Apple argues in favor of selling Macs with only 8GB of RAM
Apple argues in favor of selling Macs with only 8GB of RAM
With the launch of the M3 MacBook Pro last year, many reviewers and customers criticized the company for still selling...
Well yeah, they're enough to meet the minimum use cases so they can upsell most people on expensive RAM upgrades.
That's why I don't buy laptops with soldered RAM. That's getting harder and harder these days, but my needs for a laptop have also gone down. If they solder RAM, there's nothing you can (realistically) do if you need more, so you'll pay extra when buying so they can upcharge a lot. If it's not soldered, you have a decent option to buy RAM afterward, so there's less value in upselling too much.
So screw you Apple, I'm not buying your products until they're more repair friendly.
I had a extra stick of RAM available the other day so I went to open my wife's Lenovo to see if it'd take it and the damn thing is screwed shut with the smallest torx screws I've ever seen, smaller than what I have. I was so annoyed
smallest torx screws I've ever seen
Torx is legitimately useful for small screws, because it's more resistant to stripping than Phillips.
Now, if they start using Torx security bits or some oddball shapes, then they're just being obnoxious. But there are not-trying-to-obstruct-the-customer reasons not to use Phillips.
I bought the E495 because the T495 had soldered RAM and one RAM slot, while the E495 had both RAM slots replacable. Adding more RAM didn't need any special tools. Newer E-series and T-series both have one RAM slot and some soldered RAM. I'm guessing you're talking about one of the consumer lines, like the Yoga series or something?
That said, Lenovo (well, Motorola in this case, but Lenovo owns Motorola) puts all kinds of restrictions to your rights if you unlock the bootloader of their phones (PDF version of the agreement). That, plus going down the path of soldering RAM gives me serious concerns about the direction they're heading, so I can't really recommend their products anymore.
If I ever need a new laptop, I'll probably get a Framework.
That’s why I don’t buy laptops with soldered RAM.
Oh, that shit is soldered on...
I mean, I did see that on some laptops, but only those cheap things in €150 range (new) which even use eMMC for storage.It became pretty common even on higher end laptops when they switched to DDR5, but some manufacturers are starting to go back to socketed RAM.
Yup, all Apple laptops have soldered RAM for some years now...
These days I don’t realistically expect my RAM requirements to change over the lifetime of the product. And I’m keeping computers longer than ever: 6+ years where it used to be 1 or 2.
People have argued millions of times on the internet that Apple’s products don’t meet people’s needs and are massively overpriced. Meanwhile they just keep selling like crazy and people love them. I think the issue comes from having pricing expectations set over the in race-to-the-bottom world of commoditized Windows/Android trash.
I upgraded my personal laptop a year or so after I got it (started with 8GB, which was fine until I did Docker stuff), and I'm probably going to upgrade my desktop soon (16GB, which has been fine for a few years, but I'm finally running out). My main complaint about my work laptop is RAM (16GB I think; I'd love another 8-16GB), but I cannot upgrade it because it's soldered, so I have to wait for our normal cycle (4 years; will happen next year). I upgraded my NAS RAM when I upgraded a different PC as well.
I don't do it very often, but I usually buy what I need when I build/buy the machine and upgrade 3-4 years later. I also often upgrade the CPU before doing a motherboard upgrade, as well as the GPU.
Meanwhile they just keep selling like crazy and people love them. I think the issue comes from having pricing expectations set over the in race-to-the-bottom world of commoditized Windows/Android trash.
I might agree if Apple hardware was actually better than alternatives, but that's just not the case. Look at Louis Rossmann's videos, where he routinely goes over common failure cases that are largely due to design defects (e.g. display cable being cut, CPU getting fried due to a common board short, butterfly keyboard issues, etc). As in, defects other laptops in a similar price bracket don't have.
I've had my E-series ThinkPad for 6 years, with no issues whatsoever. The USB-C charge port is getting a little loose, but that's understandable since it's been mostly a kids Minecraft device for a couple years now, and kids are hard on computers. I had my T-Mobile series before that for 5-ish years until it finally died due to water damage (a lot of water).
Apple products (at least laptops) are designed for aesthetics first, not longevity. They do generally have pretty good performance though, especially with the new Apple Silicon chips, but they source a lot of their other parts from the same companies that provide parts for the rest of the PC market.
If you stick to the more premium devices, you probably won't have issues. Buy business class laptops and phones with long software support cycles. For desktops, I recommend buying higher end components (Gold or Platinum power supply, mid-range or better motherboard, etc), or buying from a local DIY shop with a good warranty if buying pre built.
Like anything else, don't buy the cheapest crap you can, buy something in the middle of the price range for the features you're looking for.
That's why I don't buy laptops with soldered RAM.
In my opinion disadvantages of user-replaceable RAM far outweigh the advantages. The same goes for discrete GPUs. Apple moved away from this and I expect PC manufacturers to follow Apple’a move in the next decade or so, as they always do.
Here's how I see the advantages of soldered RAM:
- better performance
- less risk of physical damage
- more energy efficient
- smaller
The risk of physical damage is so incredibly low already, and energy use of RAM is also incredibly low, so neither of those seem important.
So that leaves performance, which I honestly haven't found good numbers for. If you have this, I'm very interested, but since RAM speed is rarely the bottleneck in a computer (unless you have specific workloads), I'm going to assume it to be a marginal improvement.
So really, I guess "smaller" is the best argument, and I honestly don't care about another half centimeter of space, it's really not an issue.
Tim Apple be like "We've tried charging more money. Have we tried charging more money and delivering less stuff in exchange?"
Yes, they do constantly. Yet, people still keep buying. I hate that I have to use Apple for my job because of the software and interface is exclusive.
I really like my macbook for dev work, and I think that now that macos is essentially a linux distro it's quite nice, but it's not that much better than the free distros and it's getting worse while they get better. Right now the only thing keeping me on a mac at work is that they gave it to me and the only thing keeping me on a mac at home is that it's already paid for.
Yup, same. I really don't like macOS, but that's what we've standardized on. I'm a Linux guy and use Linux at home for everything.
Lol, audio jacks come to mind. As well as a physical button. And shipping devices without cords or chargers.
I was using my 2016 (or so) MacBook Air the other day and getting low memory errors. I thought, wow, this thing only has 8 gb, maybe it's time to upgrade, just to see this 😐
Part of the difference is that the Apple silicon Macs aggressively use SSD swap to make up for limited memory. But that's at expense of the SSD lifespan, which of course isn't replaceable.
I'd never recommend a Mac, but the prices they charge to get a little more RAM or SSD over base are crazy. The only configurations offering any "value" are the base models with 8gb RAM.
Why tf can't they sell mac with upgradable parts?? They are "so" into renewable and recycling stuff and saving planet and stuff. Then they should start selling shits with upgradable parts. Even cpu's if possible. Now apple fan boys argue with that. And don't bullshit me with soc should be near cpu for faster optimisation they can redesign the mobo.
There are legitimate advantages of the RAM being soldered right next to the SoC. However, if anyone could figure out how to create a proprietary RAM module, that slots in right next to the SoC (or even just an SoC module including RAM) that can be swapped out and that doesn‘t have any meaningful performance impact, it would be Apple. Just that it never could be Apple…
Because that gives the user as much or more control over the device as Apple themselves have. One of the fairly consistent things about Apple over the years has been a desire to maintain tight control for themselves over the products they make.
There is what they say they are in favor of, and there is what they really are in favor of.
They are in favor of apple getting all the monies, the end
They certainly used to. My wife's 2012 MacBook Pro has upgraded RAM and SSD parts I've put in over the years and still runs fine, though it isn't used much anymore and OS upgrades stopped a while ago.
Their current environmental marketing is pure greenwashing bullshit and their stances on upgradability and repairability are terrible.
Because then they can’t gaslight people into thinking their 8GB is magical.
It's basically just greenwashing. They pretend to be into renewables and recycling only when it doesn't disincentivize people from buying the newest product. Ex: iPhone trade in for recycling - Yes, they do recover some raw material but you can only do it if you're buying a new iPhone with that credit, and its probably also an attempt to keep cheap used iPhones off of the market.
Common apple L
There is exactly one reason why they do this: So they can charge you $200 to upgrade it to 16GB and in doing so make the listed price of the device look $200 cheaper than it actually is. Or sometimes $400 if it's a model where the base model comes with a 256GB SSD (the upgrade to 512GB, the minimum I'd ever recommend, is also $200).
The prices Apple charges for storage and RAM are plain offensive. And I say that as someone who enjoys using their stuff.
That's why I dropped them when my mid-2013 MBP got a bit long in the tooth. Mac OS X, I mean OS X, I mean macOS is a nice enough OS but it's not worth the extortionate prices for hardware that's locked down even by ultralight laptop standards. Not even the impressive energy efficiency can save the value proposition for me.
Sometimes I wish Apple hadn't turned all of their notebook lines into MacBook Air variants. The unibody MBP line was amazing.
Sometimes I wish Apple hadn’t turned all of their notebook lines into MacBook Air variants. The unibody MBP line was amazing.
Typing this from a M2 Max Macbook Pro with 32GB, and honestly, this thing puts the "Pro" back in the MBP. It's insanely powerful, I rarely have to wait for it to compile code, transcode video, or run AI stuff. It also does all of that while sipping battery, it's not even breaking a sweat. Yes, it's pretty thin, but it's by no means underpowered. Apple really is onto something with their M* lineup.
But yeah, selling "Pro" laptops with 8GB in 2024 is very stupid.
Yeah, sure. Even if what they say about the OS resource usage is true, it's only a fraction of the total usage. A lot of the multiplatform software will use the same resources regardless of the OS. Many apps eat RAM for breakfast, doesn't matter if it's content creation or software development. Heck, even smartphones these days have have this much or more RAM.
I won't argue, I just won't buy an Apple product in the near future or probably ever at all.
buys [insert price] laptop, top of the line, flagship, custom silicon, built ground up to be purpose specific.
Opens final cut pro: crashes
ok...
Same. And I bet you the price will also go up with less ram.
My basic web dev Docker suite uses about 13GB just on its own, which - assuming you were on 16GB (double Apple’s minimum) - wouldn’t leave much for things like browser tabs, which also eat memory for breakfast.
A fast swap is not an argument to short-change on RAM, especially since SSDs have a shorter lifespan than RAM modules. 16GB remains the absolute bare minimum for modern computing, and Apple is making weak, ridiculous excuses to pocket just a few extra bucks per MacBook.
My basic web dev Docker suite uses about 13GB just on its own
Skill issue
average webdev
Playing devils advocate here: As someone who deals with stuff like that, you also wouldn’t buy the base model mac. The average computer user can get by with 8GB just fine and it’s not like you can’t configure Macs with more than that.
That of course doesn’t justify the abhorrent price of the upgrades…
PS5 has 16GB and it’s a toy.
The people need to know how you use 13GB of ram worth of containers for web dev.
Docker is awesome for a lot of things. But it's not particularly good for RAM.
Wow! 13GB! I did some heavy stuff on my computer with like a shit ton of Docker servers running together + deployment and I never reached 13GB!
Without disclosing private company information lol what are you doing ;)
not OP, but I have to run fronted and backend of a project in docker simultaneously (multiple postgres and redis dbs, queues, search index, etc., plus two webservers), plus a few browser tabs and two VSCode instances open, regularly pushes my machine over 15gb ram usage
pretty much like this
Running a suite of services in containers (DBs, DNS, reverse proxy, memcached, redis, elasticsearch, shared services, etc) plus a number of discreet applications that use all those things. My day-to-day usage hovers around 20GB with spikes to 32 (my max allocation) when I run parallelized test suites.
Dockers memory usage really adds up fast.
What do you bist that takes that much memory?
I bought one of the early M1s and bought into a lot of the early reviewers that claimed 8 was enough on the ARM architecture. Honestly, for most folks, it’s probably fine. For me, it’s not.
My wife and I use the M1 has a multi-account family machine. And we’re both experience design directors, so we both have RAM hog design apps open under our accounts. The poor little Mac just can’t handle all that abuse with 8 gigs.
Our old ass Intel Mac with 16gig of RAM had no problems keeping a ton of crap open.
The battery life and low heat are absolutely amazing on the M1. That stuff was a monumental upgrade. But we absolutely can’t be lazy and just leave crap open unless it’s actually needed.
The fact that Apple is selling “Pro” machine with 8 gigs is a joke. 8 would be fine for my folks who fart around on Facebook all day, but it’s not enough for a lot of heavy multimedia work.
8 megs of RAM? I didn't know they brought back the Macintosh II.
lol. Fixed. My brain is broken.
I dunno if you noticed or if that was the joke. But you said "8 megs" three times in your comment when I think you meant to say "8 gigs". 1 gigabyte ~ 1024 megabytes. Just wanted to let you know in case it wasn't a joke about how 8 wasn't enough. That's all, thank you!
lol. Apparently my brain is broken.
Actually, 1 gigabyte (109 B) is 1000 megabytes (106 B), while one gibibyte (230 B) corresponds to 1024 mebibytes (220 B). I know that in some circles, 1 GB is treated as 1 GiB, so I don't blame you. This system of quantities is standardised internationally in order to conform with the SI (mega must mean a million times and not 220 times), but many don't conform to it, such as Microsoft as far as I know.
I found for most CS-ish tasks 8GB is okay. I also bought an early M1 and haven't had too many problems outside of running VMs, which I expected. I purchased one of the stocked configurations at an Apple store, so there were slim pickings with 16GB of memory that weren't like double the price of the machine.
8GB RAM is what my phone has.
Having that in a laptop shows what they think of people buying their kit. They think you're only buying it so you can type easier on Facebook.
My phone was manufactured in 2022, cost under USD250, and has 8gb of ram. New phones generally come with 12gb or more.
TBF 8gb of ram on a phone is actually psychotic. You really shouldn't be doing all that much on a phone lol.
As engineers, we should never insert proprietary interfaces into our designs. We shouldn't obfuscate the design.
The motivation for these toxic practices comes from the business side because it's profitable. These people won't share the profits with you because they are psychopaths. Ultimately we are making more waste when electronics cannot be upgraded, maintained and repaired. It's bad for people and it's bad for the environment.
So much stuff in both the hardware and software world really annoys me and makes me think our future is shit the more I think about it.
Things could be so much better. Pretty much everything could be open and standardised, yet it isn't.
Software can be made in a way that isn't user-hostile, but that's not the way of things. Hardware could be repairable and open, without OEMs having to navigate a minefield of IP and patents, much of which shouldn't have been granted in the first place, or users having no ability to repair or upgrade their devices.
It's all so tiresome.
I think Napoleon said something similar to "the army is commanded by me and the sergeants"?
Well, not true anymore today. All this connectivity and processing power, however seemingly inefficiently they are used, allow to centralize the world more than it could ever be. No need to consider what sergeants think.
(Which also means no Napoleons, cause much more average, grey, unskilled and generally unpleasant and uninteresting people are there now.)
It's about power and it happened in the last 15 years.
I think it's a political tendency, very intentional for those making decisions, not a "market failure" and other smartassery. It comes down to elites making laws. I feel they are more similar to Goering than to Hitler all over the world today.
This post may seem nuts, but our daily lives significantly depend on things more complex and centralized in supply chains and expertise than nukes and spaceships.
We don't need desktop computers which can't be fully made in, say, Italy, or at least in a few European countries taken together. Yes, this would mean kinda going back to late 90s at best in terms of computing power per PC, but we waste so much of it on useless things that our devices do less now than then.
We trade a lot of unseen security for comfort.
Apple said some pretty dumb things to defend that 8gb, but let’s not pretend that most manufacturers do the same thing.
For years people have known it can’t be upgraded. You know that going in.
No one complains that video cards on (most) laptops can’t be replaced, yet many of them wind up being useless for anything but daily tasks.
For years people have known it can’t be upgraded. You know that going in.
Not sure that is true, lots of people see the marketing for a MacBook and think that any of them will be enough. Or see the price difference and think they are getting a good deal, or don't understand why that is. I've had to tell people, sorry I know you spent a lot of money on this, but it does not have the storage for what you are wanting to do. Yes, the only way is to buy another one.
Otherwise yea, everyone tries to gaslight customers into thinking they didn't get ripped off.
Sure, some people buy a computer without knowing anything about the computer.
Unified memory is not user accessible. If you think you’ll need additional memory, it’s a good idea to upgrade now.
They say it right there. Should it be red and flashing? Should there be a confirm button?
If you go into the Apple Store, someone who is trained to help is always available, and various models are typically in stock.
I’d like to firmly repeat, that Apple never should’ve said that bullshit. Also I feel that 16 gigs should be the standard amount for any Apple laptop. They are premium products. Perhaps the Mac Mini could start at 8.
And since you pulled out the gaslight, I’ll call you a misinformed accuser.
Granted, I'm a developer and my dev ide already uses a good 10+GB, I have probably hundreds of tabs and windows open over 6 desktops... But I got 64GB, and I'm considering upgrading to 128, and these clowns think 8 is okay today? My development laptop of like 10 years ago has 8GB
I've been okay with 16 for a while. I use ViM as my editor, and occasionally VSCode. I use a single desktop, but I generally have a half dozen or more tmux tabs for various parts of the project.
That said, I've been feeling a bit squeezed with 16GB. The main RAM consumers are:
- Firefox - I frequently have 100 tabs open, so it takes a few GBs RAM
- Docker - running most of our app (a dozen or so microservices) takes 3-4GB if I'm careful about turning stuff off that I don't need, 5-6 if I'm not
- Teams and Slack - especially during calls, these use a lot
So I think 16GB should be the minimum, and 24GB should be average. I'm going to be adding another 16GB to my personal development machine (hobbies and whatnot), and my work laptop can't be upgraded (MacBook), but I'll be upgrading to an M3 or M4 soonish and will request more RAM.
8GB is probably fine if you're just running a browser and that's it. If you're doing anything else, 16GB should be the minimum.
I have 16GB and I have to run shit I dev on local k8s. I have to close teams and my browser to get enough ram sometimes.
Buy more memory, if you have the financial means to do so. If not then I'm sorry you're in that situation
Of course they do.
Apple is acting like this article does not exist.
My X220 and T520 each have 16GB. The designed max was actually "only" 8GB, but it turns out 16 GB actually works. I replaced the RAM modules myself without asking Lenovo for permission. Those models came out in 2011.
This was also true for Apple computers before they started soldering the ram in place. I remember going way over spec in my old G4 tower. Hell, I doubt the system would crash if you found larger ram chips and soldered them in.
I doubt the system would crash if you found larger ram chips and soldered them in.
You can't even swap components with official ones from other upgraded models. Everything is tied down with verification codes and shit nowadays. So I doubt you could solder in new ram and get it to work.
My HP Omen 17" was designed for a maximum of 32GB ram. I'm currently running 64GB on it.
Yeah lol my thinkcentre with a 6gen intel had only 8GB (I paid under 100€ for it) so I went shopping to double that on a second hand site, but the price for 4, 8 or the 16GB ddr4 ram stick (sodimm, there seems to be a flood of used ones) I bought was about the same, like 30€ shipping included, so now I got 24GB.
My students with the 8gb version struggle to do basic audio work with only a few plugins. This is BS from apple. Unless you use your computer only for web browsing, in which case you shouldn't get a stupid mac in the first place.
To be fair I have no idea why audio plugins need so much ram
Latency is a bitch. If you want anything to run on real time with zero latency, then it means everything, including those pretty large sample data, has to be stored as close to the processor as possible. Compressing/decompressing takes a shit tonne of time and effort, and to keep both delay down and fidelity up, you have to pay in absurd amounts of RAM to the DAW shrine.
i have more ram on my old gpu apple sucks
A friend has a phone with more ram.
all my phones have more ram since like 2015
Even the PC manufacturers selling "gaming" PCs using integrated graphics aren't usually this brazen about it.
Isn't "it's good enough for most users" a little too close to "it's good enough to be bought, used for a bit, and then tossed"? Usually computers that were adequate for X stop being able to do X. There's little to no margin and you can't upgrade it?
Even if they are right, no one cares and it will always be a bad look.
I'm fine with this.
I mean, I have no interest in an 8GB machine, but it's also fair to say that there definitely are people who are fine with it, and who would like to save the money. Say you've got four kids and you're buying them all laptops -- I dunno if that's the thing parents do these days, or whether kids typically just get by on smartphones or what. And sometimes they get broken or whatnot, and you're paying for the other expenses associated with those kids. That money adds up.
Apple runs a walled garden, unless things have changed in recent years while I wasn't watching. They tried opening up to third-party hardware vendors back around 2000 with some third-party PowerPC vendors, found that too many users were buying that hardware instead of theirs, and killed off the clone vendors. That means that if you want to use MacOS, you have to buy Apple hardware. And so there's good reason to have a broad range of offerings from Apple, even some that are higher-end or lower-end than the typical user might want, because Apple is the only option that MacOS users have. If I want to run Linux on a machine with 2GB of memory, I can do it, and if I want to run Linux on a machine with 256GB GB of memory, I can do it. MacOS users need to have an offering from Apple to do that.
Plus, I assume that these are running some form of solid-state storage, which makes hitting virtual memory a lot less painful than was the case in the past.
Save money, buy an Apple computer. Choose one.
The thing is that Apple charges three kidneys per gigabyte over 8 GB.
If you've got four kids and you're buying them all laptops, I don't think buying them all Macs and "saving money" by getting cut-down machines with too little memory (or whatever other hobbling Apple may cook up now or later) is exactly the smart play. You would need to have a very compelling reason to absolutely have to run MacOS to the exclusion of everything else which if we're honest, most people don't.
A Lenovo IdeaPad Slim, just to pick an example out of a hat that contains many other options, costs half as much as the low spec 2024 Macbook Air the article is spotlighting while having double the RAM, double the SSD, and, you know, ports. For the cost of a 8GB Macbook Pro you could buy a Legion Slim with an i7 and an RTX4060 in it and have change left over, a machine which would blow that Mac out of the water.
There are a lot of things you can say about Macbooks, but being a good value for the money is consistently never one of them.
We both have 8GB Airs in our house, an M1 and an M2. They run just fine.
I agree. But we still have to listen to all the bitching.
Lmao I'd take my chonky ass dell laptop with expandable ram any day of the week
my w520 would win in a fist fight against the latest macbook, hell any of them ever produced.
I get upgrades help the bottom line but considering that 8GB of RAM chokes the silicon they are allegedly so proud of... seems like a slap in the face to their own engineers (and the customer as well but that is not my point).
Like the upper management and C-suite give a fuck about any of their employees.
I also can not figure out why so many companies are selling them with only a 500Gb drive. SSD or HDD.
So they can charge more for an upgrade. Simple business tactics.
Don't forget cloud services!
I can't believe I'm reading this in 2024
Cant have users getting all uppity with excess memory after all
I mean. It makes sense. The vast majority of people buying apple computers are loyalists or people that simply need an Internet/word processor.
And if you want to develop in apple then you have to spend a massive premium for their higher end hardware.
Their CPUs are actually really good now, when the apps are actually optimized for them. Especially in single core, they are very competitive with top Intel or AMD chips while being way more power efficient.
ex: in Geekbench 5.1 single core the M2 max gets 1967 points (85%) compared to 2311 points from the 7950X3D and 2369 from the 14900k. The M2 max (12 cores (8 p + 4 e), 12 threads) can draw a maximum of 36 watts while the 7950X3D (16 cores, 32 threads) can draw around 250 watts, and the 14900k (16 cores (8 p + 16 e), 32 threads) can draw around 350 watts.
Apple's GPUs are definitely lacking though, in terms of performance.
Ya. Their CPUs are really good. Got to give credit where credit is due.
I haven't used 8GB since... 2008 or so? TBF, I'm a power user (as are most people on any Lemmy instance, I presume), but still...
And sure, Mac OS presumably uses less RAM than Windows, but all the applications don't.
Apple has been really stretching their takes lately. Nice to see some fire under their ass though it's not going to matter. Too many ignorant people falling for likeable propaganda.
does that mean people wont be able to use chrome in their macs?
One tab only.
what a weird title bro, of course they argue in favor of it, they sell the fucking hardware that they created. Be a little weird if they just argued against it after spending billions designing and manufacturing it.
Regardless, i still can't believe apple thought 8GB minimum was ok, genuinely baffling to me.
of course they will, it is for profit
To be fair, M-series Macs are pretty insanely efficient with memory. Unless you’ve actually used one extensively, I can understand the attitudes here…BUT:
I’ve done broadcast animation for many years, and back in ‘21 delivered an entire season of info/explainer-type pieces for a network show — using Motion, Cinema 4D, and After Effects (+ Ai and Ps) — all of it running on a base-level, first-gen M1 Mini (8/256). Workflow was fast and smooth; even left memory-pig apps running in the background most of the time…not one hiccup. Oh, and everything was delivered in 4k.
So 8gb actually is plenty for most folks…even professionals doing some heavy lifting. Sure I’d go for 16 next one, but damn I was/am still impressed. (Maybe it sucks for gaming, I don’t do that so have no clue).
It's clear that the M3 MacBooks are noticably slower with 8GB or RAM than with 16GB for various tasks, though, including photo & video editing, and 3D rendering.
Sure, 8GB gets the job done but why are Apple selling "professional" grade laptops in this price range that clearly require additional memory to reach peak performance?
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
videos showing how the M3 MacBooks struggle with 8GB of RAM
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
It doesn't matter how 'insanely efficient' they are. If your tasks need to use more than 8Gb of memory you are going to run out and start swapping to disk.
8gb worth of data is not heavy lifting for professional use.
It mostly just shows how crazy fast modern SSDs are that they can do swap duties with performance that is acceptable to many people. The SSD in my MacBook Pro can read/write at 5-6 GB/s. That means it can write out the whole 8 GB of memory of one of those smaller machines in under 2 seconds. As long as your current task fits in 8 GB and you're fine waiting 2 seconds to switch between apps...
To be fair, at the price point of Macs, 16GB is easily achievable.
I'll admit I don't use Macs, so maybe they are more efficient than the Linux and windows machines I work off...
...but I typically use machines with 64GB and recently upgraded my personal machine to 128GB. I still swap about 50GB to my SSD from time to time.
And I'm not doing heavy graphic design or movie editing stuff.
I cannot fathom for the life of me how 8GB would ever be feasible.
How the fuck are you using that much ram of you aren't doing "heavy duty" stuff????
I just said I'm not doing graphic design or movie editing. I typically have 10 different browser profiles open to separate data / bookmarks, maybe 8 email accounts in tabs and Outlook (if not on Linux), 4-8 VS code windows, a mix of jetbrains rider or visual studio instances, a smattering mix of postman/SQL server/azure data studio/thunder client, among other things like PDFs and documents. And then multiple docker containers and other local running servers.
The swap usually comes in when I'm parsing a data file or something.
It's worth mentioning that windows will use as much ram as possible just because it can and leave available with what it considers "reasonable"
I get the sense that a lot of people here don’t use MacOS.
I have a few ARM and Intel Macs in 8 and 16gig configs, and I do a lot of heavy multimedia work. My 8 gig M1 only really gets into trouble when my partner and I both have an account with files open in bloated creative software. One pro user, and it’s usually fine. 2 active accounts with shitty creative software running, and you get a few beach balls.
There are a ton of benchmark videos on YouTube. I saw one recently for the new MacBook Air comparing the 8/16/24 GB models. They found that 8GB was significantly slower than 16GB for tasks like exporting video, but there was no difference between 16 and 24 gb.
I get the sense that a lot of people here don’t use MacOS.
I wish that was true.
Interesting to know for sure! I guess I can't speak to what they're doing for optimizations first hand, but at the same time...my 128GB cost me like $300 on sale so, I dunno, a wash? Haha.
I've tried to become a Mac convert a few times, mostly peer pressure, but I just haven't been able to do it successfully yet.
Do you understand kernel memory management fundamentals? I'm asking because what you wrote here strongly suggests otherwise - so, unless you're able to show me I'm wrong, I'm going to stick with my conclusion that this is all incorrect and likely complete bullshit.
You seem particular in a way that is breathtakingly unfun.
You do you.
I have a five year old MBP here with 16 gigs of RAM and it runs the latest version of macOS. I can run multiple web browsers with dozens of open tabs, VS Code, an LLM, and a video editing app on it, all simultaneously, without breaking a sweat.
IDK what Apple's secret sauce is but their shit just works better than everyone else's, that's a fact.
Dude, that's how much RAM I used to have on a super high-end dev box at work with 56 cores. It was very helpful for compiling Chrome. WTF are you doing with a personal machine that needs that much RAM?
It's okay if you run efficient OS on it, not the case.
OSX is waaaay more memory efficient than windows…
Yeah my blueprint of efficient os it isn't Windows also.
The recent stats I've seen indicate macOS usually uses more ram
Anything is way more efficient than windows. That's very low(or high, but you need to go under it) bar.
Can your macos run on router with 32MB RAM? Or on most powerful supercomputer? Or both?
Have you used an 8 gig ARM Mac?
I’m pretty brutal on my machines, and if my 8 gig m1 really only starts to beach ball when multiple accounts are open, and those accounts all have bloated multimedia software running.
My 16 gig machines can handle that use case fine, but the 8 gig machine will occasionally beach ball.
Personally, I won’t buy an 8 gig config again. But I’m a fucking monster that leaves a million bloated things open across multiple active user sessions.
And it’s not RAM, it’s UM for an SoC. The usage of memory changed with the introduction of Apple Silicon.
"Unified" only means there's not a discrete block for the CPU and a discrete block for the GPU to use. But it's still RAM- specifically, LPDDR4x (for M1), LPDDR5 (for M2), or LPDDR5X (for M3).
Besides, low-end PCs with integrated graphics have been using unified memory for decades- no one ever said "They don't have RAM, they have UM!"