M1 Mac RAM and SSD Upgrades Found to Be Possible After Purchase

[Jetson]

Why is Apple making it so difficult for customers to upgrade their own machines?

A 256 GB SSD for a computer is a ridiculously small amount of storage for many of us these days. I want to have my laptop hold all of my storage without having to haul around an additional hard drive. I currently use 4 TB and will need an 8 TB drive soon.

The M1 laptop, attractive as it is simply will not do unless Apple increases the SSD capacity choices and/or allows owners to swap out the memory and SSD ourselves. This used to be how Apple rolled, until they decided to build computers according to the toaster appliance paradigm. Customers used to be able to easily swap out memory, storage, even the processor.

 

[jdb8167]

Why is Apple making it so difficult for customers to upgrade their own machines?

A 256 GB SSD for a computer is a ridiculously small amount of storage for many of us these days. I want to have my laptop hold all of my storage without having to haul around an additional hard drive. I currently use 4 TB and will need an 8 TB drive soon.

The M1 laptop, attractive as it is simply will not do unless Apple increases the SSD capacity choices and/or allows owners to swap out the memory and SSD ourselves. This used to be how Apple rolled, until they decided to build computers according to the toaster appliance paradigm. Customers used to be able to easily swap out memory, storage, even the processor.

What makes you think that upcoming ASi Macs to replace the current Intel versions won't match the current Intel specs? The current Intel 16" MBP allows up to 8TB SSD. Why wouldn't the replacement ASi version? The current Intel 4-port 13" MBP allows up to 4TB SSD. I bet an upcoming high end 13"-14" MBP will also allow at least that much SSD.

The first ASi M1 Macs are the low-end replacements for the i3 Mac mini and the 2-port 13" MBP (and the MBA which I believe is supposed to be entry level.) Entry level Macs tend to have smaller top end features like RAM and SSD.

 

[Macaholic868]

Here comes the update for Big Sur that “accidentally” bricks devices detected with “non-genuine” parts.

 

[ajfahey]

I see this as good news not so much for upgrading the machine but for repair reasons.
If the mem or ssd is broken anyway, this might be a way to recover the machine.

Not that I expected memory size to be an architectural limitation but it’s good to see it proven that it isn’t, the the 16 GByte limit on the current M1 hardware was about market analysis, not technical limitations. I doubt that Apple will bother with patching the OS to limit upgrades. Who really has the equipment available to remove and upgrade μ-BGA memory that is soldered in an MCM hybrid package? How many people even know what MCM, let alone what μ-BGA stands for?

 

[Liliass]

I saw people from TikTok China version upgraded it without problem. When upgrade a RAM need to add a 1K resistance chip

 

[Shirasaki]

Apple better start a leasing program soon. LOL

Yeah, just force end users to return for an upgrade or for user to lose access of their hardware device. Apple can collect hardware subscription fee forever.

 

[Liliass]

Uploaded a video to upgrade the M1 MAcBook from 256 to 1TB

 

[I7guy]

Uploaded a video to upgrade the M1 MAcBook from 256 to 1TB

That guy has some skillz. It's worth watching the video for the background music.

 

[Jorbanead]

Why is Apple making it so difficult for customers to upgrade their own machines?

A 256 GB SSD for a computer is a ridiculously small amount of storage for many of us these days. I want to have my laptop hold all of my storage without having to haul around an additional hard drive. I currently use 4 TB and will need an 8 TB drive soon.

The M1 laptop, attractive as it is simply will not do unless Apple increases the SSD capacity choices and/or allows owners to swap out the memory and SSD ourselves. This used to be how Apple rolled, until they decided to build computers according to the toaster appliance paradigm. Customers used to be able to easily swap out memory, storage, even the processor.

The MacBook Air and 13” MacBook Pro (2port) have always had those specs. People somehow keep thinking that the M1 is meant to replace every Mac, but it’s not. The M1 is just their baseline replacement for their baseline macs like the air. They have said many times in both events and interviews that the M1 is the very first in a family of chips.

The 4-port MacBook Pro’s offer up to 8TB of storage and 64gb of ram and there is no indication this will change when they get the Apple silicon treatment. People need to be patient and realize this is a 2 year long process that we are only 5 months into. Better apple silicon macs with better specs are coming.

Yeah, just force end users to return for an upgrade or for user to lose access of their hardware device. Apple can collect hardware subscription fee forever.

So people seem to think that their decision to lock in the ram is based on a money grab. While that may have been a partial factor for Apple, the real reason why they lock their products down is: First, a design that makes memory upgrades possible, let alone easier, is going to be thicker and heavier. Next, it would likely make cooling more difficult. Finally, it opens a world of compatibility problems forcing Apple to support components from third party vendors. That support need will raise prices and destabilize Apple’s field support.
As far as ram, the other reason for it is because On an Intel machine, the ram runs through PCIe lanes which means the ram modules can be separated from the cpu. On apples chips, they are directly integrated right on the package so the only way to really change it is to do it in the way shown in the article.

Essentially, if you want user upgradable ram, you’d have to sacrifice RAM performance. Apple chose better performance. If you wanted to replace system SSD’s you’d have to sacrifice security. Apple chose better security.

Sure we can be salty and complain because we’d rather have upgradable parts, but apple prefers performance and security over upgradability.

 

[Mcckoe]

Extremely misleading title. It's a bit like saying robbing a bank is possible, given you have an experienced crew, inside information and a pass from law enforcement. This is not something the average user will ever be able to do.

Technically Possible !== Possible

Your missing the point, they are advertising the possibility. Chips are cheap, being able to switch-out comparable chips, and increase stat configurations is a growing sub-market of custom silicon mass manufacturing.

 

[quarkysg]

As far as ram, the other reason for it is because On an Intel machine, the ram runs through PCIe lanes which means the ram modules can be separated from the cpu. On apples chips, they are directly integrated right on the package so the only way to really change it is to do it in the way shown in the article.

From what I know, Intel x86 CPUs traditionally have what they call a north bridge and a south bridge. The north bridge handles memory while the south bridge handles I/Os (e.g. PCIe, SATA, etc.)

Modern Intel x86 CPUs incorporated the north bridge directly into the CPU die it self, similar to what the M1 has currently, while the south bridge is still a separate IC.

Moving the memory controller closer to the CPU circuits increases performance.

AFAIK, the main reason why the M1 Macs does not have socketed memory modules (e.g. SO-DIMMs) is because LPDDR4X memory only comes in IC components. There is no SO-DIMM module for LPDDR4X available for sale, likely due to the low voltage used, which probably will not work well or at all over long circuit path of the motherboard.

 

[m2m2k]

So people seem to think that their decision to lock in the ram is based on a money grab. While that may have been a partial factor for Apple, the real reason why they lock their products down is: First, a design that makes memory upgrades possible, let alone easier, is going to be thicker and heavier. Next, it would likely make cooling more difficult. Finally, it opens a world of compatibility problems forcing Apple to support components from third party vendors. That support need will raise prices and destabilize Apple’s field support.
As far as ram, the other reason for it is because On an Intel machine, the ram runs through PCIe lanes which means the ram modules can be separated from the cpu. On apples chips, they are directly integrated right on the package so the only way to really change it is to do it in the way shown in the article.

Essentially, if you want user upgradable ram, you’d have to sacrifice RAM performance. Apple chose better performance. If you wanted to replace system SSD’s you’d have to sacrifice security. Apple chose better security.

Sure we can be salty and complain because we’d rather have upgradable parts, but apple prefers performance and security over upgradability.

Cooling would be easier with added space, albeit the device would indeed be thicker and more bulky.
Compatibility is less an issue as in the past Apple used more or less standard components. In fact compatibility / stability has never been an issue when Apple supported user up-gradable machines. On the other hand software stability seems to have decreased when Apple started to push non-upgradable devices. (Just look at Big Sur). It might be slightly different with M1, but on the other hand Apple is also using different suppliers for the ram, ssds which they solder and glue on.

Performance could be slightly worse - but Apple never focused on performance. So the driver for this is costs and the possibility to charge a higher price.
Same for security, there is not (or shouldn't at least) a difference between user-friendly upgrades or not. If you look at datacenters from all the big players (MS, AMZN, Google) of course their hard-disks / ram modules are replaceable; security comes from the encryption and not from the fact the disks are soldered and glued to the pcb.

 

[Blowback]

Technicians in China have reportedly succeeded in upgrading the memory and storage of the M1 chip, suggesting that Apple's integrated custom silicon for the Mac may be more flexible than previously thought.

Reports of maintenance technicians being able to expand the memory and storage of M1 Macs began circulating on Chinese social media over the weekend, but now international reports have started to clarify the situation.

Technicians in Guangzhou, China have discovered that it is possible to detach the RAM from the M1 chip and its nearby SSD module and replace them with larger capacity components, which are correctly recognized by macOS, without breaking the device.

As proof, a large number of images showing the process of a base model M1 MacBook Air with 8GB of RAM and 256GB of storage being upgraded to 16GB of RAM and 1TB of storage, and this change being correctly shown in macOS Big Sur, have been shared online.

The RAM and SSD components on Apple's M1 Macs are soldered in place, making the procedure extremely challenging, and there is reportedly a high chance of failure. This invasive unofficial upgrade also undoubtedly breaches Apple's warranty.

Apple has made it increasingly challenging for users to upgrade their own Macs over the years, and it was thought that the M1 Mac represented a final solidification of this move, with all of the M1 Mac's computing components being heavily physically integrated. The possibility of upgrading the memory and storage of M1 Macs, albeit in an invasive and risky procedure, therefore seems to be a significant discovery.

Due to the difficulty of upgrading the RAM or SSD, almost all M1 owners will likely still have to rely on the memory and storage configuration that they chose at the point of purchase, with upgrades being confined to a minority of enthusiasts, although it has been suggested that M1 Mac memory and storage upgrades in Asia will be available through unofficial channels.

M1 Mac owners may be keen to see if the process behind these upgrades is refined over time and becomes a more viable option.

Article Link: M1 Mac RAM and SSD Upgrades Found to Be Possible After Purchase

Everywhere I've seen this and similar headlines I have but two things to say: 'CLICK-BAIT". 'Journalism' continues its (shameless) race to the bottom .......

 

[_penguinman_]

People are obssesed with wanting to upgrade mobile computers. Just buy what you need and forget about it. Guess what I can't upgrade my £3000 hi-fi speakers, my £1400 HD 800 S headphones, my £800 headphone amp, my UAD Apollo DAC, my iPad Pro, my iPhone, my £4000 OLED TV, my PS5, my Xbox One X, the vacuum, the Apple TV, the satellite box, my wifes Dyson hair dryer, the gym equipment - basically I can't upgrade any other electrical item I own, many costs thousands more than an M1 MacBook and i'm not bothered about it.

The main reason for modularity, hence the inclusion for industry standard sockets (DIMM slots, M2 slots, PCIE slots, etc) is not just for upgradibility! Its for forcing PC manufacturers to compete with each other. Creating an open and fair market for pc components.

They charge exorbitant prices for upgrading their hardware, and let me tell you about a little secret: Apple uses the same memory chip like what everybody is using! Its either from Micron or Samsung. the same industry standard chips using industry standard connections.

An open and modular PC ensures that prices are kept in check. This is basic economics.

Apple charges an additional $800 for 2TB of ssd upgrade. Dont want to pay for Apple's horrendous SSD prices? just buy a Samsung 970 Evo Plus for $320. Dont want to pay for that? Just buy an Adata 8200 pro for $265.

But wait there's more:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1204902786015494144

I found the CAS latency of Apple’s DDR4 ECC RAM. How? First I found their upgrade kit, looked at the part number on the memory chips, searched Micron and found the full part number, found their technical doc and found the latency, and whoop… CL22. The cheapest ECC Micron sells.

Apple apparently uses the cheapest and slowest Memory chip they could find and then slapping a 3-4x mark-up sticker on it.

• A 768GB RAM upgrade package for the mac pro costs a whooping $10,000!!!! It even goes to $14,000 if you want 128GBx6 modules!
• For the same 768GB(64x12) capacity, a RAM package from Samsung would only cost you $4400!! (might even be cheaper if you buy other brands.)
• And you know whats even funnier? The Samsung memory module has lower latency (CL19) than the crap that Apple uses (CL22).
• The third party RAM is cheaper and better in every conceivable way.

Industry standards is a win for the customers

The problem is, Apple keeps on pretending that somehow they are "special". Special hardware that command a special price, preying on people who aren't familiar with PC technology. While in reality they use the same industry standard components as everybody else. (industry standards? WTH are those? never heard of 'em.)

The point of security is also a misplaced one, you know you can use encryption right? you can have security AND modularity at the same time. *cough industry standards cough*

I'm a long time mac fan, but you know you can still be a fan of them and be critical of their business practices at the same time right?

 

[_penguinman_]

Cooling would be easier with added space, albeit the device would indeed be thicker and more bulky.
Compatibility is less an issue as in the past Apple used more or less standard components. In fact compatibility / stability has never been an issue when Apple supported user up-gradable machines. On the other hand software stability seems to have decreased when Apple started to push non-upgradable devices. (Just look at Big Sur). It might be slightly different with M1, but on the other hand Apple is also using different suppliers for the ram, ssds which they solder and glue on.

Performance could be slightly worse - but Apple never focused on performance. So the driver for this is costs and the possibility to charge a higher price.
Same for security, there is not (or shouldn't at least) a difference between user-friendly upgrades or not. If you look at datacenters from all the big players (MS, AMZN, Google) of course their hard-disks / ram modules are replaceable; security comes from the encryption and not from the fact the disks are soldered and glued to the pcb.

This is absolutely correct. There are no technical differences between a soldered and socketed RAM/SSD for security purposes. Just use encryption.

 

[akbarali.ch]

I see this as good news not so much for upgrading the machine but for repair reasons.
If the mem or ssd is broken anyway, this might be a way to recover the machine.

It's barely good news, considering the skill level required, it will be hard to find such service places nearby one can reach and also the risk of bricking the whole damn thing.

 

[rasputin666]

Honestly, it's the RAM that should be upgradable. Storage is cheap and fast externally, especially with USB-C on the M! MINI for example. I maxed out both the RAM/SSD on purchase but would have gone much higher on the RAM, if I was given that option. So, I knew going in that my M1 Mini was a short-term purchase [1-2 years], which actually benefits my use case.

 

[akbarali.ch]

The main reason for modularity, hence the inclusion for industry standard sockets (DIMM slots, M2 slots, PCIE slots, etc) is not just for upgradibility! Its for forcing PC manufacturers to compete with each other. Creating an open and fair market for pc components.

They charge exorbitant prices for upgrading their hardware, and let me tell you about a little secret: Apple uses the same memory chip like what everybody is using! Its either from Micron or Samsung. the same industry standard chips using industry standard connections.

An open and modular PC ensures that prices are kept in check. This is basic economics.

Apple charges an additional $800 for 2TB of ssd upgrade. Dont want to pay for Apple's horrendous SSD prices? just buy a Samsung 970 Evo Plus for $320. Dont want to pay for that? Just buy an Adata 8200 pro for $265.

But wait there's more:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1204902786015494144

Apple apparently uses the cheapest and slowest Memory chip they could find and then slapping a 3-4x mark-up sticker on it.

• A 768GB RAM upgrade package for the mac pro costs a whooping $10,000!!!! It even goes to $14,000 if you want 128GBx6 modules!
• For the same 768GB(64x12) capacity, a RAM package from Samsung would only cost you $4400!! (might even be cheaper if you buy other brands.)
• And you know whats even funnier? The Samsung memory module has lower latency (CL19) than the crap that Apple uses (CL22).
• The third party RAM is cheaper and better in every possible way.

Industry standards is a win for the customers

The problem is, Apple keeps on pretending that somehow they are "special". Special hardware that command a special price, preying on people who aren't familiar with PC technology. While in reality they use the same industry standard components as everybody else. (industry standards? WTH are those? never heard of 'em.)

The point of security is also a misplaced one, you know you can use encryption right? you can have security AND modularity at the same time. *cough industry standards cough*

I'm a long time mac fan, but you know you can still be a fan of them and be critical of their business practices at the same time right?

What you saying is absolutely correct. But as the other person said not every device one owns is upgradable and we don't worry about it too much.

Also the computers, the way it was built right from the beginning in the 70s 80s, it just happened to be a lot, lot modular and it spread like wildfire and it continued ever since. I would love to see some user upgradable components down the line in macs, if not RAM, at least the SSD has to, has to be user-replaceable, NO ARGUMENT THERE.

I don't know anyone other than Apple achieving anything by soldering components. I had a Mid-2012 device that still works perfectly and I see a newer mac failing. So soldering everything is not improving anything other than Apple's bank balance.

 

[mannyvel]

This is vaguely horrifying news for people in the market for used M1 machines.

Oh, FYI there is a substantial cost for modularity, in both complexity and performance. You don't see it because it's baked into "how things are done" world. For non-PC devices modularity and expandability are high-cost options...options which are almost never taken by anyone.

 

[altaic]

If you measure the iFixit teardown pics, those LPDDR4X chips look to be 7mm x 14mm (98 sq mm), and if you count the BGA pads in the pics, each chip has 877 pads (w/ 0.3 mm pitch!). Checking out available LPDDR4X ICs from the usual suspects (mouser, digikey, newark, octopart, etc.), most are 10mm x 14.5mm (145 sq mm) BGA200 (i.e. 200 pads in a ball grid array).

The ICs Apple use have significantly smaller area than the others on the market, specifically 98/145. Perhaps unsurprisingly, if you take those "new" 12GB ICs on the market that are 145 sq mm, and scale by that ratio, you get just over 8GB in 98 sq mm.

So, not only does it look like Apple is already using the best available density LPDDR4X RAM, but they've also got some sort of secret sauce going on with the vastly greater number of BGA pads (877 vs 200). The extra higher density pads are likely to achieve a better noise floor to maintain especially low voltage and super low power. IIRC, typical LPDDR ICs signal at something like 0.7V-- connector contact resistance/inductance/capacitance and resulting electrical noise is extremely tricky at such low voltage and high frequency, so connectors are right out.

That is why they solder the RAM.

High efficiency is critical to not only mobile computing but also high density computing (e.g. servers)-- and where you can afford extra power you can get higher noise immunity for special applications (e.g. automotive, aerospace, etc.). Furthermore, if your designs (and proven production processes) already use soldered BGAs, you get the extra vibration tolerance for free (which those special applications may require, never mind simply higher reliability for oft abused mobile devices).

Anyway, if we see more RAM on the upcoming Macs, I'd guess there will be more of the same LPDDR4X ICs. Perhaps instead of 2 on one side of the CPU module for 16GB, we could see 2 on two sides for 32GB... or maybe even 2 ICs on three sides for 48GB... or maybe...

 

[kuba stez]

My concern with some of the reports of really high ssd usage due to memory swapping is the longevity of that drive. I’d hate for the drive to fail in under 5 years and require an entirely new motherboard. Time will tell how big of an issue that will be.

I have a late 2013 macbook with 256 GB ssd. Mac used on a daily basis. Just turned to new M1. So I asume that SSD in my new laptop will survive at least 5 years.

 

[imdropbear]

Here comes the update for Big Sur that “accidentally” bricks devices detected with “non-genuine” parts.

Very much doubt it. This procedure is way too risky, way too hard and therefore way too expensive and barely anyone will go through this so Apple won't bother to spend a single minute "fixing" this.

 

[skitidetdu]

Would be fun to see how it affected performance.

 

[Darth Tulhu]

Based on a couple of your previous posts, it sounds like you have come to the “Acceptance” phase of the Five Stages of Grief. Congratulations! Many here will remain in Anger for the rest of their lives, which is not a healthy place to remain.

Great observation! I spent almost 7 years there myself but hey, I'm a Sith Lord.

One of the few benefits of getting older is that you realize you don't have time to waste on things you cannot change and perhaps become a bit more efficient.

Thus, I now rage against the machine a bit less, and enjoy things for what they are quite a bit more, even if I still have the ability to perceive purported flaws.

 

[flottenheimer]

Does anyone know the physical size of the entire M1-chip?
What are we looking at here? Say, 30x30 mm? More? Less?