• dhork@lemmy.world
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    English
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    Wait, don’t new iPhones and Macs have that unified memory? Maybe I’m missing something, but shouldn’t Apple be in the best position with regards to memory prices in their products?

    • paraphrand@lemmy.world
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      English
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 days ago

      Yes, you are missing something. You are assuming they get their memory from a different supplier than the rest of the industry.

      For some reason lots of people assume this.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        English
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        3
        ·
        Aquileo | edit-2
        13 days ago

        My understanding, though, is they have their own chip specs, for custom die nobody else uses , and they integrate that into their chiplets or whatever it is they are using. So it’s not like those vendors can just sell those die to other customers. Whoever is making Apple’s RAM is making it specifically for them.

        Unless their contracts with Apple have some sort of escalation clause, I would figure Apple would be pretty insulated from all this price nonsense. Heck, they have enough cash on hand that I bet they can buy a smaller RAM vendor if they had to. It mainly depends on how much of that custom RAM tech they own vs. licensing from any particular vendor. If they are using patents from their vendor, then that makes it harder to just switch.

        • paraphrand@lemmy.world
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          English
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          3
          ·
          13 days ago

          I see. Yeah, I think the problem is that they can’t insulate themselves from the overall production timeline constraints. Because even if their chips are unique, they don’t have their own private production lines. They only get a share of available production capacity.

          And as I understand it. Buying out a memory production facility is something they are not interested in. They don’t want to be in that part of the supply chain. And getting in now, only for memory supply chain constraints to go back to “normal” in 2 years isn’t a strategy they want to take.

          Apple would rather have a diverse supply chain, and have the ability to pit different vendors against each other.

          Some of this is similar to why just building a new facility isn’t a solution in the near term either. Because by the time it’s online, the situation is likely to have passed. And then you are back in a commodity market that’s historically difficult to compete in.

        • 3bygone3@lemmy.world
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          English
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          2
          ·
          12 days ago

          Afaik they use the same type of memory as phones do, variants of LPDDRx. “Unified” does not denote a different type, it means that both the GPU and the CPU can use the same memory (similarly to integrated GPUs using the main system ram).

          • dhork@lemmy.world
            Aquileo | link
            Aquileo | fedilink
            English
            Aquileo | arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 days ago

            Thanks for the clarification, I thought I had read somewhere that they were doing something special in terms of their specs but maybe that was wrong (or maybe they transitioned at some point to save money)