[orev]

I’m glad they explained why RAM has become soldered to the board recently. It’s easy to be cynical and assume they were doing it for profit motive purposes (which might be a nice side effect), but it’s good to know that there’s also a technical reason to solder it. Even better to know that it’s been recognized and a solution is being worked on.

[OJFord]

I didn't find that a particularly complete explanation - and the slot can't be closer to the CPU because? - I think it must be more about parasitic properties of the card edge connector on DIMMs being problematic at lower voltage (and higher frequencies) or something. Note the solution is a ball grid connection and the whole thing's shielded.

I suppose in fairness and to the explanation it does give, the other thing that footprint allows is a shorter path for the pins that would otherwise be near the ends of the daughter board (e.g. on a DIMM), since they can all go roughly straight across (on multiple layers) instead of a longer diagonal according to how far off centre they are. But even if that's it, that's what I mean by it seeming incomplete. :)

[Tuna-Fish]

> and the slot can't be closer to the CPU because?

All the traces going into the slot need to be length-matched to obscene precision, and the physical width of the slot and the room required by the "wiggles" made in the middle traces to length-match them restrict how close you can put the slot. Most modern boards are designed to place it as close as possible.

LPCAMM2 fixes this by having a lot of the length-matching done in the connector.

[ansible]

Generally speaking, layout for modern DRAM (LPDDRx, etc.) is a giant pain. Trace width, differential trace length matching, spacing, number of vias, and more.

And all this is needed even though the DRAM signaling standard has extensive measurement and analysis of the traces built right into the hardware of the DRAM and the memory controller on the processor. They negotiate the speed and latency at runtime.

Giant pain.

[throwaway48476]

Competes with space for VRM's.

[smolder]

Yeah, you can only make the furthest RAM chip in DIMM be so close to the CPU based on the form factor, and the other traces need to match that length. Distance is critical and edge connectors sure don't help.

[klysm]

I didn’t really appreciate the insanity of the electrical engineering involved in high frequency stuff till I tried to design some PCBs. A simplistic mental model of wires and interconnects rapidly falls apart as frequencies increase

[drivingmenuts]

The problem is getting manufacturers to implement the new RAM standard. While the justifications given are great for the consumer, I didn't see any reason for a manufacturer to sign on.

They are going to lose money when people buy new RAM, rather than a whole new laptop. While processor speeds and size haven't plateaued yet, it's going to take a while to develop significant new speed upgrades and in the meantime, the only other upgrade is disk size/long-term storage, which, aside from Apple, they don't totally control.

So, why should they relenquish that to the user?

[cesarb]

> While the justifications given are great for the consumer, I didn't see any reason for a manufacturer to sign on. [...] So, why should they relenquish that to the user?

It makes sense that the first ones to use this new standard would be Dell and Lenovo. They both have "business" lines of computers, which usually offer on-site repairs (they send the parts and a technician to your office) for a somewhat long time (often 3 or 5 years). To them, it's a cost advantage to make these computers easier to repair. Having the memory (which is a part which not rarely fails) in a separate module means they don't have to replace and refurbish the whole logic board, and having it easy to remove and replace means less time used by the on-site technician (replacing the main logic board or the chassis often means dismantling nearly everything until it can be removed).

[masklinn]

> To them, it's a cost advantage to make these computers easier to repair.

Alternatively, it allows them to use more efficient RAM in computer lines they can't make non-repairable so they can boast of higher battery life.

[babypuncher]

They also charge a lot more for these "business-class" machines. That higher margin captures the revenue lost to DIY repairs and upgrades.

[AnthonyMouse]

> They are going to lose money when people buy new RAM, rather than a whole new laptop.

You're thinking about this the wrong way around.

Suppose the user has $800 to buy a new laptop. That's enough to get one with a faster processor than they have right now or more memory, but not both. If they buy one and it's not upgradable, that's not worth it. Wait another year, save up another $200, then buy the one that has both.

Whereas if it can be upgraded, you buy the new one with the faster CPU right away and upgrade the memory in a year. Manufacturer gets your money now instead of later, meanwhile the manufacturer who didn't offer this not only doesn't sell to you in a year, they just lost your business to the competition.

[petemir]

I doubt the consumer mass that actually matters to manufacturer's earnings understands RAM value and if the computer they are buying is RAM-upgradable or not.

They are going to buy the 800$, any of the two, complain when it inevitably "works slower" in a couple of years (if they are lucky), and buy a new 800$ once again then. I don't see the manufacturer's motivation to offer upgradable RAM.

[AnthonyMouse]

They don't have $800 to buy another one so soon. So they take the one that "works slower" to some tech who knows the deal and tells them this machine sucks because you can't upgrade it, and now they think your brand is crap (because it is), curse you for the next however many years until they have the money and then buy the next one from someone else.

[makeitdouble]

I'd see two angles:

- the manufacturer themselves benefit from easier to repair machines. If DELL can replace the RAM and send back the laptop in a matter of minutes instead of replacing the whole motherboard to then have it salvaged somewhere else, it's a clear win.

- prosumers will be willing to invest more in a laptop that has better chance to survive a few years. Right now we're all expecting to have parts fail within 2 to 3 years on the higher end, and budget accordingly. You need a serious reason to buy a 3000$/€ laptop that might be dead in 2 years. Knowing it could weather RAM failure without manufacturer repair is a plus.

[bugfix]

Even if it's just Lenovo using these new modules, I still think it's a win for the consumer (if the modules aren't crazy expensive).

[rock_artist]

Unlike Apple, where they are in in-direct competition on computer hardware, For PCs, If Lenovo starts doing it, then it's a marketing point. now Asus, HP, Dell would try and get it.

So it's the egg and the chicken where if it'll be important to consumers, it might end up as catching up.

[7speter]

These companies did plenty well 12+ years ago when users could upgrade their systems memory.

[kjkjadksj]

They can have their technical fig leaf to hide behind but in practice, how many watts are we really saving between lpddr5 and ddr5? is it worth the ewaste tradeoff to have a laptop we can't modularly upgrade to meet our needs? I would guess not.

[masklinn]

> how many watts are we really saving between lpddr5 and ddr5?

From what I gathered, it's around a watt per when idling (which is when it's most critical): the sources I found seem to indicate that ddr5 always runs at 1.1V (or more but probably not in laptops), while lpddr5 can be downvolted. That's an extra 10% idle power consumption per.

[kjkjadksj]

So rather than your battery lasting 15 hours it only lasts 14ish. Probably a rounding error considering how much a poorly coded website can impact your battery life estimates even on apple silicon, and the fact your battery degrades over its life anyhow and never gets what it says on the tin (especially apples tin).

[yread]

If they soldered a decent amount that gou can be sure you don't ever need to upgrade it would be fine (seriously, 64GB ram costs like 100eur, non issue in a 1000eur laptop). 8 is not enough already and 16 will soon be limiting too.

[brookst]

Is the goal to not have any computers that are limited to a single task? Tons of corporate IT purchases go to someone only using e.g. Word all day. Do we really care if they are provisioned with “enough” memory for you or me?

[pathartl]

The baseline 14" MacBook Pro that costs $1600 has 8GB of shared RAM. That's not enough. I don't believe OP is talking about machines better suited for your task, machines in the $1k range.

[nuancebydefault]

10 percent is not neglectible. Also 64GB is a lot _today_ but most probably not 5 years from now. The alternative of buying a new laptop feels like a big waste.

[orev]

No matter how much the specs increase, developers find a way to use it all up. This approach would just accelerate that process.

[tombert]

Yeah, I was actually surprised to learn there was a reason other than "Apple wants you to buy a new Macbook or overspec your current one". It's annoying, but at least there's a plausible reason to why they do it.

[seanp2k2]

"...and they charge 4x what the retail of premium RAM would otherwise be per GB"

do storage next.

[klausa]

Apple's RAM is not soldered to the _motherboard_, it's part of the SoC package.

[Vogtinator]

Only recently. It started out as soldered to the main board.

[klausa]

M1 Macs started shipping in late 2020, so, for some definitions of "recently", sure.

It's true for any laptops that can be reasonably described as having a "SoC" and not CPU, anyway.

(I guess you could be extremely pedantic and try to argue that T2 counted as SoC? But clearly not what I meant.)

[brookst]

No, it started out as chips in sockets. I (dimly) remember upgrading my II+, I think from 32kb to 48kb?

A lot has changed.

[lazide]

EEPROM like DIP packaging where it was damn near impossible to pull without bending a pin and/or smacking your hand on something?

God forbid someone steps on it too, I think I might still have some scars on my feet.

[brookst]

And remember how the pins were a little too wide, so as to ensure tension against the socket, so you had to put one side in and apply pressure to get the other side? How many chips did I just fold over or bend even just inserting? Many.