rMBP Soldered RAM faster and more efficient than Removable RAM?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by renosausage, Apr 22, 2013.

  1. renosausage macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2012
    #1
    I've read a lot of posts about how the lack of removable RAM is a deal breaker from getting the rMBP.

    I can remember reading an article that went into detail about Apple's decision to use soldered RAM.

    Supposedly the soldered RAM makes a better connection and allows the RAM to be used to its fullest capacity.

    I don't know if this is true or not.

    I want to know if anyone has heard of this before?
     
  2. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #2
    I've heard similar claims though I don't think the speed difference is all that noticeable for most real world applications.

    I think its more of a cost issue on Apple's part, not to improve the performance of the MBP
     
  3. ColdCase macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #3
    Connectors introduce signal integrity issues. If you don't need to worry about a wide variety third part RAM or connectors, you can design closer to the edge (you have more control over the RAM chips). So soldering in RAM allows you to push the performance envelope. In Apples case I think it was more about reducing space, however.
     
  4. swerve147 macrumors 6502a

    swerve147

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    #4
  5. Count Blah macrumors 68030

    Count Blah

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    US of A
    #5
    Yes. But I'll take the option of going up to 16Gigs of owner replaceable memory over 8 gigs of soldered on memory.
     
  6. ColdCase macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #6
    Even if it means another 1/4 inch thickness and 6-8 ounces? Isn't that the market for the cMBP?
     
  7. Count Blah macrumors 68030

    Count Blah

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    US of A
    #7
    If it means I can use off the shelf components to upgrade my machine as usage evolves? Heck yeah.
     
  8. ColdCase macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #8
    You seem to be in the minority here, hope Apple doesn't take your advice..... as I wouldn't want to sacrifice the significant portability improvement. :) Never used my old upgradable MacPro, just too heavy and clunky to carry.

    Glad we have choices.
     
  9. thehustleman macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2013
    #9
    Agreed!

    Having the option to do something and simply choosing not to is always greater than not having the option because someone else chose for you
     
  10. swerve147 macrumors 6502a

    swerve147

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    #10
    yup yup, you hear Apple kind of hide behind the "all flash architecture" argument with the retina but I suspect that the real reason is a bit more sinister (for the consumer at least)

    I'd gladly trade this speed bump for the ability to choose and install my own RAM.
     
  11. jafingi macrumors 65816

    jafingi

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Location:
    Denmark
    #11
    No visible improved perfomance by doing that.

    But they can make thinner laptops with soldered-on RAM.
     
  12. Exana macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #12
    They did not tells about memory latency (CAS and so on). So if one have DDR3 1600 CL 11 current and an other runs DDR 1600 CL9, there will be a small difference.
    I agree no one will ever see a difference without benchmark.
     
  13. A7ibaba macrumors regular

    A7ibaba

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Location:
    Sweden
    #13
    It's simply not true. I don't know where you read that nonsense,but i highly suggest you that you skip that place.
     
  14. renosausage thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2012
    #14
    I will have to disagree with you on this:

    [​IMG]

    This data is pretty convincing

    ----------

    "If nothing else, you must tip your hat to Apple for this, that is an incredible job of matching memory to memory controller, and setting the CPU to properly utilize the memory. You will NEVER see this on a computer that supports DIMMs, it is not possible."

    This came from Adam W, ASIC design engineer
     
  15. Count Blah macrumors 68030

    Count Blah

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    US of A
    #15
    I"m glad we have choices now as well. But the writing is on the wall right now. The choice will be taken away soon enough, and we will be forced to go your way or the highway.

    Yea choices!!!! Boo being forced to max out your machine day 1!!!!
     
  16. thehustleman macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2013
    #16
    Of course they're going to force the upgrade, how else would they get you for more money when you can just change the memory on your own overpriced system?
     
  17. maxosx macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Location:
    Southern California
    #17
    They've also proven that by eliminating the fasteners and using glue to bind it together, they save even more money.

    Even if only a few bucks per computer, that's one big savings for Apple.

    In turn they now have an even greater ability to control obsolescence time lines. It all works out.
     
  18. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    #18
    RAM speed is almost never the bottleneck on any workload. So, it's kind of a moot point.
     

Share This Page