Apollo Lake Laptops May Ditch Replaceable RAM

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Is not being able to replace a laptop’s memory a deal breaker for you? You’ll probably be avoiding the majority of Apollo Lake portables then, as it is being reported that manufacturers are opting for onboard soldered designs.

…replacing the memory sticks with higher-capacity models wasn’t an impossible feat for consumers using a screwdriver and the wondrous unlimited power of Google. However, if the memory is now on-board, the chips are soldered into place on the motherboard itself and cannot be replaced. As a result, notebook motherboards supporting Apollo Lake won’t have any memory bank slots whatsoever, reducing the overall amount of hardware packed into the super-thin form factor. This slightly reduces manufacturing costs for the OEM, as well.
 
Last edited:
This does really suck. I hope for work that Dell's Latitude line continues to have upgradeable/replaceable RAM.
 
I have never upgraded laptop RAM, nor have any clients ever requested a RAM upgrade.

I have however upgraded the hard drive. Many, many times. Leave that alone and I don't really see a problem.
 
"Super thin laptops" is the operative phrase there. The design already doesn't allow memory slots, as you can see with similar-type current models like the Macbook Air, XPS 13, HP Spectre 13 or Surface Book. It's only a subset of the laptop market and is caused by physical space limitations. It's no surprise that the same limitation will affect future models of super thin laptops too.

edit: once again I'm pretty disappointed by the poor state of tech journalism.
 
Id be fine if the cost for the upgraded ram wasnt 3-4x the cost of buying it from newegg. 4 gig notebook, $400, 8 gig notebook, $600, 16 gig notebook, $800, seem fair right Mr customer right?
 
Look for an Ultra book I might be ok with it. But I have a clunker and it cant get a RAM upgrade I will be livid. If this ends up as true I will avoid this chipset.
 
Upgrading the RAM from 4->16 and HDD->SDD is the most cost effective speed and cost upgrade available. The speed upgrades are simply remarkable.

My wife's last laptop was an HP i3. I was only $300 with 500gb HDD and 4GB memory. So I thought I would do an upgrade for $180. ($100 SSD + $80 16 gigs memory)

I had to rip apart the entire laptop (shell, screen, keyboard, and some daughter boards) to reach the HDD and Memory slots. All in all it was an hour job. It was a massive pain in the tail designed to discourage people from upgrades. There's no excuse for not having an easy upgrade path.
 
"Super thin laptops" is the operative phrase there. The design already doesn't allow memory slots, as you can see with similar-type current models like the Macbook Air, XPS 13, HP Spectre 13 or Surface Book. It's only a subset of the laptop market and is caused by physical space limitations. It's no surprise that the same limitation will affect future models of super thin laptops too.

edit: once again I'm pretty disappointed by the poor state of tech journalism.

Yea there are already several laptops that fit this category. It's disappointing because RAM is one of those things that can help extend the life of a system. I actually can't think of a single laptop or desktop that I haven't upgraded the RAM on. Every single one that was able to get an upgrade has gotten it, because there has always been enough CPU power to keep up while memory tends to be stripped down due to costs.

DigitalGriffin You no doubt were able to continue using that same system for another few years versus having to pony up the cash to replace it. These ultrabooks while it's nice they are thin and portable are really a pain in that regard. The problem stems from the fact that once someone goes down a path, they don't know when to stop. You could still have a solid laptop with socketed memory, processors, removable HDDs and they could be half as thick as what we used to have. The tradeoffs for that little extra is definitely not worth it in my book.
 
Sounds fine IF every laptop has 32gigs minimum, so it lasts the next 3-5 years.
 
I always max out the RAM and get the smallest cheapest spinner drive because I am going to remove that anyways and put in an SSD of my choosing.
 
I lost interest at "super thin form factor". Because super thin form factor implies other sacrifices that I will never make.
 
These thin machines already come with non replaceable ssd's guys. Just as long as they stop the 2gb ram bullcrap and make it at least 8. That's the only annoyance I have with our asus transformers, only 2gb of memory. But in the end it still does the job if you only run one thing at a time. Also this is the low end of town.
 
These thin machines already come with non replaceable ssd's guys. Just as long as they stop the 2gb ram bullcrap and make it at least 8. That's the only annoyance I have with our asus transformers, only 2gb of memory. But in the end it still does the job if you only run one thing at a time. Also this is the low end of town.
The PC market is messed up with its own set of price segmentation assumptions. A $200 2W Atom with 4GB memory laptop is obviously a threat to a $500 Core i3 laptop with 4GB memory because both have 4GB! I blame MS, Intel and every PC manufacturer for this mess.

Apollo Lake will be the second generation of Atoms that support up to 8GB RAM, and will probably have close to zero laptops with that amount of (soldered) memory installed over its lifetime.
 
You know, its not always just "thinner, lighter, faster". Sometimes, it's also cheaper. Solder-down memory reduces the costs for compatibility testing associated with validating module designs from multiple manufacturers. Instead of validating a dozen companies all using the same three companies' memory (Samsung, Hynix, and Micron), because of differences in their PCB designs, they only validate three (and more likely only two), and source the components instead of the modules.

The real losers in this revelation are the module makers.
 
I lost interest at "super thin form factor". Because super thin form factor implies other sacrifices that I will never make.
The MacBook comes to mind right away. It's kind of a shame, because it's *almost* useful, but they had to Retina the thing, and it just struggles too much with all the pixels. If they had gone 1440x900 or something (and cut the price accordingly), it would have been more than capable enough and I could appreciate the MacBook.
 
I think a lot of companies just lease laptops. These tend to be standardized - use them a few years, get a new one, rinse/repeat. I would personally prefer a unit with upgrade options, but also realize I'm not worth the time of the design and marketing departments. The only new personal laptop I have ever owned is a Macbook from 2008 (for Xcode development). I did upgrade it from 2GB to 6GB, also replaced the HDD with an SDD.
I have a new Macbook (my work owns it). It's not upgradeable at all. It's thin and ultraportable - I am happy with that. My gripes: keyboard sucks, only 1 USB-C port - Apple's hub gives me 1 USB2 port, not enough), and it doesn't work with my Thunderbolt display I have at my desk at work - I'm using a Dell 1080 p display instead.
 
Sounds fine IF every laptop has 32gigs minimum, so it lasts the next 3-5 years.

No, they will still ship the standard configuration with only 4GB ram. If your want the 8GB model it will be $200 more and you'll have to wait 3 weeks for it to be custom built. The 16GB model will be unavailable, even for a custom order.

You will need to spend extra to buy the laptop with all the memory it will likely ever need, and just hope you don't have a memory problem since it will not be worth fixing.

It's a shame since I've upgraded the memory on many of the older laptops at work over the years. However, I now buy most of then with 16GB ram (requirement for the technical users) so when these laptops get handed down to less demanding users, they will still have plenty of ram.


They seem to be going backwards on Laptops.
I purchased a small 11.6" laptop for travel 7 years ago for <$400. Bought the dual core Celeron model since it was faster then the higher clocked single core CPU.
I was looking at newer laptops in that same price range or less receintly, and looked up the CPU performance on the dual core Pentium chip that most of them ship with. They are not much faster than my 7 year old Celeron chip. The only real improvements is in the built in video and better battery life. Real disappointment.

Guess upgrading my old laptop with an SSD earlier this year was a good choice, especially since I'll likely be using it for a few more years.
 
I always max out the RAM and get the smallest cheapest spinner drive because I am going to remove that anyways and put in an SSD of my choosing.

I hate the extra work, but that's what I end up doing with most the Dell laptops I buy for work.
Dell prices the upgrades to SSD at about 3 times the price I can buy my own drives for.
Plus they general max out at 500GB, when the standard config for my technical users requires 1TB.
 
I just showed a client this evening a nice Lenovo with 12 gigs of RAM and a i5 for $669 from the egg. Told her we could get an SSD later. Was really surprised to see 12 gigs of ddr4 on a 'cheap' laptop.
 
This has been done before. For example, Ivy Bridge: Samsung NP780Z5E and NP880Z5E had 4GB/8GB on-board respectively. At least you were given one DIMM slot to max out at 12GB/16GB. If this is to become commonplace, just offer 16GB minimum at respectable speeds and we are all set. Otherwise, vote with your money. I admit it is kind of stupid to make things so disposable. Modular design is for a reason: failure.
 
We probably tend to get a false sense of what the general public knows and doesn't know on sites like this. The majority of people who buy laptops might believe that's it's a sealed box, that nothing can be added and if so, then from a business standpoint, I guess it makes sense. Certainly speeds up the already short life-cycle of the device.
 
Apollo lake is the next low-end platform (previous the Atom line) so it's not surprising that they're trying to save costs and cut down on size. This isn't going to affect the sort of system people care about upgrading RAM in anyway, these are mostly disposable sub $400 systems.
 
Businesses would avoid the ultra thins if they don't meet their needs, and IT can actually get that across to the lunkhead users, anyway. Of course there is always at least that one VP of turd licking that demands a paper thin Ultra book or a mac or some other bit of tech IT does not want to support.

If you are the type to upgrade, then factor this into your buying decision. Annoying to be sure, but hardly a major concern unless all laptops, and not just low end ultra thins, go this way.
 
i do not remember a single Cherry Trail product with upgradable RAM. Sky Lake replaces Cherry Trail, so nothing new here.
Currently there is no price gap between premium Cherry Trail 2-in-1s and low-end Core M offers. One trades the battery life of the Cherry Trails for graphics performance and SSD support on the Core M.
 
my little RCA 10 inch has fixed ram as well, but what do you expect for 80 bucks.
 
You guys know Apollo Lake will be a budget processor right? Most of these have been in NUCs, tablets and bottom of the barrel laptops. Pretty much all of these for the last year or so have had everything soldered on, You are lucky on some of them to be able to add a hard drive to them.
 
Super thin laptops are deal breakers for me. If you want something thin get a tablet and a bluetooth keyboard. If you want a laptop, be a man and get a workstation with a bottom that comes off without screws, allowing access to a socketed cpu, at least 2 RAM slots and with the fan right there in plain sight for easy cleaning. And don't forget to reapply thermal paste on every new laptop you buy.
 
Of course there is always at least that one VP of turd licking that demands a paper thin Ultra book or a mac or some other bit of tech IT does not want to support.

And this is one of my biggest problems. There is always a manager or developer who wants the latest and greatest, ultra light, super expensive laptop, and I have to explain to they why it's not a good idea (no docking station, limited memory, no onsite support, etc.
 
For personal use laptops I rarely buy one that needs to be upgraded down the line. By the time I need more memory CPU and GPU are also toast.

For work this would be horrible as laptops need to be re-purposed often and to meet requirements for the users memory adding/removing is sometimes needed. Also if memory fails thats a whole new mainboard and required RMA.
 
I have a Google Chromebook. It only has 2GB of memory, which was noticeably not enough once I had many tabs open.

I upgraded to a 128GB M2 drive and then discovered you could enable drive caching. I turned on like 4GB of drive caching and with the speed of the SSD, I haven't noticed a single hiccup since.

SSD's and buses are getting fast enough that I do not think memory is AS critical as it used to be. The whole point of memory was to get around the horrible speeds/response time of hard storage. But now hard storage is damn near the same thing as memory.

And I did have an experience once on WIndows where a rogue program had a memory fault and used up all the memory so Windows started using the SSD for page swapping. I played a video game for several hours before I happened to notice my memory was at 100%. I never even noticed it was page swapping to the SSD.
 
my little RCA 10 inch has fixed ram as well, but what do you expect for 80 bucks.

To be fair, it was pretty advanced at time of release.

155952259_vintage-rca-portable-tv-radioclockmodel-agr-056s.jpg
 
I upgraded to a 128GB M2 drive and then discovered you could enable drive caching. I turned on like 4GB of drive caching and with the speed of the SSD, I haven't noticed a single hiccup since.

SSD's and buses are getting fast enough that I do not think memory is AS critical as it used to be. The whole point of memory was to get around the horrible speeds/response time of hard storage. But now hard storage is damn near the same thing as memory.

And I did have an experience once on WIndows where a rogue program had a memory fault and used up all the memory so Windows started using the SSD for page swapping. I played a video game for several hours before I happened to notice my memory was at 100%. I never even noticed it was page swapping to the SSD.

using your SSD as a page file will kill SSD endurance and to a lesser degree, SSD performance. this is relevant in modern low cost SSDs which use a triad of tech solutions that lower drive longevity: smaller fab processes, TLC/MLC, 3D NAND. page file should be off on low cost consumer SSDs. That said, Windows 8 has better performance that W7 in memory starved scenarios.
 
AnandTech covered the Apollo Lake launch: Intel Quietly Launches Apollo Lake SoC: Goldmont CPU, 6 SKUs, 6 & 10 Watts

It has a new Atom uarch and uses more power than Braswell. A +30% increase in performance (@ same clock speed vs Braswell) at the application level, along with the jump in power consumption, suggests Intel widened the architecture from 2 wide to 3 or 4 wide integer execution cores.

The good news is that Apollo Lake gives a nice jump in performance and the bad news is that its appeal as a very low power CPU will have to wait until the 14nm+ or 10nm shrinks.
 
Super thin laptops are deal breakers for me. If you want something thin get a tablet and a bluetooth keyboard. If you want a laptop, be a man and get a workstation with a bottom that comes off without screws, allowing access to a socketed cpu, at least 2 RAM slots and with the fan right there in plain sight for easy cleaning. And don't forget to reapply thermal paste on every new laptop you buy.

I can agree somewhat but my dell 11'' 2in1 is very handy with built in keyboard and touchscreen.


The only thing really holding back a 5 almost 6 year old Dell 14'' laptop is the crappy intel graphics. More ram doesn't really help there sadly. Been a great machine except it is a model that doesn't have easy access to the hdd. Thats the main reason I have to look at the tech manuals of new laptops before buying them now.
 
Back
Top