Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Next-Generation DDR5 RAM Will Double Speeds of DDR4 RAM as MacBook Pro Remains on LPDDR3

otternonsense said:
I'm typing this on the maxed out 2016 MBP too, which has given me an orchestra of kernel panics, RAM alerts, beachballs, program crashes, Touchbar glitches and a plethora of accidental mistakes due to the ridiculous size of the trackpad. Experiences vary.
Click to expand...

I hope you didn't restore from an early backup. I had a friend who restored from a Time Machine backup on a new hardware and all sorts of crazy stuff happened. As soon as he did a clean install, no problems. If clean install didn't help, then you have a bad hardware. Send it in for repair and if it failed 3 times in a row, get a full refund as hopefully, you should be covered by the lemon law.

Regardless, this has nothing to do with DDR3/DDR4 standards.
 
One more reason PC will be superior to Mac 99.9% of the time: 2-3x more power for half the cost...

Apple should stick to what they do best, mobile devices.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JackANSI
otternonsense said:
ALL of this could have been easily solved by not making it so bloody thin.
Click to expand...
Bigger battery ≠ more power or longer time on battery, efficiency of parts makes the battery life. DDR4 is more power-hungry at low load (which 75% of the time a computer is at) than LPDDR3, and Intel processors that would be used for the MBP don't support LPDDR4.

The worst thing about tech is that there's so much complexity involved in it, and many "tech geeks" are stuck with the "bigger is better" mentality, or as we've seen in the responses from this thread, stricken with a severe case of ignorance.
 
ebatalha said:
I'm really tired out of this kind of statements… Bla bla bla… Performance? What do you think about FCPX being the faster NLE in every feature it has? Best for organizing media, best to edit, best to export. LPX, another professional app. Mainstage, Motion, Compressor. I really don't get these complaints…
My late 2013 iMac is a beast of a machine and it will be fine for me for more 5 years, I'm sure.
Click to expand...

For A/V work the current Pro software lineup is very good (especially FCP after 10.3). I think the biggest complaint people have with Apple's "Pro" support is that Apple doesn't really acknowledge its creative pro customer base on a regular basis; Sure, the software teams are doing great work, but on the hardware side has stagnated somewhat since your iMac was new. iPads are wonderful, but no professional video editor is going to use one in the office. I hope 2017 has great things in store for the Mac lineup.
 
JMacHack said:
The worst thing about tech is that there's so much complexity involved in it, and many "tech geeks" are stuck with the "bigger is better" mentality, or as we've seen in the responses from this thread, stricken with a severe case of ignorance.
Click to expand...

Please explain what is ignorant or grating about asking to keep the 2015 chassis and stuff more RAM and battery in it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Mercurian and Ladybug
I hate to say this but these kinds of article don't relate to us anymore. It used to be fun to speculate on new tech arriving in macs but don't get your hopes up people, this is Tim Cook we're talking about. Steve used to put the latest and greatest in his products. Hell, I still have my 12" PowerBook G4 laying around somewhere and for all intents and purposes it runs great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: otternonsense
furtive said:
Intel said DDR5 won't ship until 2020. It's easy to take the piss out of Apple and their falling behind on cutting edge tech but this is the same story for PCs as well.
Click to expand...
This.

What kind of troll baiting junk headline for an article is this? DDR5 gets a diffuse date for a future first technical preview, i.e. in essence an advanced prototype sneak peak, and all of the sudden that equates to the MBP being 2 generations behind with RAM, when the Skylake processors don't even support the RAM Apple would have chosen to go with otherwise, and made the best choice possible given their chosen design parameters. One can criticise those design parameters, fair play, but As mentioned above, it's exactly the same in the PC realm.

A PC manufacturer wants to make an MBP clone but give it a higher watt processor, GPU and RAM, but then can only get it to 2.5 hours of battery life. There will be the crowd that says, "SEE!!! THEY CAN DO IT, WHY CAN'T APPLE??? APPLE SUCKS!" The rest of us know better, and understand compromise and balance. Choose the machine that best suits, and if that means the 7lb Razor for you, so be it!

And now I just fell for it...touché Mr. Rossignol, well played...
 
  • Like
Reactions: dotheDVDeed and JMacHack
Askolan said:
I hate to say this but these kinds of article don't relate to us anymore. It used to be fun to speculate on new tech arriving in macs but don't get your hopes up people, this is Tim Cook we're talking about. Steve used to put the latest and greatest in his products. Hell, I still have my 12" PowerBook G4 laying around somewhere and for all intents and purposes it runs great.
Click to expand...


This. As usual, we'll be expecting a slew of Mac updates announced (or at least teased) at WWDC. At most, Tim Cook may dump a product RED MacBook with 2015 specs into the world. The only update in years was the abysmal new MacBook "Pro". Until proven otherwise, it's safe to assume at this point in time that the entire Mac product line is heading for planned obsolescence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9081094, The Mercurian and Askolan
Another click bait headline as honey pot for the trolls. This standard won't even be finished before some time in 2018 and then has to be implemented by Intel and the others, so maybe 2019, but yes let's contrast a laptop Apple is selling today with some technology not even close to production. Sad.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JMacHack
otternonsense said:
Please explain what is ignorant or grating about asking to keep the 2015 chassis and stuff more RAM and battery in it.
Click to expand...
Because, as I said "more more more" isn't better. Even with the larger battery, the comparable Dell XPS still manages half the battery life at load. The heart of the issue is that LPDDR4 isn't supported by intel, and compromising the (already complained about) battery life would just exacerbate the problem.
 
Again....the CPU
MyopicPaideia said:
This.

What kind of troll baiting junk headline for an article is this? DDR5 gets a diffuse date for a future first technical preview, i.e. in essence an advanced prototype sneak peak, and all of the sudden that equates to the MBP being 2 generations behind with RAM, when the Skylake processors don't even support the RAM Apple would have chosen to go with otherwise, and made the best choice possible given their chosen design parameters. One can criticise those design parameters, fair play, but As mentioned above, it's exactly the same in the PC realm.

A PC manufacturer wants to make an MBP clone but give it a higher watt processor, GPU and RAM, but then can only get it to 2.5 hours of battery life. There will be the crowd that says, "SEE!!! THEY CAN DO IT, WHY CAN'T APPLE??? APPLE SUCKS!" The rest of us know better, and understand compromise and balance. Choose the machine that best suits, and if that means the 7lb Razor for you, so be it!

And now I just fell for it...touché Mr. Rossignol, well played...
Click to expand...
Again...the CPU and its caching capabilities are far more important. You really want to replace Sky or Kaby with an ultra low power CPU just to get the latest standard of RAM? I dont think you'll be pleased with that result...
 
  • Like
Reactions: MyopicPaideia and JMacHack
But I want DDR3! I payed premium price to get the oldest substandard hardware! govern yourself Apple!
 
JMacHack said:
Because, as I said "more more more" isn't better. Even with the larger battery, the comparable Dell XPS still manages half the battery life at load. The heart of the issue is that LPDDR4 isn't supported by intel, and compromising the (already complained about) battery life would just exacerbate the problem.
Click to expand...

A subset of users would gladly compromise (the already lousy) battery life for improved performance. At the moment, MacBook Pros is all we've got from Apple to make up for the total lack of iMac and Mac Pro updates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dmi, The Mercurian and JackANSI
otternonsense said:
This. As usual, we'll be expecting a slew of Mac updates announced (or at least teased) at WWDC. At most, Tim Cook may dump a product RED MacBook with 2015 specs into the world. The only update in years was the abysmal new MacBook "Pro". Until proven otherwise, it's safe to assume at this point in time that the entire Mac product line is heading for planned obsolescence.
Click to expand...

From the stories that have filtered out about the 2016 MBP development, I think it's pretty safe to say that the Mac lineup's refresh schedule got thrown horribly out of whack last year. I hope they've got something snazzy to show this year, they've certainly been taking their time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: otternonsense
otternonsense said:
A subset of users would gladly compromise (the already lousy) battery life for improved performance. At the moment, MacBook Pros is all we've got from Apple to make up for the total lack of iMac and Mac Pro updates.
Click to expand...
I'm not touching the iMac and Mac Pro subject. I agree that those are criminal.

However, sacrificing battery life for max power has never been Apple's MO. Hell, they even go for the lowest wattage they can in their desktops for some ungodly reason. Maybe a subset of users would have sacrificed the battery life, but then they'd be on here complaining that the battery life is ****, and Apple is doomed, can't innovate, etc.

I think there's an inherent disconnect on battery efficiency and tech performance progress. The higher-end stuff seems to be getting more powerful by eating up as much power as it can (which is good to a fault), but on a portable where battery life is a serious concern, the top of the line, cutting edge hardware would cause dismal battery life.

Speaking of which, major improvements in battery life just haven't materialized compared to the massive performance jumps in the hardware sectors.

Taking all of this into consideration makes Apple's choice to keep the 16gb LPDDR3 ram in the MacBook Pro seem more reasonable.
Still, the idea of "just shove a bigger battery into it", isn't a fix. It would likely just chew through it at a faster rate than a battery that could fit into a MBP 2015 case could hold.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beeplance, 9081094 and otternonsense
konqerror said:
This article is very wrong. LPDDR3 is very different from DDR3 from a physical, electrical and logical standpoint. (Just like GDDR is not comparable to DDR)

Technical details, see the chart at the bottom: https://blogs.synopsys.com/committedtomemory/2014/01/10/when-is-lpddr3-not-lpddr3-when-its-ddr3l/
Click to expand...

iKrivetko said:
DDR3 and LPDDR3 are not the same, stop spreading misinformation for crying out loud.
Click to expand...

JMacHack said:
Something, something, fake news.
Click to expand...

Thanks for pointing this out. :) It's not my area of expertise and unfortunately I made a poor assumption.

I've corrected the article.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MyopicPaideia and konqerror
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back