Apple limits 2016 MacBook Pro models to 16GB of RAM to maximize battery life

2456789

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 179
    "RAM allotments of more than 16GB would require more power-hungry controller unsuitable for use in a laptop."

    you gotta be kidding me, these people are total a... h... 
    I think the ram limitation has to do with the fact that they implemented a crippled chipset/motherboard inside that only supports low bandwidth and 16gb ram. Would =nt be the first time when they intentionally cripple things by design.
    I've been frustrated for a while now that I can't upgrade my ram on my 2013 rmbp. It's unacceptable not being able to get 32gb of ram for a high end laptop in late 2016 with the 'Pro' designation. Guess will have to wait another 4-5 years or just buy a PC laptop now and hackintosh it 


    edited October 2016
  • Reply 22 of 179
    ksecksec Posts: 1,567member
    Apple will move to LPDDR4 later when they update to 10nm Intel Cannonlake. Which will allow 32GB Ram at same energy usage. Which is in late 2017. You *may* likely get TSMC 10nm GPU from AMD. So again I think Apple's design is very forward thinking.
    tmayration al
  • Reply 23 of 179
    ksec said:
    Apple will move to LPDDR4 later when they update to 10nm Intel Cannonlake. Which will allow 32GB Ram at same energy usage. Which is in late 2017. You *may* likely get TSMC 10nm GPU from AMD. So again I think Apple's design is very forward thinking.
    Wasn't there an article a while back about Apple hiring people with experience and knowledge developing drivers for NVIDIA hardware? If I didn't dream it, and it really happened, then perhaps we may see NVIDIA inside in the not-too-distant future.
  • Reply 24 of 179
    Swapping (even if it is to an SSD) consumes less battery than larger memory?
    ewtheckman
  • Reply 25 of 179
    dig48109 said:
    What a terrible decision. We buy high end Macbook Pros in our company. We buy lots of them and we max it out with 1TB SSD and a discrete graphics card. Many of our users are video editors for 360 video and our developers need more RAM for their needs. I need more RAM for running virtual machines. This is clearly a case of Apple not listening to their customers. Most of the time our laptops are plugged in. We can live with a USB type C connector as long as there are enough of them. To Phil Schiller. Give us Apple customers the choice in the Pro series between 1. More RAM sacrificing battery life 2. Choice of AMD/ATI graphics vs nVidia. Sorry but a lot of 3rd party tools still only support CUDA and not yet OpenCL. Typically many small developers who tools we use will write for nVidia only. This throws a monkey wrench in our pipeline development This is frustrating. We've been stuck at 16GB for too many years. There is no excuse for the top end Macbook Pro (w discrete graphics card) to be limited to 32GB. At another former company (500 artists) many of our users using Foundry's Nuke or Mari would be using 128GB or 64GB systems from a 1U system with a PCoIP graphics card. Computers were in Los Angeles and the artists were in Vancouver (BC govt subsidies lured the companies there). Apple time to listen to your customers. One shoe , or one max RAM size does not fit all. Sorry. Don't care what the limits are for the Macbook Air or Macbook (which by the way we never buy, has only one port and that too it has to be used for power, why couldn't he Macbook have two USB-C ports?)
    Why don't you use the iMac that can be expanded to 64GB RAM through OWC?
    roundaboutnowration al
  • Reply 26 of 179
    This is ridiculous. There is a solution. Apple must either find it or make it.

    I cannot use a 16 GB computer, mobile or otherwise for me work. I do EVERYTHING where I am, video, audio, image editing, web development, word processing, email communication, facetime, etc. The entire Adobe suite is being utilized simultaneously it seems half the time. On my 32 GB iMac 5k, it's not enough, but I am used to it. 

    I recently Discovered not having a laptop is killing me with ability to make certain deadlines.

    But 16 GB would strangle me to death.

    Come on! this is a freaking PRO machine.

    I could take or leave the touch bar. All I really wanted was some decent freaking RAM capacity for crying out loud. 

    Just put a stinking note on the BTO 32GB RAM option that it will decrease battery life. I bet that would be the top seller.

    I could buy a Windows laptop with 32GB now. But ZERO options on the Mac side?

    It's like they don't' want pros to purchase these. Holding back the notebook to push iPad or something. I don't know.

    It just doesn't feel right.
    edited October 2016 pulseimagestallest skilewtheckman
  • Reply 27 of 179
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,258member
    It's like they don't' want pros to purchase these. Holding back the notebook to push iPad or something. I don't know.
    Do you know how arrogant you sound by suggesting that Apple drop the MBP in favor of the iPad because they don't offer a 32GiB option? How the hell does iOS on an iPad with 3GiB RAM equate to a 15" MBP with a 2TB SSD, 16GiB RAM, 2.9GHz quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.8GHz, with 8MB shared L3 cache, Radeon Pro 460 with 4GB of GDDR5 memory, with 4 USB-C/TB ports capable of running 2x4K or 1x5K displays?
    pulseimagestmayration al
  • Reply 28 of 179
    Soli said:
    It's like they don't' want pros to purchase these. Holding back the notebook to push iPad or something. I don't know.
    Do you know how arrogant you sound by suggesting that Apple drop the MBP in favor of the iPad because they don't offer a 32GiB option? How the hell does iOS on an iPad with 3GiB RAM equate to a 15" MBP with a 2TB SSD, 16GiB RAM, 2.9GHz quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.8GHz, with 8MB shared L3 cache, Radeon Pro 460 with 4GB of GDDR5 memory, with 4 USB-C/TB ports capable of running 2x4K or 1x5K displays?
    Do you know how foolish you sound in trying to say the complete freaking opposite of what I just said?

    READING COMPREHENSION. LEARN THIS TERM.

    I was lamenting the strange feeling that Apple seems to be holding back the laptop instead of pushing it forward, say like the iPad Pro (which I own - and it comes nowhere near fulfilling what an MBP does).

    I could do without an iOS device. But I would hate computing life without a real Mac.

    I have been painfully waiting on a new MBP with 32GB of RAM and was certain it was now. But nope. It's just a boneheaded, stupid decision and Apple can still reverse it in a quiet update.

    Pay attention for crying out loud.
    edited October 2016 ewtheckmanbloggerblog
  • Reply 30 of 179
    evilutionevilution Posts: 1,373member
    Oh good, the pointless return of the "I'm not buying it until that number doubles" crew. We haven't heard from them since the 16gb iPhone was dropped.

    Seriously, if you really need more than 16gb of RAM (need, not want) then you are a heavy user and you should be using a desktop computer.
    Soliericthehalfbeepulseimagestmayration alpscooter63
  • Reply 31 of 179
    evilution said:
    Seriously, if you really need more than 16gb of RAM (need, not want) then you are a heavy user and you should be using a desktop computer.
    So buy a gimped laptop (like your job would require) or buy a THREE YEAR OLD desktop (that you can’t take where your job requires)…

    Can you see why people are saying that Apple is ignoring Macs to their own detriment?
    ewtheckmansingularitybloggerblog
  • Reply 32 of 179
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,258member
    Soli said:
    It's like they don't' want pros to purchase these. Holding back the notebook to push iPad or something. I don't know.
    Do you know how arrogant you sound by suggesting that Apple drop the MBP in favor of the iPad because they don't offer a 32GiB option? How the hell does iOS on an iPad with 3GiB RAM equate to a 15" MBP with a 2TB SSD, 16GiB RAM, 2.9GHz quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.8GHz, with 8MB shared L3 cache, Radeon Pro 460 with 4GB of GDDR5 memory, with 4 USB-C/TB ports capable of running 2x4K or 1x5K displays?
    Do you know how foolish you sound in trying to say the complete freaking opposite of what I just said?

    READING COMPREHENSION. LEARN THIS TERM.

    I was lamenting the strange feeling that Apple seems to be holding back the laptop instead of pushing it forward, say like the iPad Pro (which I own - and it comes nowhere near fulfilling what an MBP does).

    I could do without an iOS device. But I would hate computing life without a real Mac.

    I have been painfully waiting on a new MBP with 32GB of RAM and was certain it was now. But nope. It's just a boneheaded, stupid decision and Apple can still reverse it in a quiet update.

    Pay attention for crying out loud.
    1) Again, it's crazy to say they released these amazing new MBPs to push the iPad…. which won't even be updated this year.

    2) You not understanding why they do or don't do something doesn't make it boneheaded.
    edited October 2016 tmayration al
  • Reply 33 of 179
    evilution said:
    Oh good, the pointless return of the "I'm not buying it until that number doubles" crew. We haven't heard from them since the 16gb iPhone was dropped.

    Seriously, if you really need more than 16gb of RAM (need, not want) then you are a heavy user and you should be using a desktop computer.
    I agree but can you take the time how I take my 27in iMac with my when I travel on business?
    The continuing 16Gb limit imposed by Apple means that I have to take my HP Elitebook 8770 with me when I travel. IT has 32Gb of RAM, 3.5TB off SSD and I can run all my VM's on it. It is a loggable rather than a Laptop class machine and I'd really like to be able to leave it at home once and for all. It also runs FCP very, very well which is something my 2015 MBP can't do anywhere near as well.
    My iMac is maxed out with RAM and storage and the 5K screen is gorgeous.
    I won't be spending a bent dime with Apple until they kick intel's ass into the gutter and offer a laptop with 32Gb of RAM. It might be moot because I'll probably be long retired by then.
    I have to say it but, Apple Senior management need to gat a huge kick up the Ass and get out of their White Towers and into the field and see for real the issues we, the users have. But they won't so my wallet is staying firmly shut.


    jlandd
  • Reply 34 of 179
    I am not sure why a laptop has to be equal to or outperform a desktop. I am not in the content creation field in any way and know full well my ignorance in this area. 

    If it is indeed for thinness that this is happening- I never remember anyone complaining how thick the last MacBook pros were. I have zero complaints about mine thickness-wise; put in the 32gb (or more) and slap in a larger battery if needed (and that sd card reader).
    ewtheckman
  • Reply 35 of 179
    mazda 3s said:
    Actually, the company at fault here isn't Apple, but Intel. Skylake doesn't support the needed LPDDR4 that would allow them to go to higher capacities. And Kaby Lake will only have support in the U chips, and U chips aren't mobile quad cores, so the 15" won't be able to get the upgrade even when they do go to KBL. 

    In short, Intel continues to drop the ball. It's hard to imagine Apple isn't getting tired of this kind of crap. 
    Skylake, 32GB, DDR4 

    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1265327&gclid=CjwKEAjw7svABRCi_KPzoPr53QoSJAABSvxf1yU3rDtp8-jlAIBM4e3JGgBPUhGK3pJlr8wRV-c1xhoCKFnw_wcB&is=REG&ap=y&m=Y&c3api=1876,92051677802,&Q=&A=details
    Desktop chips in a laptop enclosure !!! That thing would get fire before completing the first level of the game !!!
    edited October 2016
  • Reply 36 of 179
    croprcropr Posts: 960member
    evilution said:
    Oh good, the pointless return of the "I'm not buying it until that number doubles" crew. We haven't heard from them since the 16gb iPhone was dropped.

    Seriously, if you really need more than 16gb of RAM (need, not want) then you are a heavy user and you should be using a desktop computer.
    I own a software development company and the efficiency of my developers is definitely higher on a 32 GB Ram machine, but this does not mean that my developers sit at their desk from 9 to 5.  Some of them work on the train while coming to the office, others work 1 to 2 a week at remote locations or at the premises of the  customers.  My developers are all mobile and need a laptop, but 32 GB RAM is much more important than a few extra hours of battery life.
    Who do you think you are that you can be so arrogant to know the working conditions of all heavy users?
    edited October 2016 jibberjewtheckmananantksundaramjlandd
  • Reply 37 of 179
    If greater ram consumes more power, well battery is not the only power source to use isn't it? Why restrict when you clearly do not have to. I always liked apple, but not this.
  • Reply 38 of 179
    webfrasse said:
    Swapping (even if it is to an SSD) consumes less battery than larger memory?
    RAM draws power continuously even when idle.
    ration al
  • Reply 39 of 179
    19831983 Posts: 1,190member
    Considering even laptops remain plugged into the wall the vast majority of the time (most are desktop replacements nowadays anyway and have been for years!) a 32GB option should at least be offered, with the disclaimer saying such an upgrade could considerably reduce battery life, so people would know what they're getting into, that way Apple would be off the hook.
    edited October 2016 singularity
  • Reply 40 of 179
    jkichlinejkichline Posts: 1,336member
    Soli said:
    mazda 3s said:
    And who's fault is that?

    2015 15-inch MacBook Pro: 99.5 WHr battery
    2016 15-inch MacBook Pro: 76 WHr battery

    2015 13-inch MacBook Pro: 74.9 WHr battery
    2016 13-inch MacBook Pro: 54.5 WHr battery
    2016 13-inch MacBook Pro with Touch Bar: 49 WHr battery

    The quest for thinness in a "Pro" machine is bringing out the causalities. 
    What about usable battery life of these machines? Is it lower or has Apple decided that they can maintain a realistic battery life per charging cycle while reducing the battery size and making it thinner and lighter?

    Personally, I would have loved to see a 32GiB option, not cared if it only a little less heavier and thicker, and had a longer batter life, to boot, but we need to remember that our specific needs are not what Apple wants as we are not the target market. We are simply individual buyers. If we don't like it we can not by not buying it.

    I do wonder about his comments about affecting battery life and hope this can be tested. If doubling the RAM to 32GiB caused the machine to lose 30 minutes of run time from that 10 hour claim I think I would have gone for it, but if it lost 2 hours, I doubt I would have. I do think they are losing some up-sales from not offering it, but they also know that so we have to ask ourselves why they aren't offering it if they are leaving money on the table. In any regard, all we can do is speculate so no one should be getting emotional about it.
    The memory controller needs to be closely integrated with the processor for the level of performance it is driving as well as power efficiency. If the memory controller available on the chipset only supports 16 GB, then supporting more would necessitate an additional memory controller. These take up space, power, and likely incurs a performance hit.

    The other thing to consider is it's possible the SSD which is three times faster than before, will offset any limitation in physical RAM. Keep in mind also that macOS has the ability to compress RAM contents and dynamically expand it to make more efficient use of RAM. Having "only" 16 GB of RAM is either a very small segment of the market or not an actual issue.
    macplusplusSolipscooter63
Sign In or Register to comment.