• Turun
    link
    fedilink
    English
    23 months ago

    I understand the scepticism, but without links of what you’ve found or which parts in particular you consider dubious claims (ram speed can be increased when soldered, higher speeds lead to better performance, etc) it comes across as “i don’t believe you, because i choose to not believe you”

    LTT has made a comparison video on ram speeds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-WFetQjifc

    Do you need proof that soldered ram can be made to run faster?

    • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13 months ago

      Yes, and the results from that video (i assume, I skimmed it, but have watched similar videos) is that the difference is negligible (like 1-10FPS) and you’re usually better off spending that money on something else.

      I look at the benchmarks between the Intel MacBook Pro and the M1 MacBook Pro, and both use soldered RAM, yet the M1 gets so much better performance, even on non-GPU tasks (e.g. memory-heavy unit tests at work went from 3-5min to 45-50sec from latest Intel to M1). Docker build times saw a similar drop. But it’s hard for me to know what the difference is between memory vs CPU changes. I’d have to check, but I’m guessing there’s also the DDR4 to DDR5 switch, which increases memory channels.

      The claim is that proximity to the CPU explains it, but I have trouble quantifying that. For me, a 1-10FPS drop isn’t enough to reduce repairability and expandability. Maybe it is for others though, but if that’s the difference, that’s a lot less than the claims they seem to make.

      • Turun
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The video has a short section on productivity (i.e. rendering or compiling). That part is probably the most relevant for most people. Check the chapter view in YouTube to jump directly to it.

        I think a 2x performance improvement is plausible when comparing non-soldered ram to the Apple silicon, which goes even further and has the memory on the die itself. If, of course, ram is the limiting factor.

        The advantages of upgradable, expandable ram are obvious. But let’s face it: most people don’t need and even less use that capability.

        • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          23 months ago

          short section on productivity

          Looks about the same as the rest. Big gains for handbrake, pretty much nothing for anything else. And that makes sense, because handbrake will be doing lots of roundtrips to the GPU for encoding.

          has the memory on the die itself

          On the package, not the die. But perhaps that’s what you meant. On die would be closer to a massive cache like on the X3D AMD chips.

          The performance improvement seems to be that Apple has a massive iGPU, not anything to do with RAM next to the CPU. So in CPU-only benchmarks, I’d expect the lion’s share of the difference to be CPU design and process node, not the memory.

          Also, unified memory isn’t particularly new, APUs have supported it for years. It’s just not well utilized by devs because most users have dGPUs. So I think the main innovation here is Apple committing to it and providing tooling for devs to utilize the unified memory better, like console manufacturers have done.

          So I guess that brings a few more questions:

          • what performance improvements could we see if devs use unified memory in socketed LPDDR memory in laptops?
          • how would that compare to Apple’s on-package RAM (I think it’s also LPDDR, so more apples to apples?)?
          • how likely are AMD and Intel to push for massive APUs on laptops?

          I guess we’re kind of seeing it with the gaming PC handhelds, like Steam Deck and Ayaneo etc al, so maybe that’ll become more mainstream.