Apparently Dell and HP have now simultaneously started, for laptops with an Optane memory cache, started advertising the total amount of DRAM plus Optane as being the total amount of memory in the system.
For those not familiar with Optane, it's a new type of memory developed by Intel and Micron. If you think of it as a high end type of NAND, that usually won't be too far off on the performance characteristics.
One could argue that Optane offers performance characteristics somewhere between NAND and DRAM, but usually much closer to NAND. In terms of latency, IOPS, or write durability, it's much closer to NAND than DRAM. For throughput, it's basically indistinguishable from NAND. The price is also closer to NAND than to DRAM, and it's non-volatile like NAND and unlike DRAM.
It's also a stupid product for consumer use. Maybe a full SSD out of it isn't completely stupid for someone with an unlimited budget, but as a cache drive, it's completely stupid. Optane might have some significant enterprise uses, and maybe future iterations of it will be more useful, as the performance characteristics have severely retreated from what Intel originally promised. Or maybe not.
But if it's a stupid product for consumers, then how are you supposed to get consumers to buy it? With deceptive marketing, of course. Claim that a laptop with 8 GB of DRAM plus 16 GB of Optane has 24 GB of total memory, and hope that clueless people think that's more than a laptop with 16 GB of DDR4 DRAM. After all, Intel produces Optane but not DRAM.
While Optane is a type of memory of sorts, so is NAND. To market a computer with a 1 TB SSD as having 1 TB of "memory" isn't technically wrong in that sense, but if you're trying to compare it to another computer's amount of DRAM only, that's extremely deceptive. And that's basically what Intel is pushing for Optane.
It actually reminds me of when someone at AMD decided to market an APU with 4 x86 CPU cores and 6 GPU compute units as having 10 "compute cores".