When are we getting more than 16gb ram, it's 2017

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by holden j caufield, Mar 30, 2017.

  1. holden j caufield macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2017
    Location:
    California
    #1
    My work laptop has 64gb ram and I'm stuck with 16gb on my retina . I adore my retina but it's really lagging. I've had 32gb on my laptop since 2012
     
  2. holden j caufield thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2017
    Location:
    California
    #3
    I don't plan to, and apple is really blowing some smoke. I really doubt more ram will crush the battery time. We've had Dell precisions and thinkpads at work and I've tried them with 2 and 4 sodimms and the battery time was pretty much the same.
     
  3. aristobrat, Mar 30, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2017

    aristobrat macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    #4
    Playing devil's advocate here, .. what does Apple have to gain by blowing smoke?

    They already messed up the battery life on these by not being able to include the larger battery that they had designed for these new cases.
     
  4. Sanpete macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Location:
    Utah
    #5
    The problem isn't primarily the amount of RAM but the type. Using 32 GB with current processors, including Kaby Lake, requires using desktop RAM. That does necessarily lessen battery life relative to using low-powered laptop RAM. I estimate based on the best data available that is costs 5 to 84 watt-hours over ten hours use for 32 GB DDR4 vs 16 LPDDR3, depending on the load. The largest battery can only be under 100 watt-hours.

    Actually, despite that setback, the battery life for the 13" without TB and the 15" was improved from the previous models. But I agree that Apple isn't blowing smoke about the very real battery issues with using desktop RAM.
     
  5. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #6
    Using more then 32GB RAM with a dual-channel memory controller makes very little sense. I guess your work laptop is a large Xeon-equipped workstation? Furthermore, having more then 16GB RAM on a dual-core CPU also makes very little sense — if your resident datasets are really that large, you'd have constant cache trashing which will probably kill the performance anyway. For most well-behaved problems, there is no need to load all the data into the memory. Having the CPU process a chunk of the data while next portions are being loaded from the disk is just as efficient. Its a shame though that many software developers don't bother with proper optimisation and well-behaved algorithms these days...
     
  6. JMacHack macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    #7
    "It's LITERALLY the CURRENT YEAR"
    Can we stop pretending that a calendar is an argument?
     
  7. mcomp112 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    #8
    Cannonlake would finally allow for LPDDR4 32GB RAM so, by most estimates, you'll need to wait till October 2018 at the earliest and October 2019 at the latest (based on Apple's caution with processors, I would assume it would be later rather than sooner).
     
  8. ZapNZs macrumors 68000

    ZapNZs

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2017
    #9
    I feel your pain.

    Many analysts with a reasonably good track record believe the forthcoming refresh will feature 32 GB of RAM, and production has probably already started on individual components for them already. Battery improvements seem like a strong possibility as well.

    It seems likely that this will be given higher priority with the 2017s than it was with the 2016s, considering how many other changes the 2016s saw relative to the 2012-2015 generations (not to mention using 32GB on the 2016 would have meant Apple delaying their launch and using the CPU that could have supported 32 GB laptop RAM, or use a completely different case design for desktop RAM.)


    Technically, Samsung is the one blowing smoke (and flames)

    Apple comically removed the battery estimator, which is infinitely better than blowing smoke (and exploding.)
     
  9. Sanpete macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Location:
    Utah
    #10
    That won't happen for another year or two. Kaby Lake, like Skylake, can only use 32 GB if it uses desktop RAM. If Apple offers a laptop with 32 GB this year, it will use desktop RAM.

    Haha!
     
  10. medulla macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    #11
    Whats the difference between mobile RAM and desktop RAM?
     
  11. Sanpete macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Location:
    Utah
    #12
    Mobile RAM is designed to use less power.
     
  12. mixart macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2012
    #13
    I really can't wait anymore. I would loved 32GB in my next Macbook Pro for future proof, but my currently 15" Late 2013 with 2.6Ghz/16GB/512GB SSD/Intel Iris Pro is having a hard time running my new LG UltraFine 5K, so I'm ordering the new Macbook Pro 15" with 2.7Ghz/512GB SSD on monday. Just can't desire if I should go for 455 vs 460 for Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign with a 5K display. Here in Denmark I can get the 455 for $450 cheaper than the 460.
     
  13. aevan macrumors 68000

    aevan

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2015
    Location:
    Serbia
    #14
    Lagging in what, exactly. What do you need the 32Gb for? I'm almost certain it wouldn't fix your lag.

    It's for people running VMs or doing a lot of video. It has nothing to do with lag, and in 2017. 16Gb is quite enough for almost everything (other than some very specific tasks, then you're out of luck).

    But people love higher numbers, and MacRumors forum members are obsessed with 32Gb RAM. In the outside world, 16Gb on a new MBP will get you far.
     
  14. JMacHack macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    #15
    Not incredibly far, I'm regularly using 12gb doing illustrator and photoshop work. Future versions, as the ability to display complex graphics grows, will likely use up even more resources.

    Right now, 16gb will work. Give it a couple years, who knows? It's about future-proofing and ROI rather than outright specs
     
  15. zaphodb3 macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2015
    #16
    For the umpteenth time, you will not see 32gb ram until a suitable LP version becomes available.

    This has been Apple's M.O. for years-- they are not willing to sacrifice battery life for any reason other than reducing the size of the laptop (and even then, they prefer to keep the battery life level).

    If you want a laptop with desktop-class RAM, by all means go Windows. Just know that you will be paying for a) a heavy laptop and/or b) a laptop with relatively low battery life. Or, I dunno, petition Apple to make 17-inch laptops again.:D
     
  16. aevan macrumors 68000

    aevan

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2015
    Location:
    Serbia
    #17
    Nope, Photoshop and Illustrator will use ALL available RAM but tests clearly show there is no increase in performance with more than 8Gb RAM even with large files. 16Gb RAM will make Photoshop run at 100% efficiency for at least 5 more years.

    I don't want you to take this the wrong way, but I don't think you understand how RAM works. You won't need more than 16Gb for Photoshop or Illustrator for a long time.
     
  17. JMacHack macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    #18
    While it's true I haven't encountered any slowness, and I know that programs allocate ram whether or not they need it, I'm just concerned about the amount of time I have before I start to get slowdown. I have both open (with multiple tabs and projects) at the same time as I do mail, safari, finder with multiple tabs, etc.

    I know the Apple programs make use of ram and battery efficiently (which is why I don't use Firefox or Chrome), but since the laptop is locked-down I have no choice but to stick with the hardware I currently have. No future upgrades, I get what I get. I don't know what the future holds, or if I'll have to run memory-intensive programs in the future.
     
  18. ZapNZs macrumors 68000

    ZapNZs

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2017
    #19
    Except when it doesn't! :p


    Is that also the case with Coffee Lake or whatever the Kaby replacement is that was (at least originally) scheduled to be released this year?

    Does that mean the analysts predicting 32GB RAM are banking on Intel being able to release a CPU capable of supporting LPDDR4 in time for the next refresh? (that timeline seems crazy tight unless Apple is planning on the current MBP having a long run, doesn't it?)
     
  19. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #20
    When a program is not being currently used, its data will be either compressed or evicted from RAM and reloaded back when the program becomes active again. In a modern OS, with a fast SSD, this happens with virtually no slowdown. Not to mention that APFS is coming, which is designed to have very low latencies. So you can have as many applications open as you want without encountering any major slowdowns. Having loads of RAM has barely any effect here, because the times needed to reload app data from disk are not only super fast but can also be masked by transition effects etc.

    Instead, if you actually want to use all the 32GB RAM, e.g. actively run all those applications at the same time — your limiting factor will be the CPU and its cache. If you have a lot of processes accessing a lot or RAM all over the place, there will be constant cache misses and your performance will suffer. As I said before, in order to utilise 32GB or more of DDR RAM, one really needs a quad core+ CPU with quad-chanel memory controllers and a lot of cache — and also tasks that can make good use of all of that infrastructure. An alternative of course is changing the RAM technology, e.g. use stacked RAM with lower latency and higher bandwidth.
     
  20. JMacHack macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    #21
    Interesting, thanks for the reply.
     
  21. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #22
    I'd guess that these analysts assume that Apple will offer an MBP config with desktop DDR4 RAM in addition to one with LPDDR3 RAM.
     
  22. lJoSquaredl macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2012
    #23
    Just curious, what are people doing that requires more than 16gb of RAM? I've worked with some pretty intense projects up to about 25-30mins long in FCPX and I don't even think I was using half my RAM yet. What lines of work require that much system RAM?
     
  23. JMacHack macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    #24
    There's quite a bit of work people do using virtual machines that I know of, and editing/creating music and 5K and 8K video are all really ram-intensive projects.
     
  24. Mefisto macrumors 6502

    Mefisto

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2015
    Location:
    Finland
    #25
    There was a link posted on this forum (somewhere, I've since forgotten where it was) where a guy explained and demonstrated how far one can get with 16 gigs of RAM. As I recall, he ran quite a few applications, VM's and who knows what else concurrently, and it wasn't easy to max out the RAM usage.

    Then again, I might be misremembering some details. If anyone knows the link I speak of, I'd like to read it again.
     

Share This Page