| ▲ | Kon5ole 3 hours ago | |||||||
Having unified memory is a real advantage though, it's not a reality distortion. | ||||||||
| ▲ | davrosthedalek 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
The price is that you essentially glue CPU and GPU together, which limits total compute, from a size and thermal perspective. This is really not a limit because of unified memory -- in principle, PCIe GPUs could read/write main memory without the CPU. But it's a limit for /fast/ unified memory, because fast means close. So unified memory is great as long as the integrated GPU is strong enough. Then it has two advantages: a) probably faster transfer CPU<->GPU (but that's an implementation choice for the non-unified case b) If you either need a lot of memory for the CPU or the GPU, but not for both at the same time, you pay for memory only once. | ||||||||
| ▲ | nvme0n1p1 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
Agreed. That's why it's a good thing all computers made in the past 15 years have unified memory, not just macs. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | fooker 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
It is a real advantage. The reality distortion is that people seem to believe it's HBM, or somehow it gives you extraordinary amounts of vram. Neither are really true. | ||||||||