Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
rMBP irreplaceable RAM is a deal breaker!
- Thread starter octavianguti
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well don't hold your breath. Apple has slowly been moving their laptops all to soldered RAM, so there's really not a chance of Apple adding removable RAM to any of their newer laptops anytime soon.
That doesn't prevent you from making a 16gb DIMM and using it though. Or more likely, wait a year for a 16gb DIMM to be produced, and pick one up from Newegg or the like.
Only if you have a cMBP though.
I don't own a rmbp, but several people at my office have them, and of course I have tasted the fruits of retina in ipad and iPhone form.
I'm all for retina, especially for the improved colour reproduction of the associated ips screen tech. I look forward to it on my next laptop, but at the same time, IMO it's not really enough to justify a purchase if you've already got a recent generation mbp. Especially in my case since I opted for the previous "high res" screen which, from a productivity standpoint, already provides you with decent screen real-estate. Although the 200px jump over non-high res is almost meaningless from a sharpness standpoint.
I don't understand...just because it isn't user-upgradable means it isn't "Pro"? You're not a "Pro" if you can swap out a RAM stick.
The rMBP is an extremely powerful laptop. It screams with almost anything I throw at it, the display is amazing, it's thin, light, the SSD is fast, etc. That's why they market it as "Pro".
I understand everyone's frustration with not being able to upgrade RAM but it's really not that big of a deal. I got mine with 16GB RAM, and it should last as long as I'll need it to. If you're a user that tends to push the limits of your computer, grab the 16GB, if not, grab 8 and call it a day. It's not a life/death decision. Some of the really, really intensive applications in 4-5 years might begin regularly demanding something in the ballpark of 32GB RAM, but if you're doing that kind of work you'll be itching for a new machine by that time anyways.
----------
I actually owned a 2011 MBP with a hi-res, anti-glare display before I upgraded to a rMBP, and compared to other cMBP's, the hi-res panel was worlds better. However, the Retina definitely makes everything on the screen look a lot better. I really did enjoy the space my 1680x1050 offered, but I'm happier with the rMBP because of the clarity and form-factor. No doubt both are great machines, and I'd say for many people in a specific line of work, the cMBP is actually the better choice.
However, if you're going to be moving around a lot when in use, the rMBP really is that much more comfortable to use on the go. It's noticeably lighter, you're not pointlessly lugging around an optical drive, and it's just easier to use in a limited-space situation.
Not possible. The DDR3 specifications has a maximum size of 8GB per module.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR3_SDRAM
So no, there is no way in the near future 16GB single dimms will be available unless you go DDR4 which the current Intel chipset does not support. And when it does come, it wont be cheap. When 8GB modules first appeared, they were $1500 per stick (discounted). A Dell M6600 laptop costed $3500 to outfit one with 16GB of RAM just a few years. It took 3 years for 8GB modules to drop down to $40.
There are a few laptops that can support 32GB. It requires 4 slots. The Thinkpad W520/W530 come to mind. It is also a brick thick. You can fit two retina 15's to a W-series Thinkpad. And that thing is heavy. The power adapter is 250 wtt and weighs as much as a retina macbook!
Even servers using DDR3 are capped at 8GB per module. Lastly, Ivy Bridge core i7 cpus max out at 32GB.
The only way to get more than 16GB of RAM (32GB) is to add more slots. That would make the Retina much, much thicker.
Since Apple is using two banks, they are already offering you the max that is available on the market.
If you want 4 banks, you are talking a different class of computer/notebook. Maybe this is where a 17" Retina could come in.
I have two laptops with 16GB of RAM and two desktop workstations with 32GB of RAM (maxxed out). I've hit 20-27GB on very rare occasions; running 10 VMs and databases. This is too much to ask for a Laptop to do. I occasionally will use up my 16GB of RAM on my laptops but I am not the normal user. I'm hitting it pretty hard and usually in a desktop environment. I need a bunch of RAIDs, extra ethernet ports,etc to do what I need to do. I would never use up 16GB in a home setting or at a coffee shop.
16GB is perfectly fine for future proofing. Don't count on getting more with current set-up. Wait till DDR4 comes along, then the Macbooks will be updated to use those as well. Once we get into DDR4, the RAM race will get interesting.
RAM is pretty cheap. $130 to get two 8GB modules for 16GB aftermarket for most laptops. And that is for cheapest RAM. The $200 upgrade differential price Apple charges is fairly reasonable. It is better to buy a machine with 16GB now and rest any fears of future proofing.
I have to agree with you that Apple is definitely hurting the used market with their new approach towards laptops. The appeal of a used laptop becomes a lot less enticing when you'll never be able to upgrade the RAM or really any other internal aside from the SSD, which is still only available via one third-party solution.
However, I think when Apple set out to redesign the cMBP, they asked themselves what the majority of its users would appreciate and they went with that. I think for most people, "thin and light" is a huge, huge selling point. If Apple had just thrown a Retina display on a cMBP and added USB 3.0, I wouldn't have upgraded from my cMBP. Just how thin and light the new model is compared to the previous-gen creates a lot of appeal for older Macbook users, and every ounce and millimeter really does count.
Apple loves controlling nearly every aspect of their products. They always have, (hopefully) always will, and although it's always caused a lot of criticism and a lot of people claiming their products would "never make it", its been one of the major reasons for a lot of their success. Apple's goal is always to make the best product. Not the most upgradable, not even necessarily the fastest, but the best overall product. When I really started examining the design of the internals on the rMBP, it occurred to me that every decision they made had a real reason. They couldn't have included a Retina display without removing the optical drive because the battery responsible for powering the display had to be significantly larger/more powerful. User upgradable RAM would've caused the machine to be thicker, and the added thickness would've caused issues with the new cooling system (side vents). And when you look even closer, for Apple to replace the trackpad they have to remove the entire battery which is apparently really difficult to remove because of the glue they used. That definitely adds a new level of complexity, especially for Genius bar repairs. So why would they go ahead with a complex design? Because Apple wanted the machine to be as thin as possible, so the design complexities and repair difficulties are worth the trouble so people will be happier with their machines.
Some people on this forum always view things so black and white. Adding new features, technologies, etc. requires a ton of thought and process, it's not as simple as just "adding" new features so effortlessly. Usually when Apple does something controversial, I typically try to see it from their POV and it always makes a lot more sense. Apple can't be perfect, and neither can any other company, but in my opinion, Apple comes closer than anyone else to perfection because Apple focuses on making the best product, and not any other way around. They can't satisfy everyone, but they get as close as you can come.
Interesting. I just assumed, since RAM sizes seem to increase year after year, that there would be a newer and larger size available soon. This would explain why not.
It just sucks that anyone who needs massive quantities of RAM in a laptop will have to wait until next year to get it.
Just because you don't know how to use Kontakt libraries properly that doesn't mean you need more RAM.
"Future-proof"? Extending life expectancy for 6month by adding RAM when you already have tons of things 5 years old is not future-proofing, just holding back the inevitable.
Not even Desktop computers are future-proof. You can change CPU from 2.8 to 3.2 in a 2008 Mac Pro, but that doesn't change the fact that it will always have SATA2 interface.
Also, I was able to run orchestral libraries in Kontakt when I had 2008 unibody with 8GB RAM. RAID0 with 7k2 disks, fairly small prebuffer (around 18kb) and Kontakts DFD allowed me to load full orchestra (even LASS divisi!) to play the project.
Needless to say, my new Retina MBP handles all that with 6KB prebuffer (thank you SSD and USB3.0 external Raid0 speeds!) and 3GB less RAM left FOR THE SAME PROJECT.
To be honest I got page-outs on the unibody with 8GB RAM and most of the time i don't even use 6GB on the Retina.
USB3.0 and Thunderbolt offer super-speed external devices (as opposed to decadent FW800 that doesn't offer anything anymore), so you can have your libraries on a small portable dual RAID0, exceeding 800mb/s with external drives!
Eventually all sample libraries will resort to DFD-like technology because its just too inefficient to load a whole library to RAM when you have SSDs that can more than handle direct streaming. SSD Access times are more than enough for libraries...
Not to mention everything will slowly transfer to "physically modelled" instruments such as Sample Modelling, Wallander instruments, 4front Pianos and Pianoteq, because it offers more flexibility and realism, is more organic, because CPUs can handle all the processing of the model and because its just plain better all over.
On the other hand, there is nothing "pro" about not knowing what software offers you and you instead whine about future-proofing, and its futile to speak about "future-proofing" a computer (extending its life by one year topmost) and not even considering everything that software will offer and need in the next 5 years.
The most stupid thing about soldered RAM is that you cannot replace it if it DIES.
By the time 16GB is not enough your hard-drive interface will be way too slow to house newest drives...
But on the other hand, coming from a Mac Pro I could use the same argument for CPU, GPU and everything else.
I replaced a GPU and added one more for extra video outs on a Mac Pro... Before I sold it.
[sarcasm]
Do you know how stupid it is that a "PRO" machine like cMBP can't have its GPU replaced?!
[/sarcasm]
I also want to point out that "computer market" rapidly shifted from "prosumer/power user" to "consumer/where_is_the_any_key?" in the last decade. And companies NEED TO SELL STUFF in order to survive... Down the line its the know how, not the gear...
You made a list of excuses and justifications but I just dont buy it. Every spec on this machine is solid for the next few years EXCEPT storage capacity and memory.I disagree, but there is no right compromise for everyone. A few years down the road when you may want to add RAM or Storage, wouldn't you also need a more powerful processor and GPU to keep up. Oh the display will also be lacking resolution. So to be future proof for say like 5-10 years, you would want the processor, GPU, RAM, hard drive consumer upgradable... hmmm... just like the wallstreet. You probably would also want a replaceable battery, keyboard, and trackpad as those will likely wear out, maybe the display for more resolution (or touch). For that upgrade price, may as well as get a fresh laptop.Apple has seen the market for that kind of laptop dwindle, I think.
Many people forget that for years Apple was charging premium prices but skimped on specs. But the way we were able to excuse them on it was because of the easy upgrade path. For many users the first thing they did (after posting an awkward unboxing video on youtube) was install a 3rd party memory and storage upgrade. Apple's machines were so underspec'd It became "normal" to buy a brand new computer and then swap out memory and storage before even turning it on.
2007 (5 Years ago)
MacBook - C2D/80GB HDD/1GB RAM
MacBook Pro - C2D/120GB HDD/2GB RAM
2010 (2 Years Ago)
MacBook Pro 13 - i5/250GB HDD/4GB RAM
MacBook Pro 15 - i5/320GB HDD/4GB RAM
2012 (Current)
rMBP13 - i5/128GB SSD/8GB RAM
rMBP15 - i7/256GB SSD/8GB RAM
Apple is better now at offering passable specs on their "classic" machines, but my point in all this is that if you take a step back then the rMBP feels like a regression on Apple's part because (SSD advantages aside) we're back to bare minimum specs. But this time they have an extremely limited/expensive upgrade path that completely changes the resale and life of these machines.
Last edited:
Which of course benefits Apple.
Apple's motives are both obvious and understandable from a business perspective. They don't want you giving new life to your machines. They just want you to buy them more often. And you will.
.Some here seem truly shocked by this. I'm really confused about all the "confusion" here.
No one is going to have DDR4 until 2014 and they will be server first.
http://news.softpedia.com/newsImage/DDR4-in-2014-Behold-the-Speeds-and-Power-Needs-2.jpg/
http://techreport.com/news/23562/samsung-roadmap-outlines-ddr4-plans-through-2014
So even if you buy a cMBP, you won't be able to upgrade to DDR4 modules. They are not backward compatible.
They have different timing and pin layout.
So basically what I am saying, for an ultrabook form factor, Apple is providing you the MAX you can get.
2-banks will give you the maximum spec what DDR3 can give you - 16GB.
If you want more than 16GB, get a Thinkpad W530 which has 4 banks and which is a different class of computer.
You are going to have to wait at least 2 years for single 16DDR4 on Macbooks as well as the rest of the industry.
Then you will start seeing 16-32GB ultrabooks.
Buy the 2.6, 16GB and 256 GB SSD version. U can change the SSD later if u want. Try to put all the working data in the cloud/ external drives and keep ur drive for applications data only. Save the money on SSD and put it on 16 GBs RAM.
Upgrade every 2-3 years is really what it comes down to with the MBPs to stay current unless your needs change. Even if the ram can be upgraded, after 2-3 years the rest starts to fall behind. To me the non-standard ssd is a bigger deal breaker to me.
I'm not sure from where you're getting your info, but that is simply not true.
Here's a 16GB DDR3 module available for purchase from IBM.
... and here's a 32GB DDR3 module available for purchase from IBM.
My sincere advice to anyone reading this stuff is to take what Wikipedia says with a huge grain of salt. The info on that site changes all of the time, constantly being updated as corrections are made. That doesn't mean that it's always wrong, just that people shouldn't be so quick to use it as a de-facto source for info. Take the info into consideration, but corroborate with other sources as well.
32GB RAM, are you running a number of virtual machines featuring Windows Vista? Like one or two VMs?!
Like one or two VMs?! 
I use a Retina MacBook Pro with 512GB SSD, 16GB RAM, and a 2.6GHz Intel Quad Core i7... so basically the computer you want to buy. It works extremely fast with Final Cut Pro X, Aperture, Motion 5, and Logic 9, so I don't think it will have trouble with Photoshop or any other image/video editing software.
BTW, it's WWDC, World Wide Developers Conference, and I doubt they will release a new model then (It's in June.)
----------
Nicely said!
BTW, it's WWDC, World Wide Developers Conference, and I doubt they will release a new model then (It's in June.)
----------
Nicely said!
HI, I understand your reservations of Wikipedia. I am going by the JEDEC published standard for DDR3 as it was introduced in 2007.
It was defined to go up to 8 GB per module:
http://www.jedec.org/category/technology-focus-area/main-memory-ddr3-ddr4-sdram
http://www.dailytech.com/JEDEC+Finalizes+DDR3+Specifications/article7856.htm
http://www.jedec.org/standards-documents/docs/jesd-79-3d
http://www.ti.com/lit/an/sprabi1a/sprabi1a.pdf
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/memory/display/20070626225710.html
That is the conforming standard. There is nothing to stop others from deviating from it. An example of this is eSATA and eSATAp which was not part of the SATA standards.
I happened to look into the 16GB single sticks. Many of them are for server platforms: ECC and the prices are $$$$ per stick. Not consumer friendly.
And they're normally LR-DIMM, RDIMM, not your standard consumer grade SO-DIMM
E.G> http://www.adata-group.com/index.php?action=product_feature&cid=6&piid=131
http://www.antonline.com/p_49Y1567-PG_1044402.htm?sID=PG
And lastly, looking at your links. Those are obviously LR-DIMMs
Info on LR-DIMM:
http://www.simmtester.com/page/news/showpubnews.asp?num=167
http://www.micron.com/products/dram-modules/lrdimm
http://www.edn.com/design/systems-design/4368420/Basics-of-LRDIMM
Basically, they are server-application Memory modules. These are not consumer grade RAM. Basically LR-DIMMs allow you to pack dual modules on one stick. Again. each module is probably maxxed to 8GB per module totalling 16GB per stick. You wont see this in a laptop or desktop.
Ivy Bridge mobile architecture does not support LRDIMM. Nor does the upcoming Haswell make any mentioning of supporting it. You are linking to enterprise class memory with specific use case/architecture.
Last edited:
Ah and only 2 slots I see. And an explanation of how you won't be able to get a 16gb stick of RAM. Ok then.
That's pretty irrelevant as Apple has used WWDC many times to release all kinds of new products, including Mac refreshes, iPhone/iPod refreshes, etc.
Rumors have it that June, too, is actually supposed to be a release heavy month, but then again those are just rumors.
Now, now ... YOU'RE the one that claimed that max DDR3 module sizes for servers was 8GB. I was merely correcting that part.
What I said had absolutely zero bearing on desktops or laptops, nor did I even imply that it did ... That's why I quoted the server-specific part of your post.
Someone should tell these e-stores that they are breaking the DDR3 rules then ..
http://www.crucial.com/store/partspecs.aspx?imodule=CT16G3ERSLD41339
http://www.pcnation.com/web/details.asp?affid=304&item=PG0305
Not agreeing or disagreeing with you but if your going to prove someone wrong at least do it right. lol
Both those are Desktop RAM, now show us Latop DDR3 16GB sticks