Computer RAM gets biggest upgrade in 25 years but it may be too little, too late — LPCAMM2 won't stop Apple, Intel and AMD from integrating memory directly on the CPU

Also, lots of users aren't gonna want the main system memory on the CPU die. Aside from the fact that it creates a clear path for vendors to artificially inflate prices through pretended scarcity via product segmentation and bundles, it also prevents the end users from upgrading the machines.
I'm pretty sure this even goes against the stated goals of the EU in terms of reduction of e-waste.
I have no doubt that a handful of vendors cooperating could restrict their offer and force the hand of end users, but I don't think this would be here to stay. Unless it provides such a drastic performance boost (like 2x or more) that it could be enough of an incentive to convince the masses.
- Outside of DIY, end users don’t care. See: Apple.
  Also, if you have a laptop with LPDDR5, it is soldered. If it has DDR5 or some variant of DDR4, it is likely also soldered as most OEMs did away with DIMM slots.
  I don’t like or agree with the practice.
  
  Even people who build their own computers usually buy all the RAM they want at the time that they're building it.
  The biggest difference to them is likely the feeling that they're losing their ability to upgrade, more than the actual upgrade itself. I still think that feeling is an important factor, though.
  
  Frame.work laptops have non soldered, upgradable DDR5 memory. In fact, you can buy a laptop with no memory and just buy it somewhere else and install it yourself.
  
  I always think of my old Asus eePc netbook from 2010 that had a special compartment that was accessible from outside without opening up the notebook itself, just so that users would be able to upgrade their RAM. How did times change from "help the user to get what he needs" to "help the user get what we need". Personally I blame Apple for this tbh.
  This is how this looked: http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2007/12/add_more_storage_space_to_your_asus_eee_pc/panel.jpg
  And the best part: My son is using this netbook now with a light weight linux. I actually switched the RAM 2 month ago. It even plays Minecraft and he draws on it with my drawing tablet.
  
  But even soldered ram isn’t as bad as in-cpu ram. Soldered ram can be replaced/upgraded by skilled technicians. I don’t think that’s possible at all with in-cpu ram.
  
  Yeah, but at least for now, we can still buy laptops with unsoldered RAM and storage.🤞
  Besides, Apple is more of a cult than a tech company, so I am not convinced their customers should be taken as an example of a natural customer's behavior.
  And I agree that most users don't care, although, this is mostly true in corporate environments, where computers have an expected lifespan of 3 years tops. In that case having the RAM soldered or not does not change anything, as the machine will get spec'ed according to what the company needs, and will get replaced before it ever reaches obsolescence.
  For the end users, many still consider keeping a machine 5+ years, and if you check the average "long lasting" (~2k USD) machine from 5 years ago, it is an 8th gen i5 (4 cores, 8 threads) with 8GB of DDR4 and 256GB, or at best 512GB SSDs. Not that those are terrible specs by today's standard, but the people who spent 2k on a machine back then will probably want to have at least 16G of RAM now. And 1TB SSDs. And if at all possible, more than 8 threads. Heck, I just got a workstation for 550 bucks that has a ryzen 7 with 16 threads...
  And that's where companies like framework come in. I advocate for them as much as possible, along with companies like system76 and purism. If we keep voting with our wallets for such companies, even if the CPUs becomes a SoC entirely, we will still get to have upgradability paths thanks the modularity of their laptops.
  Edit: as expected, religious people got offended about me calling out their religion, thus proving my point. 🥲
  Edit 2: don't get me wrong, I'm not denying that Apple has a good tech stack (as a BSD lover, that would be silly), and that the Lemmy audience is likely aware of that too. But it is also abundantly clear that the overwhelming majority of the Apple customers have absolutely zero idea what makes their "must have" tech stand out, and are merely in for the cult part. If Apple would stop making sense technologically, it wouldn't make the slightest difference to them.
- On CPU RAM does provide much faster performance. That’s the reason they are going that route.
  
  It's part of the reason why RAM was always placed close to the CPU on the motherboard anyway. The farther they are apart, the more time and energy is used to transfer data and instructions between them.
  
  Which makes a lot of sense as RAM speed is the one big bottleneck.
- People who really care about computers buy handmade artisanal transistors.
  
  I know you're kidding, but: http://www.homebrewcpu.com/

On CPU is definitely superior for performance, and what I'm not seeing people consider here is a future where you have On-CPU-RAM and On-Motherboard-RAM. CPU RAM for intense CPU functions, and traditionally seated RAM to be more like a modern "swap" I suppose, but instead of using the slower disks for swap, you're just using slower RAM.
I could especially see this in Enterprise level hardware. I'm just saying, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Por Que No Los Dos?
I know, I know, you can't expect corporations to do squat to benefit the consumer, but one can hope.

both techniques will obviously need to coexist for some time. they dont have logistics on large memory near the processor,. quite yet, so there is still a place for ram.
- I'd argue that they do have the logistics down pretty well at this point as HBM3E can squeeze 144Gb onto a package.
  
  That makes it sound like they'll probably use software locks on one die to restrict RAM.
  Downloadmoreram.com could become a reality!
- Yes, and are they able to fit 16gig on there or 64.. as 16 seems to be the minimum for a proper system nowadays. 8 is only fine if you use it for some browsing and video.

Wouldn't RAM on die mean lower wafer yield?
- This is about RAM on the package not RAM on the die. It honestly makes no sense why we don't have CPUs and RAM soldered to the motherboard right next to the CPU package. I love being able to change the stuff myself, but any reasonable repair shop could be doing that for you and we can have much higher performance than we currently have. It's not like there's really many viable options anyways. AMD has what four good CPUs intel has like two, and there's two good ram ICS.
  
  Why would you think soldering would increase performance vs socketed at all much less provide "much higher performance"
  If soldered was the only option ans 6 skud was enough for everyone everyone would have to buy very expensive hardware to increase one spec instead of smart people getting to mix match and upgrade.
  
  Can it not just be socketed next to the CPU?
  We seem to socket CPUs just fine.

We already have memory wafers glued to our CPU wafers in the form of L3 cache. It's lower latency, higher throughput, up to a few hundred MiB in bigger models and can potentially be used without external RAM sticks (but I've not heard of using that feature outside of BIOS firmware early boot -- that's probably the only change we'll see). Sometimes it's DRAM, sometimes it's SRAM, its size varies quite a bit.

I get that this was primarily created to benefit laptops, but would it provide any advantage for desktops?
- Yes, the laws of physics require that on-die RAM is markedly faster.
  
  I get that, but is this on-die? It says that it is modular, so I interpreted that to mean that it was not on-die.

3d vcache would like to say hi

Question: modern systems can mount hundreds of GB or even terabytes of RAM, right? At this point, why not mount non-volatile storage as RAM? Performance should increase since data wouldn't have to be loaded.
- What you’re describing is the holy grail of computer memory technology. If we had nonvolatile memory as fast as RAM, we would absolutely be using it instead. Unfortunately even the fastest SSD today would be a significant drop in speed from modern RAM.
  
  Would it be faster than loading gigabytes of data from an SSD over NVMe into RAM?
- From the perspective of a computer engineer SSDs are painfully slow. Waiting for data on disk is slow enough that it is typically done by asking the OS for the data and having the OS schedule another process onto the CPU while it waits. RAM is also slow although not nearly as slow. Ideally you want your data in the L1 cache which is fast enough to minimally stall the CPU. The L2 and L3 caches are slower but larger and more likely to have the data you want. If the caches are empty and you have to read RAM your CPU will either do a lot of speculative execution or more likely stall.
  Speculative execution on CPUs is a desperate attempt to deal with the fact that all memory access is slow by just continuing through the code as if you know what is in memory. If the speculative execution is wrong a lot of work gets thrown out (hopefully nothing unsound happens) and the delay is more noticable.
  Bluntly an SSD only system would probably be an order of magnitude slower. I'm also not sure switching to a new process (or even thread) to load from SSD would be viable without RAM as it would likely invalidate a lot of cache triggering more loads.
- Essentially we do. If you run out of RAM, you get pages from disk. You would know this if you ever used Windows ME.

This is the future of PC, but with soldered RAM: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slot_1

I already use a processor with integrated graphics
- I know it's standard for graphics to be integrated into a motherboard. Is that what you're referring to? Because I've never heard of on-CPU graphics.
  
  What?
  
  Cpus have had integrated graphics for years... My 11 year old cpu has awful graphics that I try to turn off usually.
  
  what sort of a rock did you crawl out of /s
  
  And has been doing it for years with the Ryzen G series chips. They have built in Radeon graphics chips. Not as powerful as a discrete GPU, but enough for a lot of people.