The real reason for no 32gb option

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by slughead, Nov 19, 2016.

  1. slughead, Nov 19, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2016

    slughead macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
  2. JohnnyGo macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    #2
    Number of SKUs is certainly one of the factors but IMHO it's not even close to the top 3 factors

    One reason the SKUs is not a big deal ? Thy could have offered the 32GB option in one or two top configs, thus increasing SKUs by approx 10-15%

    The number of SKUs, however, played a bigger role in not having black or rose gold as options. That would increase SKUs by 100%
     
  3. slughead thread starter macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #3
    actually I messed up: only 1 GPU option in 13" both models -- so really adding the mem option increased by 80%!
     
  4. fokmik, Nov 19, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2016

    fokmik macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2016
    Location:
    USA
    #4
    i wonder if apple put 32 gb with no lpDDR4...how the battery was..
     
  5. slughead thread starter macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
  6. JohnnyGo macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    #6
    Not possible with Skylake CPUs.
     
  7. sinoka56 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2013
    #7
    so you'll buy the 2017 version ... the only money making scheme reason
     
  8. MadDane macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2015
    #8
    Remember that the hardware is only part of the complexity. For every combination there is also different keyboard layouts, accessories, and so on.
     
  9. lockerc18 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 17, 2012
    #9
    Honestly, how many users would actually use 32GB? I have 16GB in my mid-2012 rMBP. I'm just a normal user, not a real power user. I don't do video editing or gaming or other intensive workloads. Just office stuff, standard apps, word processing, and the like. I got 16GB because I'm a techie and I have to have the latest and greatest, and that was the most RAM I could get back then. But I've never been able to use all of it. I might get to half of it, and I don't know the internals of OSX well enough to understand how the system itself might use RAM for caching or page swapping and so on.

    The point is that I can't come close to using the 16GB I have, so I have a hard time understanding why anyone would need twice that. I suppose there are a very few power users at the high end would might. But not the typical users. So from an Apple perspective, they have to address the mainstream, and not really the fringe at the outside boundary. Just like anything else, Apple made a business decision, which does support almost everyone who would buy a MBP, I think. It's kind of like why they don't offer a 17-inch MB any more. There aren't enough people who would buy one to justify offering one.
     
  10. Howard2k macrumors 6502a

    Howard2k

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2016
    #10
    IF only there was some way that SKU management could be made easier. Like some sort of super capable machine that would be able to take all of those manual SKU records and provide some sort of automation.

    If I came up with something like that I'd call it a "computer" with a "database"
     
  11. runner77 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2016
    Location:
    Berlin
    #11
    The color is soldered into the motherboard? Sure...
     
  12. MrX8503 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    #12
    Why is 32GB such a big deal? Yes there are users out there that need it and having options is great, but 32GB RAM is LAST in a list of priorities.
     
  13. littlepud, Nov 19, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2016

    littlepud macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    #13
    The problem is a little more complicated than simply producing the same board with more memory soldered, and has nothing to do with SKU management or tracking. What we are seeing is what happens when engineering reality meets Business 101.

    A 32GB BTO option would require Apple to either:

    1. Produce a completely different logic board layout just for 32GB, OR
    2. Move all models to DDR4
    The 1st option turns into a logistics and supply-chain issue for Apple, and was probably discarded as a result. Apple cannot simply produce the same board with a different amount of soldered memory in the case of 32GB because LPDDR3 and DDR4 use different pin outs and voltages.

    The 2nd choice would side-step the supply-chain problem, but would probably lead to unacceptable battery life in the 8GB and 16GB models, even if 32GB users were to accept lower battery life. Remember, Intel chips do not yet support LPDDR4.

    The interaction between Intel's supported memory types vs. Apple's design choices for thin & light, combined with logistics constraints leads to a 32GB option not being financially viable. There simply aren't enough potential 32GB buyers to make sense for Apple to live with either compromise discussed above. This is why Apple chose a 3rd compromise, to not provide a 32GB model.
     
  14. maratus macrumors 6502a

    maratus

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #14
    It's refreshing to see at least a few people who know about LPDDR3 trade-off and Skylake's max support of 16GB of LPDDR3.

    Certain competitors have both LPDDR3 option for 16GB and DDR4 for 32GB, at a cost of slight battery life decrease and more complicated logistics.

    I'd prefer Apple to give us an option, but I didn't expect them to change their strategy regarding component choices
     
  15. tubeexperience, Nov 19, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2016

    tubeexperience macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2016
    #15
    Had Apple made the memory and SSD removable, the number of logic board configurations would decrease by 83% (from what's currently available).

    Adding a 32GB memory configuration wouldn't add even a single logic board configuration.

    Of cause Apple wouldn't do that because of greed.

    Apple don't want you to be able to upgrade on your own: planned obsolescence at it's finest.
     
  16. UnluckyXIII macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2014
    #16
    I see it like this;

    1). No 32GB option = people complain

    2). Yes 32GB option = majority complain about the $£€ silly upgrade cost

    Reality). Most people probably don't need it for anything more than "future proofing" but since we don't really know what the future will bring and in a market where software to hardware optimisation is coming on leaps and bounds the majority will most likely not need it for some time (if ever) and will upgrade systems before it becomes a real impact on their workflow.

    I don't think the combination of SKU's was the main reason for not seeing 32GB though, other hardware limitations are the cause.

    XIII
     
  17. littlepud macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    #17
    This is incorrect. Even if Apple returned to traditional SO-DIMM memory, the 32 GB option would require a completely different board because LPDDR3 and DDR4 are not pin-compatible.
     
  18. syan48306 macrumors 6502a

    syan48306

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    #18
    Linus realized that they messed up the video comparison but decided not to do anything about it. Rather they just made a form post explaining it. In their post the explain:

    The reason why the MacBook pro uses DDR3 is for the Low Power modules. There are no Low Power DDR4 modules, yet. If you're using LPDDR3, the CPU memory controller limits the system to 16GB. It's as simple as that.
     
  19. ITguy2016 Suspended

    Joined:
    May 25, 2016
    #19
    Agreed. After all how many are actually using more than 640KB or RAM?
    --- Post Merged, Nov 19, 2016 ---
    T, FTFY.
     
  20. tubeexperience macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2016
    #20
    The same excuse has been made over and over again.

    Both LPDDR3 and DDR4 are 1.2V.
     
  21. Howard2k macrumors 6502a

    Howard2k

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2016
    #21
    Quick, off to Wikipedia before someone questions the depth of your electrical knowledge.
     
  22. maratus macrumors 6502a

    maratus

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #22
    Despite the same voltage, LPDDR3 has much lower standby power consumption (to maintain memory contents)
     
  23. Howard2k macrumors 6502a

    Howard2k

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2016
    #23


    Sorry, I tried.
     
  24. tryrtryrtryrt Suspended

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2016
    #24
    Neither is 2133 but it is working somehow...
     
  25. slughead thread starter macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #25
    So the Macbook pro can sleep using less power. Yes that was clearly the complaint of most pros (even though the smaller battery means at load it'll be shorter duration and most are not getting APple's claimed battery life).

    Don't worry, the battery is glued in there too just for good measure.
     

Share This Page