[HN Gopher] JEDEDC publishes new CAMM2 memory module standard
___________________________________________________________________
JEDEDC publishes new CAMM2 memory module standard
Author : rguiscard
Score : 88 points
Date : 2023-12-11 09:03 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.jedec.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.jedec.org)
| metaphor wrote:
| This article[1] may be contextually useful.
|
| [1] https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ram/new-
| incredibl...
| Tempest1981 wrote:
| Cool. How many pins on the connector? 560? vs 288 on a DDR5
| DIMM?
|
| I can't find any pictures/vids of the connector. Would love to
| see how the stacked config looks/connects.
| colejohnson66 wrote:
| I took a look at the standard, and it's a 7x44 connector for
| each channel of memory. That gives 308 connection points,
| which is slightly more than 288 on a DIMM. Dual-channel
| modules (as shown in the article) simply double the number of
| pins to a 14x44 connector (616 pins)
| GeekyBear wrote:
| Here's another:
|
| https://www.anandtech.com/show/21069/modular-lpddr-becomes-a...
| wejick wrote:
| Thanks, I thought it's talking about data compression. So
| clueless to not understand what the article talks about, as I
| was expecting things like hardware accelerated RAM.
| undersuit wrote:
| CPU packages are starting to have issues with too much or too
| little pressure from the heatsink mounting to cause pin
| contact issues too. AMD Threadripper has a $30 torque wrench
| that is suggested to secure the package.
| o11c wrote:
| Most relevant bits:
|
| > Notably, CAMM2 will make non-soldered LPDDR5(X) memory
| possible
|
| > Another benefit of CAMM2 is that it means multiple memory
| modules aren't necessary to activate dual-channel memory.
|
| Edit: a different HN post's URL was
| https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/12/camm-standard-publis...
| tech2 wrote:
| I'm a big fan of the idea of CAMM in general. It's this, or we
| end up with locked-in amounts of RAM as per things like the
| M[1-3] Macbooks. The connectors won't be cheap, so I suspect
| uptake for laptops might not be so common, but this is a big help
| for desktops going forward.
| tommiegannert wrote:
| Thickness seems to be a major selling point here. I wonder why
| there aren't any board-to-board edge connectors that would
| allow placing RAM expansion boards next to the motherboard,
| instead of on top of it. Given how small laptop motherboards
| are nowadays, it feels like there would be some room for this.
| gbin wrote:
| The issue is that the RAM needs to be close to the CPU and
| the edge that is the closest to the CPU is probably where
| designers want to put the cooling exhaust and radiator.
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| That's not always the case. My last three laptops have the
| RAM hanging off the edge of the mainboard. The SO-DIMM
| connectors are where the board stops, and there's "nothing"
| under the modules.
|
| The CPU is actually in the middle of the MB, close to the
| two edges (top and bottom), but the cooling fan and
| heatsink are to one side, connected via some heat pipes.
| jeffbee wrote:
| SO-DIMMs are regular DDR, not LPDDR.
| tech2 wrote:
| I think that one of the issues with edge-connectors (beyond
| thickness and distance as mentioned in another comment) is
| capacitance, which is one reason why CAMM is structured the
| way it is.
| ksec wrote:
| For something like MacBook Air it would be a problem. But
| MacBook Pro which has a fan and added thickness, CAMM2 would
| be about the same thickness.
| sheepshear wrote:
| I guess they could make a horizontal DIMM socket.
| seritools wrote:
| it's super flat, so maybe on the back of the board? can't
| make the way to the CPU shorter than that :^)
| Tuna-Fish wrote:
| The biggest selling point is signal integrity and routing
| length. CAMM(2) is designed to be much better at that than
| DIMMs, which is why if this ends up being successful we will
| probably see it (or something similar) on desktop and
| eventually server too.
| GeekyBear wrote:
| I agree. LPDDR that no longer has to be soldered onto the
| motherboard is a great step forward for flexible memory options
| in laptops.
| jacooper wrote:
| I doubt apple is going change it's approach when CAMM2 arrives,
| they soldered memory even before ddr5.
| borissk wrote:
| Is the CAMM 1 used anywhere other than Dell Precision laptops?
| adrian_b wrote:
| From the new standard:
|
| "CAMM2 is this JEDEC standard version while prior CAMMs have
| been proprietary."
|
| So CAMM 1, i.e. "prior CAMMs" has been confined to Dell
| laptops.
|
| It is nice that Dell has given the specification to JEDEC, to
| avoid the proliferation of incompatible vendor-locked memory
| modules.
|
| Of course, this will also be beneficial for Dell, because the
| CAMM modules will become cheaper when there will be a larger
| market for them.
| phendrenad2 wrote:
| Also, potentially patent royalties, unless Dell waives them.
| Already__Taken wrote:
| hopefully waived and the likes of a CM5 would use it
| theogravity wrote:
| Video of CAMM1 on a dell laptop:
|
| https://www.pcmag.com/news/what-is-camm-perhaps-the-future-l...
| phendrenad2 wrote:
| Hmm a compression connector. So like modern CPU sockets.
| schmorptron wrote:
| This is a great development. It looks to greatly decrease the
| advantages soldered ram has compared to upgradable SODIMMs in
| laptops. It both allows for LPDDR5 ram and for slightly thinner
| designs. Hoping we'll see this in consumer laptops soon and for
| prices to get to about what SODIMMs cost right now maybe a year
| later?
| eternityforest wrote:
| I wonder if we'll see something like this to replace soldered
| flash chips too
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-12-11 23:01 UTC)