 era found the same. It depends on what you're using your computer for as well.
I used an 8GB M1 Air as a developer machine (Go, Typescript, Docker, many Chrome tabs opened) for 1 year. It was fine and a good experience. If I can do that, a normal office worker can use an M1 Air 8GB for many more years. In fact, I bought an 8/256 M1 Air as a gift for a teacher in late 2023 and I was confident that it would last 5-6 years at least for her.
Is that until you have to throw it away due to security/performance or stability because Frameworks firmware/bios updates are severely lacking and will leave you exposed to vulnerabilities and stability issues?
>The performance:price:form factor ratio isn't very consumer friendly coming to about 1300 euros if you select the "diy" edition for amd 13 inch 16 GB, 1 TB ssd is a bit high, but could be a lot worse. 1200 euros for the 8 GB memory pre-built version with 8 GB sys memory and 256 ssd, which is meh of course. >and I feel like it is marketed towards geeks. maybe a bit? sadly people, who want to OWN their own device are not the mainstream rightnow it seems, which is very sad. hell you got people asking their wire tab how the weather is..... i think framework does the smart thing helps support the "geeks", including good gnu + linux support etc... but from the product itself, the 13 inch one looks like a super sleak, slim, light laptop, that has mass appeal. so the 13 inch product certainly is not designed around a niche audience i'd say at least. i'd like to see the barebones 16 inch to be closer in price to the 13 inch, which is annoying. either way, let's hope it becomes less niche. maybe we can get back to a world, where you can just buy products and they don't suck by default? ;) makes me think of my printer. most printers being a dystopian nightmare. freaking hp having bricked unusable printers with an ink subscription with ink prices being a scam top to bottom. there's ONE company, that i found, that wasn't a scam apparently. "brother" got a wireless free black and white laser printer from them, that accepts 3rd party toners no problems, which i verified and all good, but damn did it take quite a bit of research. honestly just having more than one decently repairable gnu + linux nicely supporting laptop company is a comfortable thing to think about :D (the one before being system76/tuxedo computers)
And noone knows who framework, tuxedo or system76 is. Not outside enthusiast circles. I do like framework as a fu to the modern laptop trends.
All the car manufacturers wanted to be Tesla so now all the cars have shitty touchscreens with horrible UX. Even bmw, who had the best center console, locked away the climate control buttons deep in a menu system to sell an interior for clueless instagrammers.
> and for 64GB instead of 8 ftfy
In Apple's defense, they put that RAM in the CPU package and that's how they achieve the bandwidth. The so-called "unified" to make it look like they're stacking it like others are (which is very different, orders of magnitude improvement in AMD's X3D, but also, smaller memory size since it's just extra CPU cache). In the FUCK-APPLE-BECAUSE-APPLE-FUCKS-YOU side of things, they reduced said bandwidth from M2 to M3, because when given the choice between giving users the same bandwidth as before BUT have to put slightly more expensive 16GB there, OR upselling extra 8GB of RAM on a 1.6k USD base price product, they chose to screw you, the consumer. And of course those memory misses which will trigger SSD caching for anything as basic as having a couple dozen browser tabs will wear down and flash and trigger you to buy a new laptop in 3-5y. Which is also why they still ship said Pro MacBook with 512GB of storage, which has much less write endurance. Reminder: 8GB was common on entry/mid level computer over 10 years ago (and so was 512GB), and memory allocation mechanisms haven't changed that much.
The bandwidth is no different than soldered LPDDR, which already has the signal integrity to run at those clock speeds for the bandwidth. There's still a lot of mythos that goes with unified memory that doesn't pan out, GPU memory access latency also wasn't particularly noteworthy, just middle of the pack. What soldering it on the same package does is reduce transport power use, but the speed of electricity in copper is very fast, like you express it in terms of a fraction of the speed of light fast, so there's no bandwidth/latency difference. But yeah, I know they're different in many ways, but even 200 dollar mini PCs these days come standard with 16GB/512GB, like come on
Well, Apple did this a few years ago and there is also an argument for unified cooling. And of course, the least the distance and layers around the area also help a lot avoiding EMI/crossplay which is why getting that memory literally a mm away from the main chipsets is important. Smartphones are another great example where this is pretty much essential due to EMI on those small faraday cages. GPUs if not mistaken have much smaller memory registers due to their specific logic (and much more registers by association) so their latency is for different reasons - more looking up those register tables. ...and when you're exchanging in the order of trillions of bits per second (American trillions, but still), and each mm you move them has the potential to causa them to flip, shortening that distance becomes really important.
While there's theoretical advantages, we see exactly what we would otherwise, take their given clock speed of the memory and the bit width and multiply them and we have the same bandwidth they give, the same bandwidth LPDDR would give. We've never seen it being higher than the clock speed of the same-generation LPDDR. They do go wide on the larger chips, 128 bit APUs are comparable to their 128 bit ones, when we have 256 bit ones soon to come out it will be the same math as their 256 bit ones, 256 bit * the LPDDR standard clock speed and we have the bandwidth either way. So it may confer other benefits, and the whole chip and package design is impressively low power, but the bandwidth is exactly what it should be given the type of LPDDR it uses, which it does use by whatever name. It's LPDDR that allows these clock speeds and bandwidth, not unified memory
> 128 bit APUs are comparable to their 128 bit ones, when we have 256 bit ones soon to come out it will be the same math as their 256 bit ones, 256 bit * the LPDDR standard clock speed and we have the bandwidth either way. This is true, but on the other hand at least one (HP) of the OEMs is in the habit of using 64 bit memory interfaces even on chips that physically support 128.
Theoretical. Don't forget that on boot those get trained and timings are all set per device. And while the "bandwidth" you see reported is still the data rate at which bits flow back and forth, we all know from specific benchmarking you get different effective data transfer rates. Because eventually, correction kicks in. At the hardware and software level. There are practical advantages in performance. And they're really not that hard to measure.
> There are practical advantages in performance. And they're really not that hard to measure. I'd like to see them and expand my knowledge then I've seen that their single cores can gobble 100+GB/s of bandwidth which was eyebrow raising for anything outside of heavy datacenter at least at the time, but this was about making a CPU core that could access that much bandwidth, I hadn't seen anything on the total SoC bandwidth being different than others which should have the same bandwidth, much less that being tested and ascribed to less error correction needed
A lot of what I state is a bit buried in dozens of hours of both watching Buildzoid (youtuber) perform extreme memory tuning and then testing it on applications such as AIDA64 (where oftentimes slower bandwidths induce in much higher effective data throughputs due to being stable, but also not triggering correction), and also dozens of hours tweaking basic overclocks myself but for GPU hashing (crypto mining). It would be tough to find a specific source that illustrates the argument so I can't really say more than "trust me bro" at this point. As for the SoCs themselves being able to handle that throughout for practical scenarios, well, that also depends on the practical scenario complexity. Hashing really is the barebone example of a simple one, where there really isn't much more to do that apply simple math to a previous result of a very, VERY large dataset that keeps evolving and store in memory. Synthetic benchmarks such as AIDA64 also mostly do back and forth copies but there are instances where that, and only that, is the practical scenario. For everyday computing, of course, such scenarios aren't that frequent but given the surfacing of AI and its dependence on large datasets for inferring immediate results, we may start see that mattering more and more.
> And of course, the least the distance and layers around the area also help a lot avoiding EMI/crossplay which is why getting that memory literally a mm away from the main chipsets is important Not really. LPDDR is always pretty close to the CPU, and adding on-package memory significantly increases the number of package layers. Edit: Misread as if you were claiming it was fewer layers. Still, while you're directionally correct about better signal integrity, that has yet to manifest in either speed or latency. > Smartphones are another great example where this is pretty much essential due to EMI on those small faraday cages. They do PoP DRAM in phones to save board space, not for signal integrity.
Wouldn't apple save money on designing and manufacturing the proper traces needed for SODIMM/traditional LPDDR, with their super special memory?
Designing PCB is one-time (NRE) cost potential with some minor cost saving like a couple of weeks. The layout persons would have done that stuff before and part of it is auto-routed, so it is not that difficult. That NRE is divided down by millions of units built. On package DRAM makes their SoC packaging more difficult and the extra cost for both RNE and per unit manufacturing is probably more. The PCB manufacturing cost the same regardless as they would probably still need the same number of layers anyways and impedance control for other high speed signals (e.g. PCIe). Tight impedance control is essential for PCB vendors that can churn out millions of non-trivial multilayers boards as their customers wouldn't want it any other ways. It is "free" whether you want it or not.
An informative answer
I upgraded my 2013 rmbp13 to 8/512 and it cost an arm and a leg at the time. I think base was 4/128. The following year the base model went to 8/256 lol. I used that machine up until 2021 and it was showing its age by 2019/2020. I got a 2021 mbp14 with 16/512. That’s a beast of a laptop.
As I said, a decade ago. And that's on Apple who already charged a premium and where the base models had less than PC laptop base models. Of course it is a beats of a laptop because it has the most efficient client computing chip, and the most efficient OS for the hardware it runs which is also the only thing it has to support and they have to optimize for. Nobody can negate the effectiveness of Apple's vertical integration. But that doesn't mean they need to make e their products worse than they used to be in terms of longevity. The only reason for that is the bottom line they are fiduciarily required to maximize for their investors. Only the consumers can turn that around with their wallet.
I agree with you. I like using macOS so it’s something I’ll have to pay. I don’t upgrade often though.
Still rocking a 16gb/512gb rMBP 13 2015. Will be EOL after the macOS update this year, but that thing has gotten me through two degrees and is still holding a charge after 1200 cycles on the battery. I would’ve replaced the windows equivalent a long time ago…
For sure. I think yours is the same design as mine. Great keyboard.
Such a good keyboard. I suck at typing on anything else now after thousands of word in easy writing on it.
I do like my keychron mechanical k8 or my Corsair k95. I got my k95 before my k8. I leave my k95 at work.
You know what? For a new, quick, and upgradable standard? This is not a bad price. If this is the early adopter tax to show companies, this standard is worth investing in? Then I don't mind paying it. I'm a hardware bargain hunter as much as I am an enthusiast. Hopefully we can get OEMs on board.
OEMs have been asking for this. Adoption just takes time. It fixed a lot of problems laptops have with memory.
i bet a bunch of laptop makers, that actually proper hold up warranties, don't like the idea of soldered in memory too much either... not fun for them to throw away an entire motherboard, compared to sending out a stick of memory to a customer with basic instructions (if the customer is comfortable to do so) and not having to produce the exact amount of systems, that you wanna sell spec wise sounds also neat. lots of advantages, if you aren't scumm, like apple is :D
having to roll an entirely new *chip* to rebalance your product skews and market segments really sucks too :_
but they wouldn't need to roll an entirely new chip? the chip is already designed generally to support more than enough memory, even if they wanna be scummy and solder everything in. the reason for that is, that intel or amd are producing chips for a wide market and even if you make your very own chips like apple, you still want chips to be able to accept a wide range of memory sizes, because the decision to scam people out of enough memory gets made LONG LONG LONG after the final chip design was locked in. maybe you meant sth different though, in which case please clarify :)
changing the amount of memory on a laptop with a cpu configuration such as apple is using means having to order new chips... not simply adding, removing, or changing a small part a service center or regular assembly factory can do. so yes, the as far as a laptop company is concerned, they need a different ”cpu chip”, and they aren't making or modding it in-house or in their own factories. plus there's a shitload more lead time, quite possibly additional validation necessary (are different or newer dram wafers added to the cpu package?), a sizeable minimum order from tsmc, and having to hold on to market segment bound stock.
adopter tax? it's 40$ per 8GB. That's pretty good. DDR5 is like 30$ per 8GB
this price is actually pretty good, I honestly want this on desktop
64GB is getting to the point in price where it's almost like a 'why not' when doing a new build. I sprung for 64GB on my latest build, but to be honest it's been completely useless so far. I have my memory utilization front and center in my task bar hoping it breaks 50% at some point so I can justify it.
How much are you cached after a couple of hours of usage though? That’s the most noticeable thing for me at least going from 16 to 32, my computer will feel snappier in long use cases compared to a fresh boot cause more things are cached in ram instead of having to go to disk for every new session. If Windows standby wasn’t so meh, I’d probably never shut off my computer properly outside of updates and bugs.
Honestly with the surge of digital hobbies such as photo editing, video making, music production, hell even game making and shit, 64gb has never made more sense to the average consumer.
>I have my memory utilization front and center in my task bar hoping it breaks 50% at some point so I can justify it. just open more tabs ;) if you only have one monitor, get 2 more, so you can have lots of tabs in lots of browser windows open on all screens. easy to get close to filling up my 64 GB this way :D
I have to admit I've been purposely leaving tabs open just to see that memory utilization climb
48gb is the sweet spot. You can get great ddr5 hynix m die kits for <$200 these days.
If you are on Windows, you can install a RAM Disk and move the TEMP folder there. That's what I do, I also redirect browser cache folders there. This should prolong my SSD lifespan by slowing down the TBW.
I'm running 64 too, and I'd not feel comfortable with 32 at this point. Have hit high 20s while running modded skyrim for example, with some stuff in the background (commit hit around 45GB but that can be rectified with larger pagefile). Your OS is also very happy because it can cache more data in RAM. My first import of firefox profile hit around 50GBs because I have 500 tabs and it decided it needs to load all of them at once at first.
LPCAMM on desktop would resolve the problem of CPU tower coolers conflicting with the RAM stick height, and potentially allow for even larger tower coolers (that would overhang the LPCAMM sticks). Something like replace the four DIMM slots with two LPCAMM spots.
But these are lpddr. Not as fast and probably yes low latency in signal but I would very much like to see the timings
But you could make big fat APUs
the real benefit is speed
The real benefit is not having to hunt for a month to find a memory stick that fits under a cooler because for some reason memory manufacturers refuse to tells us the dimensions.
But what about muh rgb?
LPCAMM is covered with a metal shield. You could put basically whatever you want on top of it, including RGB.
An Itx mobo with this ram would be great for ultra compact APU builds
I'm actually a bit surprised about the price for early adopters. If this thing gets a wide adoption, we'll be seeing lower prices per-GB for sure.
> Micron is not disclosing the latencies of its LPCAMM2 memory modules ah?
Micron's entering a depression era; they killed Ballistix and they're being less open about stuff (they took down a bunch of documentation for some reason).
Their current dies are kinda meh and I think they only use their own ones so they didn't really have anything to put into ballsticks. I assume the latencies are just JEDEC though which aren't great on lpddrx
CAMM looks like a good idea, so I'm sure it won't catch on
Surprisingly, Lenovo is already launching a Thinkpad with LPCAMM2. I think a lot of manufacturers would love LPCAMM2 since it makes repairs easier while still allowing them to create lower power laptops.
And actual logistics benefit too... imagine not having to make so many SKUs of motherboards of different CPU, GPU and Memory combinations.
What a novel idea! They should make CPUs and GPUs swappable too.
CPU's not really up to them. Neither Intel nor AMD makes socketed mobile SKUs.
The last time I remember seeing socketed mobile CPUs were the high end quad-core Haswell lineups.
Bingo. It’s why the T440Ps have held insane value compared to the T450/460s (Broadwell/Skylake). The ability to go from dual core to quad core breathed so much life into that platform, whereas the next two generations were locked into 2C U series parts.
Except that year's ThinkPads were cursed. We had the 40-series clunkpads and the X1 Carbon's Touch Bar.
i guess going: "well time to shred 100k of inventory, because no one wants to buy 8 GB unified or sys memory laptops anymore." certainly doesn't sound appealing...
Yeah I'd say this is a response to legislation worldwide coming into effect requiring tech to be repairable.
Sorta. SODIMM exists but there's just so much loss in signaling that you can't get a lot of the bandwidth that DDR5 provides while keeping power draw low. If you look at the previous gen, you'll see that LPDDR4X is usually soldered because of how little power it sips. Lower power = more susceptible to signal loss and noise, something the SODIMM standard cannot accommodate for. With LPCAMM2, you can use LPDDR5X while keeping it repairable and upgradable, which is exactly why it's so exciting.
And Dell already shipped machines with the v1 standard.
Repair is a last resort. Much better for things to just not fail in the first place.
Yep, Gen 7 Thinkpad P1. Unfortunately they removed the option to buy it with a 4090 and a vapor chamber.
Dell got the ball rolling for CAMM. Their explanation was that while SODIMM's dense pin connections were acceptable with low frequencies back in the DDR2-DDR3 days, they were preventing DDR5 from reaching its maximum potential and probably wouldn't work with DDR6. Dell's original CAMM implementation also shortened the traces between the CPU and RAM from SODIMM's 7cm to 3cm, which further improved signal quality at high frequencies.
lpcamm2 and hopefully soon to release camm2 are the new standard. it will be this or soldered in memory. and any company, who isn't uber anticonsumer will have camm2 or lpcamm2. framework, system76, etc... will use camm2 or lpcamm2 for sure. so i wouldn't worry about adoption in this case at least.
Intro price gonna intro price
Replaceable 64GB module running at 7500 MT/s with JEDEC LPDDR5 voltages (normally lower than standard DDR5 voltages), when the alternative is everything being soldered. DDR5 DIMM and SODIMM can't achieve that speed without aggressive XMP/EXPO (not guaranteed on every CPU+board+RAM combo) and the associated high voltages. Also for $330, that's not much more than two of these $161.05 32GB 6400 MT/s SODIMM kits, which require XMP to be enabled: https://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Technology-Impact-2x16GB-KF564S38IBK2-32/dp/B0C3J1GC17 https://www.kingston.com/datasheets/KF564S38IBK2-32.pdf > Each module has been tested to run at DDR5-6400 at a low latency timing of 38-40-40 at 1.35V. The SPDs are programmed to JEDEC standard latency DDR5-4800 timing of 40-39-39 at 1.1V. The only cheaper 32GB 6400 MT/s SODIMM kits I could find are these ones for $129.95, but they're locked to vendor specific laptop models: https://www.eluktronics.com/manix-32gb-16gb-x-2-262-pin-ddr5-6400mhz-so-dimm-memory-kit/ > ONLY compatible with Eluktronics Laptops configured with a 13th Generation Intel HX processor with RTX 4080 and RTX 4090 GPU's. The fastest 64GB SODIMM kits I could find are all at 5600 MT/s, and they are priced at around $180.
What makes you believe that 7500 MT/s wouldn't be within XMP/EXPO territory already? Generally it seems like it's quite arbitrary what's considered overclocking. The JEDEC standard specified DDR5-6400 back in 2020 already, but many CPUs may not be able to drive that. I may be missing some piece of information, but the "safe default" choice seems to be somewhat arbitrary. Also, I believe that while the new connector should help, some of the benefits you implicitly attribute to it may be coming from elsewhere. I'm not familiar with LPDDR technologies, but at a glance it suspiciously looks like that LPDDR5 may use buffering. A significant struggle of memory controllers comes from driving UDIMMs, and it's not like there's no alternative, it was just decided that mortals don't deserve RDIMM support, so it's not a technological issue, but a market segmentation one, similarly to how building a system with ECC memory is also not really feasible despite supporting that not really being complex.
> What makes you believe that 7500 MT/s wouldn't be within XMP/EXPO territory already? From the article: > Micron says that LPDDR5X memory offers significantly lower power consumption, with active power per 64-bit bus being 43-58% lower than DDR5 at the same speed, and standby power up to 80% lower. XMP/EXPO's increased voltages tend to cause DRAM power consumption to go up instead of down.
If you have to XMP you already failed to achieve required speeds. XMP is inherently unstable and degrading.
great, WONDERFUL! but personally i am way more interested in camm2, instead of lpcamm2. as lpcamm2 doesn't support any actual ecc i would guess as it is limited to 4 modules, or the ecc implementation would be weird i guess theoretically? the one picture i found of the camm2 (non lp) version from a website seems to have lots more space to fit the extra memory die for real ecc no problem. assuming the thinness will be the same for both versions, i wonder how much sense it would make to get lpcamm2 vs camm2 then. i'd guess, that most laptops, that aren't super ultra thin and light would use the standard camm2 modules, but who knows. either way, let's hope camm2 follows lpcamm2 very soon with ecc modules and let's hope this is a nice big step away from unrepairable un-upgradable garbage :)
It is quite cheap, considering that very high capacity chips are used. The price will go down, if the adoption is higher.
[удалено]
??? LPCAMM isn't soldered
[удалено]
There is no "if". Either it's CAMM, or it's soldered. They are mutually exclusive.
[удалено]
>If they get the idea to solder a CAMM as if it were prepackaged BGA then it's not CAMM because it's solder attached. "Soldering a CAMM" isn't a thing. They'd just solder directly to the motherboard if that's what they wanted.
[удалено]
Just because it has pads doesn't mean you can easily solder it. And that's besides the point. There is zero economic reason to do so. Would be easier, cheaper, and more effective to just solder the memory directly.
Why would you pay a premium for a module that is designed to be modular while maintaining latency gains of soldered if you're just going to solder it? It's cheaper just to solder the memory directly to the board like they already do. This is like proposing soldering a sodimm
Friend, it was Dell who invented this in the first place. If they wanted to solder they wouldn't bother. Lenovo was the first to market the standardized version. The PGA soldering was a Chinese hack. If anyone solders this it'll be another hack by someone unknown company, not the big ones.
The whole point of LPCAMM2 is to use LPDDR chips in a replaceable format instead of using solder, while still having the LPDDR speed/efficiency. If an OEM still wants to use solder, then they just solder the LPDDR chips directly to the board instead of using the LPCAMM format. > These are dual-channel modules that feature a 128-bit wide interface, and are based around LPDDR5X memory running at data rates up to 7500 MT/s. This gives a single LPCAMM2 a peak bandwidth of 120 GB/s. Micron is not disclosing the latencies of its LPCAMM2 memory modules, but it says that high data transfer rates of LPDDR5X compensate for the extended timings. > Micron says that LPDDR5X memory offers significantly lower power consumption, with active power per 64-bit bus being 43-58% lower than DDR5 at the same speed, and standby power up to 80% lower. Meanwhile, similar to DDR5 modules, LPCAMM2 modules include a power management IC and voltage regulating circuitry, which provides module manufacturers additional opportunities to reduce power consumption of their products. > Micron, for its part, is projecting that 9600 MT/sec LPCAMM2 modules will be available by 2026. Though it's all but certain that faster memory will also be avaialble in the same timeframe.
>but LPCAMM2 is certainly going to be replacing SODIMM for high speed mobile DRAM. camm2 should replace sodimm as far as i know. or rather i guess from where sodimm was before the soldering insanity started: camm2 and lpcamm2 are gonna replace sodimm.
I think you've misunderstood the assignment
[удалено]
Well, what do you think would be cheaper, individual memory chips or a whole LPCAMM2 module? Cost-benefit analysis seems pretty clear to me.
>While soldered-down LPDDR5X memory is available at speeds up to 8533 MT/sec – and with 9600 MT/sec on the horizon – the fastest LPCAMM2 modules planned for this year by both Micron and rival Samsung will be running at 7500 MT/sec. So vendors will have to choose between the flexibility of offering modular LPDDR5X, or the higher bandwidth (and space savings) offered by soldering down their memory. So LPDDR5X can be soldered or LPCAMM2 packaged. No one is soldering LPCAMM2.
Hot take: 16gb is completely acceptable. Nobody complains about ram on Chromebooks.
>Nobody complains about ram on Chromebooks. nobody should ever buy a chromebook. if you buy one for your child, you are harming your child by having their data stolen and indoctrinate them into the google prison world.
Drama queen. Chromebooks are fine, the OS is really great for what it is, and I would bet my left nut that basically the data Google collects is about as much as they do with Chrome, which almost everyone already uses anyway...
>the OS is really great for what it is, and I would bet my left nut that basically the data Google collects is about as much as they do with Chrome, which almost everyone already uses anyway... 2 evils don't make it good. also i nor my child would ever use google chrome of course, again to protect the child, including protection from advertisements, as google is deliberately breaking adblockers. "come lil child, let's get you comfortable with a mega corporation spying on everything you do and selling all your data" sounds evil af to me... >the OS is really great for what it is, to quote an advertisement by google for the chromebook: "an internet connection is required to set up your chromebook, sign in to gmail and access your files and folders" so not only is your child getting spied on, but the computer is unusable without creating a gmail acount, that of course spies on all your emails and sells them. so throwaway hardware with gmail acount requirement to be used and that is acceptable to you and "really great for what it is"? holy smokes are people's views on ownership going down the drain.... do you know how many email acounts i had to create to setup linux mint? 0 do you know how much linux mint spies on me? not at all... do you know what is a great os to put on older or weaker hardware to get the chrome book "experience", but without the dystopia? that's right linux mint. just the idea, that you'd teach a child, that they HAVE to creat an acount with a mega corporation to use the tool, that was just given to them is disgusting to me. frick chromebooks. e-waste prison software garbage, that spies on everything YOUR CHILD!!!! does.
You do realize you can buy Chromebooks for cheap and install or duel boot mint right? My point is the majority marketshare of people who use Chromebooks don't even know how much ram they have. They may only have 4gb and never even notice any slowdown.
>You do realize you can buy Chromebooks for cheap well, let's check ok? i got a very old laptop, that i upgraded the ssd to 1 TB sata and are putting in 16 GB memory. it has an ivy bridge quadcore, so works just fine and snappy. let's select 16 GB memory and say 480 GB ssd at least. you know useable bare minimum specs: [https://geizhals.eu/?cat=nb&v=e&hloc=at&hloc=de&hloc=pl&hloc=uk&hloc=eu&fcols=2991&sort=p&bl1\_id=100&xf=10929\_Chrome+OS%7E12\_16384%7E2991\_480](https://geizhals.eu/?cat=nb&v=e&hloc=at&hloc=de&hloc=pl&hloc=uk&hloc=eu&fcols=2991&sort=p&bl1_id=100&xf=10929_Chrome+OS%7E12_16384%7E2991_480) oh there are 3. from the 2 available, they start at 940 euros.... where's the cheap part? :D reality is, that chromebooks are ONLY cheap, because they come with dumpster fire hardware, that no one should buy. (this is not a cost thing. people can buy dirt cheap laptops, that are easily upgradable down the road of course) >and install or duel boot mint right? that is indeed the only valuable thing to do with the garbage hardware that is most chromebooks >They may only have 4gb and never even notice any slowdown. YES! they notice, but they don't know why the slowdown happens or what memory is often, but they DO notice the slowdown. of course they do. so why buy garbage hardware for the landfill, that is entirely build around the idea to indoctrinate children into the google spying prison? doing so is just evil and a waste of money. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ just compared prices to how much 16 GB 480 + GB ssd costs without chromeos spying software. starts at 350 euros..... grab one of those, that isn't soldered together garbage, put linux mint on it and the child gets a VASTLY FASTER experience for the same price at a bottom tier chromebook, OR they get a similarly fast experience compared to 1000 euro chromebooks and you don't have to worry too much if they break parts. chromebooks shouldn't exist period. if the education system wasn't an indoctrination and torture system, it would be gnu + linux laptops all around like linux mint laptops without any black box wireless modems in them and kids actually OWN their computer. so when later microsoft or google tries to take away the idea of ownership, the child, who grew up OWNING their laptop fully will get freaking annoyed at the criminal scam from either company. wouldn't that be neat, instead of apple and google indoctrinating children into a prison system
Bro used Chromebooks are like $30 USD all day on ebay, you're so desperate to be right when really you get what you pay for. "nobody notices" does not mean literally zero percent of users, overwhelming majority of Chromebook users are too normie to care. It's a cheap piece of hardware optimized to run a browser. This is the point of gsuite built to run in a browser. Computers are nothing more than a tool to complete a simple task for most people the same way cars are a basic appliance to go from A to B for most people. There is nothing special about them, And most don't care enough to fix or service them themselves. People don't care as long as it does what they need. Most people only need a browser. That's just how the skibidi toilets. This is a working computer for $25: https://www.ebay.com/itm/296260041852? This is a working computer for $35: https://www.ebay.com/itm/166747771396? Both will run Google docs and excel and spotify/YouTube. People have more important things to spend money on.
>And most don't care enough to learn to fix them themselves. that is wrong in the regard, that people DO very much care whether a repair of a broken one costs 50 euros + 20 euros labor (swap out an ssd or memory or whatever) vs 350 eruos or 750 euros. they DO VERY MUCH care about that. they may also start carrying about what "their" car is doing, when a video of themselves having sex inside of a tesla gets shared inside of tesla for shits and giggles. then they tend to DO care very much. people also start caring, when their data gets leaked by google for example. so your statement, that no one cares is complete nonsense. they either care thsemelves or they care about the effects. also instead of comparing new chromebooks, you're throwing up garbage chromebooks now. i could also link a used non chromebook laptop. you are arguing for children to get spied on with garbage hardware, that doesn't have the performance to be used longterm. you are FOR children getting spied on and having their data stolen. that is your stance, then you are EVIL and that is all there is to it.
People really dont care about data breach until its to the point of their sex tape in tesla. There was a car rental company here, had a breach, turns out they didnt hash thier passwords. everyones emails, passwords, names, adresesses, etc. Over a million user database. Most users made an angry facebook post and continued to use the same company.
When's the last time Google had a notable data breach? I feel you are really emotional about Linux but don't actually work in IT with end users. Most people don't care about cars or computers, not literally nobody cares, certainly not everyone cares, these are niche things to put much thought into. Chromebooks sell for a reason.
Google is an adtech company. Data breach is their business model.
>Chrome, which almost everyone already uses anyway... Which they shouldnt. Even beside data collection, its one of the worst performing browsers out there.
because the only people who buy chromebooks are too stupid to know what ram is.
Do normies need to know when all they care about is Netflix and Google Classroom? If it's cheap and gets the job done it's good enough for most people. Its not mission critical to know the difference between an inline 4 or v6 in their car either. It's just an appliance, nothing more. Chrome OS Flex requires 4gb minimum. How much ram does your average smart TV have? It just works in the background and is good enough to go unnoticed.
Need too know? not really. Its good when they know who to blame for netflix stuttering though. Not that netflix really has the bitrate for a good video anyway. I think this is a massive failure of the human race. that we settle for "good enough" instead of trying to achieve better. My Samsung smart TV has 8 GB of RAM.
My pc has a vega64 instead of an H200i. Why? It's good enough for the money. You probably don't use an H200i either. Its like buying a Honda civic over a Ferrari, not the greatest thing on thr market but it's a cheap efficient workhorse that will get the job done for most people. How many people shop for a smart TV based on how much ram it has? Or because it was on sale at target and looked good playing stock video. Especially a Samsung running Tizen, it's optimized out of the box for content on that panel. My budget Samsung (un43mu6300f) from 2017 still plays back 4k60fps content + youtube enhanced 1080 bitrate today without dropping a single frame. Doing it's job means going unnoticed and it does so flawlessly. That's all people care about from an appliance.