Apple Cuts More Mac Studio and Mac Mini RAM Options as Memory Shortage Worsens
55 points
3 hours ago
| 10 comments
| macrumors.com
| HN
quaddoggy
2 hours ago
[-]
Anecdata: Ordered my Mac mini M4 Pro (48GB) on April 1. Was told it wouldn't be available until June 4 but it just came in yesterday—a full month early. So I think there is an "underpromise; overdeliver" thing happening with current orders. Will be curious to see what happens with the Mini M5 release this year.
reply
JKCalhoun
1 minute ago
[-]
Put in an order for 64GM Mac Mini late March. I'm feeling luck now having pulled the trigger when I did.
reply
storus
1 hour ago
[-]
It seems like M3U 512GB RAM was a unicorn we won't ever see again :( Many skipped buying it with the hopes of a 768GB-1TB M5U but it looks increasingly unlikely.
reply
jdboyd
10 minutes ago
[-]
Maybe for the M6 or M7 generation that might happen?
reply
gyomu
2 hours ago
[-]
The Mac Mini and Studio are due for an update in the coming months, a part of this is also probably that they’d rather save memory to build up their next gen model inventory rather than current gen ones?
reply
jshier
1 hour ago
[-]
Like trvz said, they use different memory. M3 Ultra uses LPDDR5X 6400 MT/s, M4 Max uses LPDDR5X 8533 MT/s, while all the M5 models use LPDDR5X 9600 MT/s.
reply
cpuguy83
1 hour ago
[-]
Does it free up fab space to make the newer ram?
reply
trvz
2 hours ago
[-]
No, the memory is different enough.
reply
icwtyjj
1 hour ago
[-]
A lot of discussion surrounding the ram shortage seems to imply that it will recover, but AI companies slurping up ram for training hasn't gone down and probably won't ever. Is there any signs that the situation is improving or is this just the new normal?
reply
thoughtpeddler
27 minutes ago
[-]
From what I understand, the RAM shortage is more about AI inference than AI training. Yes, training created much of the early HBM crunch because frontier-model training clusters need tons of HBM near GPUs, but inference is what is keeping the pressure on now and into the future.
reply
librasteve
1 hour ago
[-]
RAM has always been a boom/bust cycle - a square wave with the period about the time it takes to bring a new state of the art fab online (3 years ish)
reply
NooneAtAll3
53 minutes ago
[-]
boom-bust cycle historically used to apply only to latest generation (f.e. DDR5 now), but current crisis affects previous gen DDR4 as well (and a bit of DDR3 too)

It feels much more like cartel behaviour, where all the players recognized blame can be redirected to "Ai demand" and "Sam Altman secret deal"

reply
bilegeek
1 hour ago
[-]
I hope it won't be this bad forever, but RAM companies are currently slow-walking any booms (not fast-tracking new fabs, etc.) in hopes of avoiding a bust. Seems it'll be more of a slow decay to still-inflated pricing.
reply
piskov
1 hour ago
[-]
Chinese fabs will alleviate some of the pressure
reply
comrade1234
1 hour ago
[-]
These don't have normal ram, right? The ram is part of the die of the processor? So... what's going on? They're keeping the chips for themselves? They're moving production to other lower memory configurations? But why? That's where demand is? Probably more demand at higher memory though?

I'd buy one or two but I can't stick them in a Colo because they don't have LOM or dual power supplies but I've been seriously thinking about buying one and just keeping it at home and having my Colo servers talking to it for local deepseek.

Not a high priority though considering how cheap deepseek is.

reply
cayleyh
1 hour ago
[-]
The ram is "unified" meaning it's a single shared between CPU and GPU, and it's "on package", meaning the RAM chips are packaged together with the CPU / GPU die, but it's just regular old RAM chips.

You can clearly see this in the shot of the Mini mobo: CPU/GPU ASIC with 2 separate ram chips packaged next to them: https://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Mac-mini...

reply
tkcranny
1 hour ago
[-]
It’s still dedicated ram on a separate chip, which is affected by supply shortages.

The ram is soldered onto the SoC in close proximity to the main arm chip. What’s different is that it is simultaneously addressable by cpu and gpu cores, not part of the same die as the apple silicon unit.

reply
nicoburns
1 hour ago
[-]
> But why?

So they don't have to stop producing machines entirely because they've run out of RAM chips. The problem they have is with supply not demand.

reply
comrade1234
1 hour ago
[-]
They don't use ram chips?
reply
nicoburns
1 hour ago
[-]
They do. They just solder them onto their SOCs (as part of the manufacturing process of the SOC). But they can't do that if they haven't got any.
reply
piskov
1 hour ago
[-]
It is still ram, not some magic thing

Still LPDDR

reply
rasz
45 minutes ago
[-]
Its normal POP (package on package) ram. Apple marketing somehow managed to convince public its magic special HMB.
reply
wat10000
1 hour ago
[-]
Same package, but separate die. It’s still competing with all the other RAM buyers.
reply
ProfessorLayton
2 hours ago
[-]
The base mac mini I got has been one of the best tech purchases I've ever made, and of course as soon as I wanted another [loaded] machine for more serious work this happens.

It's absolutely wild that Apple's desktop machines now cap out at less ram than their portables which can't sustain an intensive workload without throttling!

reply
mannyv
1 hour ago
[-]
The listings on eBay are also super tight. If you can find a Mini/Studio it's priced at a premium.
reply
shell0x
1 hour ago
[-]
I bought a Mac Studio with 128gb RAM and M4 Max a year ago for local LLMs. 96gb memory doesn’t seem to be sufficient?
reply
leptons
1 hour ago
[-]
What? 640K should be enough for anyone!
reply
jmclnx
2 hours ago
[-]
People may not remember, it is ~1980 all over again. There was a massive 'chip' shortage back then were the mini-computer company I was at and many others could not get chips they needed.

In fact, chips were kept under lock and key to prevent theft. But there was a massive theft there were 20,000 chips were stolen.

reply
rasz
47 minutes ago
[-]
It was so bad Sun Microsystems of all places was buying smuggled Japanese ram from Jack Tramiel

https://forums.atariage.com/topic/207245-secret-atari-dram-r...

    May 15, 1989

    FBI SA and US Customs Agents advised Assistant US Attorney that source information and investigation had determined that Atari Corporation was importing 256K DRAMS into the US in false packing containers, and without proper import documents in violation of US import laws and contrary to import agreements between the US and the Japanese Ministry of Industry and Trade. Atari purchases large quantities of DRAMS from Japanese manufacturers for use in their Taiwanese manufacturing plants. Purchasing in Taiwan allows Atari to obtain the DRAMS at a greatly reduced price. There are strict import quotes on the DRAMS, because of Japanese flooding of the market in years previously but there are no import duties. By shipping the DRAMS in the U.S., Atari can thereby increase the price by approximately four times their purchase price. The original manufacturers, whether Fujitsu or Mitsubishi would not be allowed to import this quantity at this price into the U.S., because this practice stifles U.S. manufacturers.

    Investigation determined that Atari was importing large quantities, 150,000 or more a wekk into the U.S. since May,1988. None were declared through U.S. Customs, and it appears telexes and telephones were used to order specific quantities in furtherance of this scheme.

    Based on the above, Assistant US Attorney stated he would consider prosecution of this matter under the Wire Fraud Statutes or 1001 Falsification of Import Documents.

    SOURCE: FBI Case 87A-SF-40454, Pages 42-43
reply
cyberax
2 hours ago
[-]
In early/mid 90-s, it was common for thieves to steal RAM sticks from computers in school/university labs.
reply
sgt
2 hours ago
[-]
Apple should just start making their own RAM and not rely so much on the suppliers like Hynix etc
reply
mft_
2 hours ago
[-]
Apple certainty has the financial resources to support other companies in e.g. developing specific innovations or building infrastructure (and has done so in the past) as long as there's an RoI for Apple.

It would surely be a smart move to support the right partner in quickly starting a new memory factory, precisely to Apple's specifications, in return for a long-term supply agreement? If Apple could secure their memory supply and at a lower cost than all of the their PC and phone competition, it would be hugely beneficial for them.

reply
tracker1
2 hours ago
[-]
Memory designs are pretty entrenched with the various patents involved... I've said a few times that I don't know why Intel hasn't gotten back into DRAM production with their fabs. I suspect they may be contractually limited when they sold off their memory businesses.
reply
coldtea
2 hours ago
[-]
>Memory designs are pretty entrenched with the various patents involved...

Can't be any more entrenched than CPUs, GPUs, and broadband chips, which Apple still designs.

reply
larkost
2 hours ago
[-]
Design is not the problem. Having foundry space to manufacture is the bottleneck. It is just all being sucked up (with AI needs being the big additional load).

And to be clear, the foundry space for CPUs/GPUs is not the same as for RAM, which is printed with much larger feature size in order to lower the costs.

reply
coldtea
1 hour ago
[-]
I agree design is not the problem. I am answering the claim that "the various patents involved" would be the show stopper.
reply
absolute8606
2 hours ago
[-]
For CPUs, they are still licensing ARMs cores, of course with their own modifications, and they bought Intel’s modem businesses, which likely gave them the patents they needed. GPUs I can’t speak to on this though.
reply
Marsymars
1 hour ago
[-]
> For CPUs, they are still licensing ARMs cores

To be clear here, Apple doesn't actually license any cores from ARM - they've got an architectural license and implement their own cores. Licenses for cores are a different thing.

reply
throawayonthe
1 hour ago
[-]
for gpus i believe they license ip from PowerVR/Imagination
reply
SpecialistK
1 hour ago
[-]
They used to. Switched to designing their own with the A11 about a decade ago.
reply
cosmotic
2 hours ago
[-]
Apple doesn't make their own CPUs, they just design them (using ARM IP). It's TSMC that makes them. The bottleneck with RAM is the manufacturing side.
reply
selectodude
1 hour ago
[-]
They don’t use ARM IP. They have an architecture license. They basically created aarch64.
reply
HerbManic
2 hours ago
[-]
Alas RAM is basically a commodity product, unless they could have some design advantage over others like the A and M series chips, there is little incentive to go into RAM.

If Apple had the manufacturing capabilities then sure, but they would still be running into the same resource constraints for inputs that everyone else is having nowadays.

At the moment, there are no solutions only responses.

reply
caycep
2 hours ago
[-]
They could justify it as a capacity investment, like buying all the tooling for their aluminum laptop bodies.
reply
JumpCrisscross
1 hour ago
[-]
Unless Apple comes up with a novel memory, which I wouldn’t put beyond Cupertino, it makes more sense to participate in economies of scale.
reply
kleton
1 hour ago
[-]
Apple normally just does prepayment for capacity- funding the capital for the production line they need
reply
estimator7292
2 hours ago
[-]
It would take 5-10 years to design and verify a RAM design that comes anywhere close to the performance of modern day memory. Plus millions in NRE.
reply
coldtea
2 hours ago
[-]
Why, is the idea that they would be starting from scratch, inventing it from first principles?
reply
superb_dev
2 hours ago
[-]
I would guess patents. If you don’t get the rights for an for an existing design, you need to build your own from the ground up
reply
varispeed
2 hours ago
[-]
So if they start now, they'll be immune to shortages in 5-10 years.

It's a no brainer.

reply
coldtea
1 hour ago
[-]
They'd have their own design in 5-10 years.

Immune to shortages no. They're not suffering shortages because they don't have their own design, they suffer shortages because the whole supply chain has issues, starting from required minerals and going all the way to shipping.

And like the final product (commercial RAM) now goes to AI which pays better, processes/materials/factory utilization to make RAM would continue to go to another industry and not Apple, if that pays better then.

reply