Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Therefore I think he deserves a little more than such wording in a response to another poster!
Fair enough, i agree, and yes, he did help me quite a bit, so i am sorry if i came across in a bad way.
However, his post describing me choosing extra RAM for my new Mac is, how did he put it, spending "it on bells and whistles you think you MIGHT need to protect yourself from the 'needing, but not having' scenario" is ridiculous. Now, you might back him up on that, but in my opinion it is ridiculous.
 
There's really nothing wrong with being torn about something. There's also really nothing wrong about asking for advice to a certain point.

However, at some point, you know what your priorities are and where you are torn and the only details you are missing are details only you can provide the correct answer to and you definitely got to the point where you went back and forth on it publicly to a needless degree.

At some point, it's on you to determine what your priorities are and then to research (there are TONS of really good YouTube content out there from people picking apart every possible difference between these processors on these Macs to determine what's better for anyone's given needs; there are also articles by Mac publications doing the same thing).

Not saying it wasn't fun going back and forth with you about it. But it was definitely a needless exercise well before it stopped.



Hey man, it's your money at the end of the day. Spend it on bells and whistles you think you MIGHT need to protect yourself from the "needing, but not having" scenario all you want. But, be honest with yourself and with those that have stepped forward to volunteer to help you out about that being a critical priority. Otherwise, you're wasting other people's time and that's not cool.
Ok, man. Sorry if i came across a bit bad/harsh, really didnt mean it that way. Thank you a lot for you advise and help, it does mean a lot to me, and i really appreciate the time you took to explain things to me.
However, I just dont understand how me opting for more RAM in my new, rather expensive btw (!), Mac purchase that will have to last me for years to come is me spending my money "on bells and whistles you think you MIGHT need to protect yourself from the 'needing, but not having' scenario"! What? If im not mistaken, RAM is NOT a unnecessary or non-functional (definition of bells and whistles) part of a computer to upgrade! Rather important, i would argue, no?
And since getting a M1 Max MBP with 64GB of RAM and maxed out gpu brand new from B&H is very similar in price to a M2 Pro with half the ram, and almost half the GPU cores (which are not completely useless!), i consider my decision to not be a very bad financial decision either. I might not use all if those gpu cores, but the 64gb of RAM and double the external monitor support are sure as heck a reason to pick what i picked.
I havent bought it yet, but planning to do so in a week or so.
Will update y'all if anybody cares about that here...
 
Fair enough, i agree, and yes, he did help me quite a bit, so i am sorry if i came across in a bad way.
However, his post describing me choosing extra RAM for my new Mac is, how did he put it, spending "it on bells and whistles you think you MIGHT need to protect yourself from the 'needing, but not having' scenario" is ridiculous. Now, you might back him up on that, but in my opinion it is ridiculous.
Come on, I am sure you can do better than that…!

Where did I back up @Yebubbleman on the statements he made, especially on the one(s) that you now stated? By stating that there is no right or wrong, as it’s all relative, depending on the individual point of view? So, whatever you may call “back him up on that” I dare to call, plain and simple, tolerance and respect against other opinions! By the way, if you read very carefully all the postings (and maybe even have a look into my signature), I never ever supported (nor criticized!) @Yebubbleman stated opinion, why would I? Just because I also use a MacBook Pro with “all the bells and whistles”… or because I have learned to deal with the opinions of other people in such topics? Different people, different opinions… all fine!

Again, you do not need to agree with his opinion, not at all. But using such phrases in the response to another poster is simply inappropriate, no discussion in here for me.

These forums are really “interesting“ places…!

Herbert
 
  • Love
Reactions: Yebubbleman
Come on, I am sure you can do better than that…!

Where did I back up @Yebubbleman on the statements he made, especially on the one(s) that you now stated? By stating that there is no right or wrong, as it’s all relative, depending on the individual point of view? So, whatever you may call “back him up on that” I dare to call, plain and simple, tolerance and respect against other opinions! By the way, if you read very carefully all the postings (and maybe even have a look into my signature), I never ever supported (nor criticized!) @Yebubbleman stated opinion, why would I? Just because I also use a MacBook Pro with “all the bells and whistles”… or because I have learned to deal with the opinions of other people in such topics? Different people, different opinions… all fine!

Again, you do not need to agree with his opinion, not at all. But using such phrases in the response to another poster is simply inappropriate, no discussion in here for me.

These forums are really “interesting“ places…!

Herbert
Ok, fine. Fair enough. These forums are great and very valuable sources of information (for sure, and i dont mean it sarcastically one bit, y'all are great guys here:)), but sometimes things can get "interesting" as you said...and i support and understand your view on different opinions, its all fine! My bad.
 
Come on, I am sure you can do better than that…!

Where did I back up @Yebubbleman on the statements he made, especially on the one(s) that you now stated? By stating that there is no right or wrong, as it’s all relative, depending on the individual point of view? So, whatever you may call “back him up on that” I dare to call, plain and simple, tolerance and respect against other opinions! By the way, if you read very carefully all the postings (and maybe even have a look into my signature), I never ever supported (nor criticized!) @Yebubbleman stated opinion, why would I? Just because I also use a MacBook Pro with “all the bells and whistles”… or because I have learned to deal with the opinions of other people in such topics? Different people, different opinions… all fine!

Again, you do not need to agree with his opinion, not at all. But using such phrases in the response to another poster is simply inappropriate, no discussion in here for me.

These forums are really “interesting“ places…!

Herbert
I noticed you have too many bells and whistles on your 16" MBP, according to Yebubbleman;)
(Not meaning to troll btw, dont report me...)
 
Okay, back to computers and your selection process...!

Also, what about the battery life on the M2 Max? What did i get wrong?
I do not know if you got something wrong, therefore let´s clarify this topic:

I hope you do not assume that you have a battery life of 18+ hours when doing serious work, for example heavy editing of photos and videos, on your MacBook Pro!

Apple is very specific how their stated battery life is tested. The example below is for the M2, but for the M1 it will be similar:

Testing conducted by Apple in November and December 2022 using preproduction 16‑inch MacBook Pro systems with Apple M2 Pro, 12‑core CPU, 19‑core GPU, 16GB of RAM, and 1TB SSD. The wireless web test measures battery life by wirelessly browsing 25 popular websites with display brightness set to 8 clicks from bottom. The Apple TV app movie playback test measures battery life by playing back HD 1080p content with display brightness set to 8 clicks from bottom. Battery life varies by use and configuration. See apple.com/batteries for more information.
Therefore, as heavier the load as shorter the battery life! Until now I didn´t do any real testing in here on my computer, but I would assume that when doing "my standard" photo editing I would end up anywhere around 10-12 hours at best. But again, that´s just an assumption!

However, i also thought about it and realized how the smaller 14" model could be really nice when traveling/on the go, because it fits into backpacks better and is lighter and overall is much more wieldy than the 16".
Overall absolutely correct, but maybe you want to consider a few things in here:

First and foremost, what is your definition of traveling and on the go? How often will this occur?
In easy terms: Will you have your computer with you a lot of times, carrying it in a backpack while walking or driving a bicycle, traveling by air (also: restrictions reg. weight), working really a lot on the go? Or will you in reality just occasionally use it on the go, carry it just from your office to your carport and then transport it in your backseat from A to B?

How will you use your computer when traveling / on the go? Doing full scale work or, as an example, just download some images and or videos from your camera, cull the images and videos, and, if at all, do light edits?

Also important: As I understand, this new computer will be your main (and only?) computer. That´s definitely a different situation than having for example a desktop computer for the heavy lifting and a laptop for mobility.

You better evaluate and consider these aspects very carefully, otherwise you will end up with a solution that doesn´t cover your "real" needs and usage!

I noticed you have too many bells and whistles on your 16" MBP, according to Yebubbleman
Maybe yes, maybe no...!

Maybe it helps when I try to explain my very personal selection process that finally concluded in buying my actual computer.

Until a few weeks ago an "aged" 15" MacBook Pro Retina (Mid 2012) w/ 16GB of RAM and a 750GB SSD was the only computer in our household, tasked with everything. Tasks to be handled: Everything what a computer normally does plus photo editing for me (pure amateur) and my wife (doing privately, but not professionally, event shootings).
Considering that we purchased the computer in 2013 it definitely amortized it´s invest, but since 2-3 years it really showed it´s age and limitations.
Mac OS Catalina was the last OS the computer could (officially) handle, over time this led to the situation that we couldn´t use anymore the most actual updates of programs like LrC and PS, at the end not anymore for MS Office. Also, working for example with images got really slow... processing an image in Topaz DeNoise took anywhere from 2-5 minutes. Today I process the same image in less than 5 sec!
Conclusion: It´s time for a new computer!

The decision for a laptop: No, we do not really need it´s mobility, it lives most of the time on the desk, connected via a TB hub to the periphery like monitor and external data storage, but the few times need / want mobility it´s available.

The decision for a M2 was easy: The most actual version of the MacBook Pro series; no possibility to get here, where we live, refurbished "older" models, at least not officially or so expensive that it doesn´t make any sense; my philosophy "you get what you pay for"; finally also being interested in technology.

The bells and whistles, means SSD size and amount of memory: As stated, as well my wife as I use this computer, means two user profiles, as a result automatically more data (and with a smile in my face, my wife has no problem filling data storage faster than I can organize and clean); the bigger SSD also allows me to keep data, that benefits from a fast data storage medium (for example LrC catalog), on the internal SSD, which is way faster than every external SSD; my very personal opinion that 32 GB of memory today is the minimum to be considered when you do things like photo editing; going for 64 GB allows easily to work on both accounts at the same time, without always closing all applications before switching (another fight with my wife avoided!); and yes, more memory makes the machine, also from my point of view, simply a little more "future proof", if that´s possible at all.

Cost: Yes, this new computer was expensive, even more so where we live (Mexico); no, I do not have the Pesos lying around, waiting to be given away; but I see the money spent as an invest that I do not do every day, speak 1-2 years, therefore it is worth it for me! If this machine again gives me 5-6 years of normal usage it has again earned it´s money!

Summary: I am satisfied and happy with our new computer! No, I do not "need" the performance of such a machine, will most likely never ever use it to it´s full potential... at least not within the near future. But this machine has what I want(ed), I could afford it, so why not going for it?! Other people think different, act different... all fine for me. We are all different!

Herbert
 
I was sort of in the same boat, I say sort of not because of pro usage (I'm not) but was buying around the time the M2 Macbook Pros came out.

I compared all available info & opted for a M1 MacBook Pro.

Aside from the obvious differences that others have made regards to wifi, hdmi, price/performance, there is one thing missed as I did & would've meant that I went for the M2 instead.

It's hard to believe it's not been mentioned & that's the inclusion of the U1 chip on the M2.

This means it's easier to locate in find my (no more annoying messages / heart attacks that you've left your MacBook behind) & can be bricked in the unfortunate event that it gets lost or stolen when not connected to the Internet & plays nicer with airdrop.

Obviously ymmv, it may never leave your house, but had I known this when getting mine, there would've been no competition, it would've been the M2 all day long.
 
It's hard to believe it's not been mentioned & that's the inclusion of the U1 chip on the M2.
While I can find explanations what the U1 chip is and what it does I cannot find any information that it is included in the MacBook Pro M2. Would you mind providing a link regarding this topic?

Herbert
 
I was sort of in the same boat, I say sort of not because of pro usage (I'm not) but was buying around the time the M2 Macbook Pros came out.

I compared all available info & opted for a M1 MacBook Pro.

Aside from the obvious differences that others have made regards to wifi, hdmi, price/performance, there is one thing missed as I did & would've meant that I went for the M2 instead.

It's hard to believe it's not been mentioned & that's the inclusion of the U1 chip on the M2.

This means it's easier to locate in find my (no more annoying messages / heart attacks that you've left your MacBook behind) & can be bricked in the unfortunate event that it gets lost or stolen when not connected to the Internet & plays nicer with airdrop.

Obviously ymmv, it may never leave your house, but had I known this when getting mine, there would've been no competition, it would've been the M2 all day long.
Also, M2 has additional tens of thousands of hours of Apple engineering beyond M1. The effects of all those engineering hours are in addition to issues of WiFi, HDMI, etc. upgrades and do not necessarily present as overt metrics. IMO the upgrade M1 to M2 is very substantive, much more than the simplistic reported ~20% improvement in benchmarks suggests.
 
Fair enough, i agree, and yes, he did help me quite a bit, so i am sorry if i came across in a bad way.
However, his post describing me choosing extra RAM for my new Mac is, how did he put it, spending "it on bells and whistles you think you MIGHT need to protect yourself from the 'needing, but not having' scenario" is ridiculous. Now, you might back him up on that, but in my opinion it is ridiculous.
You were considering 16GB of RAM. If you were seriously considering 16GB of RAM, then 64GB of RAM is not something you'll need or even likely appreciate. So, one of two things are true:

Either:

(a) You would've been just fine with 32GB of RAM because 16GB was an option you were seriously considering for your needs; in which case, 64GB is an overkill "bells and whistles" feature

OR

(b) You really did need 64GB of RAM, in which case, considering 16GB of RAM (therefore prompting me to advise you get 32GB of RAM) was both wrong and misleading on your part.


Either way, you did sort of waste my time and are ridiculing the advice I did give you, which I don't particularly appreciate. Not saying you have to agree with it (there are others on here who believe that opting for more features does protect you against the "wanting, but not having" scenario that, with Apple Silicon Macs, requires a wholesale machine replacement; and while I don't think it's necessary in your case, there are some for whom that strategy is an important guiding principle). But asking for it and then ridiculing it? That sort of kills whatever interest I had in helping you to begin with.

Incidentally, with Apple's technical specs page, review sites like Ars Technica, The Verge, Macworld, Mac|Life, and Engadget, and several others, as well as YouTube channels like MaxTech, Luke Miani, MKBHD, Rene Ritchie, and several others, you HAVE the resources to actually discern just how much difference all of these Apple chips have from each other! Incidentally, you had enough input from people by page 4 of this thread, to give you everything you needed to finally sit by yourself and mull this crap over because, by that point, it was only about what trade-offs/compromises are important to you and you alone.

Why this thread is still going on Page 7 is absolutely beyond me. Take a break from Macrumors.com, go do research, go do some soul-searching, buy your MacBook Pro, and then be done with it. Any thing else, at this point is needless wheel spinning that doesn't help you or anyone trying to help you.
 
My search engine defines the term "bells and whistles" as: Extra features added for show rather than function; fancy additions or features. Calling RAM and GPU/CPU cores bells and whistles is just wrong and insulting. RAM and GPU/CPU cores literally define the competence of any new MBP.

For a workload that, as originally described, is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY to push the boundaries of 32GB of RAM DURING THE SUPPORTED LIFETIME of the MacBook Pro in question, 64GB of RAM definitely qualifies as bells and whistles.

There are some workloads for which 64GB is absolutely not bells and whistles. Casual 4K/6K editing and RAW photography in Lightroom doesn't strike me as being among them based on (a) my time actually working with people that also use Lightroom heavily and (b) the research I've done on the actual capabilities of these chips with these workloads.

Yes, you can account for the future all you want, but to a point, it becomes silly. I'm not going to buy an M1 Ultra or M2 Ultra Mac Studio instead of an M1 Mac mini for casual use cases just on the off-chance that the added power saves me from having to upgrade the computer sooner (especially when statistics are showing us that this is not how Apple draws up lines between what is going to get an OS update versus what won't).

Similarly, for how I use a Mac, it would be utterly silly for me to get anything beyond a Pro SoC because I'll never actually use the added features that come in Max or Ultra.

For someone doing intense After Effects work, I would not assume the same of them. I'd tell that person to get an M2 Max 16-inch MacBook Pro or M2 Max Mac Studio at the minimum and that'd be that.

Again, 4K/6K can be done on the M1 MacBook Air comfortably. Hell, Apple demoed the DTK running an A12Z that could do 4K and 6K comfortably. Unless someone is literally breathing down your neck wondering why your work wasn't done yesterday, a Pro SoC will not make a substantial difference over its contemporary Max SoC for Lightroom workloads. I'd imagine, it'll make even less of a difference as both M2 Pro and M2 Max age over the next several years.

And the words "you think you MIGHT need," although intended by you to denigrate the OP's analysis, instead get to an essential flaw of your own analysis: the fact that determining the optimal specs of a new box is about the future (2023-2028+), not about the past (2022-2023). So for any wise buyer evaluating a potential new computer purchase the analysis is about what one thinks one MIGHT need 2023-2028+. Imperfect to be sure, but that is the relevant analysis that needs to be done.

And, again, within reasonable limits, this logic still stands. If you are buying an M1 Pro or M2 Pro Mac, it's wiser to get 32GB than 16GB of RAM for this reason. Similarly, with standard M2 or even standard M1, it makes sense to get at least 16GB of RAM (if not 24GB on the M2) for this purpose. However, we'll need 16GB of RAM and 32GB of RAM as a baseline well before 64GB at the current rate.

Incidentally, the OP isn't even sure of their own NEEDS, and therefore determination of what those needs are (and therefore the quantity of "more than they think they'll need") is rather nebulous. If they were, this thread wouldn't have lasted anywhere near this long. Yes, we could say that the OP can guarantee no issue with a fully maxed out M2 Max 16-inch MacBook Pro with 96GB of RAM; but at some point, even that's excessive and unlikely to ever be appreciated beyond the peace of mind that "I got all the possible upgrades to forestall my eventual upgrade" can possibly provide.
 
For a workload that, as originally described, is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY to push the boundaries of 32GB of RAM DURING THE SUPPORTED LIFETIME of the MacBook Pro in question, 64GB of RAM definitely qualifies as bells and whistles.

There are some workloads for which 64GB is absolutely not bells and whistles. Casual 4K/6K editing and RAW photography in Lightroom doesn't strike me as being among them based on (a) my time actually working with people that also use Lightroom heavily and (b) the research I've done on the actual capabilities of these chips with these workloads.

Yes, you can account for the future all you want, but to a point, it becomes silly. I'm not going to buy an M1 Ultra or M2 Ultra Mac Studio instead of an M1 Mac mini for casual use cases just on the off-chance that the added power saves me from having to upgrade the computer sooner (especially when statistics are showing us that this is not how Apple draws up lines between what is going to get an OS update versus what won't).

Similarly, for how I use a Mac, it would be utterly silly for me to get anything beyond a Pro SoC because I'll never actually use the added features that come in Max or Ultra.

For someone doing intense After Effects work, I would not assume the same of them. I'd tell that person to get an M2 Max 16-inch MacBook Pro or M2 Max Mac Studio at the minimum and that'd be that.

Again, 4K/6K can be done on the M1 MacBook Air comfortably. Hell, Apple demoed the DTK running an A12Z that could do 4K and 6K comfortably. Unless someone is literally breathing down your neck wondering why your work wasn't done yesterday, a Pro SoC will not make a substantial difference over its contemporary Max SoC for Lightroom workloads. I'd imagine, it'll make even less of a difference as both M2 Pro and M2 Max age over the next several years.



And, again, within reasonable limits, this logic still stands. If you are buying an M1 Pro or M2 Pro Mac, it's wiser to get 32GB than 16GB of RAM for this reason. Similarly, with standard M2 or even standard M1, it makes sense to get at least 16GB of RAM (if not 24GB on the M2) for this purpose. However, we'll need 16GB of RAM and 32GB of RAM as a baseline well before 64GB at the current rate.

Incidentally, the OP isn't even sure of their own NEEDS, and therefore determination of what those needs are (and therefore the quantity of "more than they think they'll need") is rather nebulous. If they were, this thread wouldn't have lasted anywhere near this long. Yes, we could say that the OP can guarantee no issue with a fully maxed out M2 Max 16-inch MacBook Pro with 96GB of RAM; but at some point, even that's excessive and unlikely to ever be appreciated beyond the peace of mind that "I got all the possible upgrades to forestall my eventual upgrade" can possibly provide.
You say:
For a workload that, as originally described, is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY to push the boundaries of 32GB of RAM DURING THE SUPPORTED LIFETIME of the MacBook Pro in question, 64GB of RAM definitely qualifies as bells and whistles.

I say you are flat wrong and do not know what you are talking about. And I have performed reasonably similar work using Macs for decades.

You say:
I'm not going to buy an M1 Ultra or M2 Ultra Mac Studio instead of an M1 Mac mini for casual use

I say A) your purchase needs are irrelevant in this thread, B) no one has ever suggested an Ultra Studio versus a Mac Mini so your referencing it is intentionally counterproductive, C) "casual use" is your work not the OP's and D) FYI Adobe apps and their ilk have always liked RAM, more and more over the years.

Your suggestion that it
"is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY to push the boundaries of 32GB of RAM DURING THE SUPPORTED LIFETIME of the MacBook Pro"
and that
"64GB of RAM definitely qualifies as bells and whistles"
is flat wrong like I said before.
 
You say:
For a workload that, as originally described, is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY to push the boundaries of 32GB of RAM DURING THE SUPPORTED LIFETIME of the MacBook Pro in question, 64GB of RAM definitely qualifies as bells and whistles.

I say you are flat wrong and do not know what you are talking about. And I have performed reasonably similar work using Macs for decades.

Yeah? So, how is YOUR experience on an M2 Pro with 32GB of RAM then? Do tell me more about how you purchased THIS machine and found it insufficient for those tasks, because I'd love to hear it.

Otherwise, your "decades" of experience using an app that hasn't even been around for a full TWO decades doesn't seem to provide much here.

You say:
I'm not going to buy an M1 Ultra or M2 Ultra Mac Studio instead of an M1 Mac mini for casual use

I say A) your purchase needs are irrelevant in this thread, B) no one has ever suggested an Ultra Studio versus a Mac Mini so your referencing it is intentionally counterproductive, C) "casual use" is your work not the OP's and D) FYI Adobe apps and their ilk have always liked RAM, more and more over the years.

Calm down. I was using that as an example. Your stance is to buy as much computer as possible because the future is categorically unknown. My point with said example is that there comes a point wherein it's overkill relative to the hardware generation and how it ages until the point where Apple says that it can't get any more major macOS releases.

Your suggestion that it
"is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY to push the boundaries of 32GB of RAM DURING THE SUPPORTED LIFETIME of the MacBook Pro"
and that
"64GB of RAM definitely qualifies as bells and whistles"
is flat wrong like I said before.
Again, I would love to hear more about your experience editing photos on Lightroom on a MacBook Pro with 32GB of RAM (which has only been a possible thing since 2018) and how you've found 64GB to be necessary for that workflow, let alone an appreciable difference when compared to 32GB.

Would also love to hear your statistical analysis on how one will, within the next 5-7 years (or however long Apple keeps supporting M2 Pro based MacBook Pros and Mac minis), find this configuration with 32GB of RAM insufficient BEFORE Apple drops support for it for completely unrelated reasons. Because, without that, you are arguing your opinion based on empirical evidence, at best, and stating it as fact; and I can't really be bothered with much of that.
 
For a workload that, as originally described, is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY to push the boundaries of 32GB of RAM DURING THE SUPPORTED LIFETIME of the MacBook Pro in question, 64GB of RAM definitely qualifies as bells and whistles.

There are some workloads for which 64GB is absolutely not bells and whistles. Casual 4K/6K editing and RAW photography in Lightroom doesn't strike me as being among them based on (a) my time actually working with people that also use Lightroom heavily and (b) the research I've done on the actual capabilities of these chips with these workloads.

Yes, you can account for the future all you want, but to a point, it becomes silly. I'm not going to buy an M1 Ultra or M2 Ultra Mac Studio instead of an M1 Mac mini for casual use cases just on the off-chance that the added power saves me from having to upgrade the computer sooner (especially when statistics are showing us that this is not how Apple draws up lines between what is going to get an OS update versus what won't).

Similarly, for how I use a Mac, it would be utterly silly for me to get anything beyond a Pro SoC because I'll never actually use the added features that come in Max or Ultra.

For someone doing intense After Effects work, I would not assume the same of them. I'd tell that person to get an M2 Max 16-inch MacBook Pro or M2 Max Mac Studio at the minimum and that'd be that.

Again, 4K/6K can be done on the M1 MacBook Air comfortably. Hell, Apple demoed the DTK running an A12Z that could do 4K and 6K comfortably. Unless someone is literally breathing down your neck wondering why your work wasn't done yesterday, a Pro SoC will not make a substantial difference over its contemporary Max SoC for Lightroom workloads. I'd imagine, it'll make even less of a difference as both M2 Pro and M2 Max age over the next several years.



And, again, within reasonable limits, this logic still stands. If you are buying an M1 Pro or M2 Pro Mac, it's wiser to get 32GB than 16GB of RAM for this reason. Similarly, with standard M2 or even standard M1, it makes sense to get at least 16GB of RAM (if not 24GB on the M2) for this purpose. However, we'll need 16GB of RAM and 32GB of RAM as a baseline well before 64GB at the current rate. g

Incidentally, the OP isn't even sure of their own NEEDS, and therefore determination of what those needs are (and therefore the quantity of "more than they think they'll need") is rather nebulous. If they were, this thread wouldn't have lasted anywhere near this long. Yes, we could say that the OP can guarantee no issue with a fully maxed out M2 Max 16-inch MacBook Pro with 96GB of RAM; but at some point, even that's excessive and unlikely to ever be appreciated beyond the peace of mind that "I got all the possible upgrades to forestall my eventual upgrade" can possibly provide.
So youre trying to say that 64gb of ram is overkill? What do you mean? So doubling the ram in a system apparemtly doesnt affect for example photo stitching time? I would beg to differ!
Also, i am not exactly a novice to all of these youtube channels youve mentioned as "resources to actually discern just how much difference all of these Apple chips have from each other", which is straight up BS because i have watched almost all of their videos on these m1/m2 MBPs and they all dont give me any useful information, except "let's open 5 Chrome tabs and Lightroom while exporting 50 photos and see if we can get a spinning ball! MAKE SURE TO SUBSCRIBE, LIKE AND SHARE!!!!!". So, i turned to these forums (i can just see it, youll inject a "but you abused these forums ahhhh" in response to this) thinking that they could actually give me some real-world advice/info and yes, it did help, but as you can see it is now a mess.
Also, incase you didnt know, i need the ability to connect more than 2 monitors, which a Pro just doesnt support, so even if 64gb of ram is overkill on your mind, i still have to go Max
 
First and foremost, what is your definition of traveling and on the go? How often will this occur?
In easy terms: Will you have your computer with you a lot of times, carrying it in a backpack while walking or driving a bicycle, traveling by air (also: restrictions reg. weight), working really a lot on the go? Or will you in reality just occasionally use it on the go, carry it just from your office to your carport and then transport it in your backseat from A to B?

How will you use your computer when traveling / on the go? Doing full scale work or, as an example, just download some images and or videos from your camera, cull the images and videos, and, if at all, do light edits?

Also important: As I understand, this new computer will be your main (and only?) computer. That´s definitely a different situation than having for example a desktop computer for the heavy lifting and a laptop for mobility.
Thanks for helping.
Yes, this will be my ONLY and certainly main computer for EVERYTHING, whether it is documents, web browsing, or heavy lifting. That is why more RAM and good external display support is VERY important. I have mentioned this several times. Again, i dont have a desktop for heavy stuff and this for travel, this will be my ONLY/MAIN computer in my posession. This does change things drastically, yes.
On the go i will be just taking images from my camera and doing colour-correction/cropping/masking in Lr/LrC and denoising images with DXO PureRAW. In terms of video, i will be importing the videos from the camera into Davinci Resolve/FCPX and doing color editing, cropping, and cuts/transitions in the timeline. This, as i understand it, does not require a huge amount of RAM. I dont know what you mean by 'light edits'.When i get home I hook up several monitors (btw, i hate that the M1s only have hdmi 2.0, why?!) via thunderbolt and using it as a desktop for literally anything.
Now, the thing is, i will absolutely not be on the go a lot at all, but when i do, i want my laptop to be not a pain to transport and not too heavy in my bag. I know the 14 inch is perfect for this, but i think if i will not be traveling enough to take advantage of the 14" compactness and size a lot, then it is not worth it considering the much worse thermals, and less screen real estate compared to the 16 inch. I have a mid 2010 mbp 15", and i dont want less screen real estate than that unless i really need to have less, which i probably dont since i wont be on the go too much. I know i could get the 14 inch and then when i get home hook up monitors and id be fine in terms of screen, but having 16 inches of screen anywhere is just soo nice....
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Allen_Wentz
So youre trying to say that 64gb of ram is overkill? What do you mean? So doubling the ram in a system apparemtly doesnt affect for example photo stitching time? I would beg to differ!

Did I EVER say that it wouldn't affect photo stitching time? No. I did not.

I said that the differences in what you ORIGINALLY stated your needs and workflows were (goalposts for which you have changed all throughout this thread) wouldn't be substantial enough to be worth the trade-offs.

Please kindly stop putting words in my mouth, let alone to justify how you've conducted yourself in this thread. It is not appreciated.

Also, i am not exactly a novice to all of these youtube channels youve mentioned as "resources to actually discern just how much difference all of these Apple chips have from each other", which is straight up BS because i have watched almost all of their videos on these m1/m2 MBPs and they all dont give me any useful information, except "let's open 5 Chrome tabs and Lightroom while exporting 50 photos and see if we can get a spinning ball! MAKE SURE TO SUBSCRIBE, LIKE AND SHARE!!!!!".

Wait. Let me get this straight: You have multiple YouTube channels where people run various tests and benchmarks on these machines to closely simulate loads similar to the kinds of things your loads would tax in terms of hardware resources, and you're telling me that you are turning to a forum where the vast majority of those commenting in it don't use the specific machines you are considering buying for the specific workloads you are intending to buy them for?

How on Earth does that make any sense at all?

So, i turned to these forums (i can just see it, youll inject a "but you abused these forums ahhhh" in response to this) thinking that they could actually give me some real-world advice/info and yes, it did help, but as you can see it is now a mess.

You didn't abuse these forums. At least, not to my knowledge.

You just asked for advice that ultimately didn't mean anything and then jerked a fair amount of those giving you that advice around while you spun your wheels and changed your stories. First it was that you didn't know how much power you'd need; now, you're speaking about it like you know enough to have not needed to ask advice in the first place. Originally, your plight was something I could've sympathized with (even empathized with) before. Now, it's just irritating. But, no, you didn't abuse these forums. Just the time and energy of those who wanted to help you figure out what to buy when you seemingly didn't have the information to determine that.

Also, incase you didnt know, i need the ability to connect more than 2 monitors, which a Pro just doesnt support, so even if 64gb of ram is overkill on your mind, i still have to go Max
Yes, this was a need that you were wishy-washy about as of Page 5 of this now-7-page thread. Now, it's a need? I honestly can't take this seriously anymore. I'm done.
 
Last edited:
Wait. Let me get this straight: You have multiple YouTube channels where people run various tests and benchmarks on these machines to closely simulate loads similar to the kinds of things your loads would tax in terms of hardware resources, and you're telling me that you are turning to a forum where the vast majority of those commenting in it don't use the machines you are considering buying for the workloads you are intending to buy them for?

How on Earth does that make any sense at all?
I didnt know that! I thought people actually have real world experience here....
 
Yeah? So, how is YOUR experience on an M2 Pro with 32GB of RAM then? Do tell me more about how you purchased THIS machine and found it insufficient for those tasks, because I'd love to hear it.

Otherwise, your "decades" of experience using an app that hasn't even been around for a full TWO decades doesn't seem to provide much here.



Calm down. I was using that as an example. Your stance is to buy as much computer as possible because the future is categorically unknown. My point with said example is that there comes a point wherein it's overkill relative to the hardware generation and how it ages until the point where Apple says that it can't get any more major macOS releases.


Again, I would love to hear more about your experience editing photos on Lightroom on a MacBook Pro with 32GB of RAM (which has only been a possible thing since 2018) and how you've found 64GB to be necessary for that workflow, let alone an appreciable difference when compared to 32GB.

Would also love to hear your statistical analysis on how one will, within the next 5-7 years (or however long Apple keeps supporting M2 Pro based MacBook Pros and Mac minis), find this configuration with 32GB of RAM insufficient BEFORE Apple drops support for it for completely unrelated reasons. Because, without that, you are arguing your opinion based on empirical evidence, at best, and stating it as fact; and I can't really be bothered with much of that.
Please stop falsely restating my comments.
-----------------
You state: Your "decades" of experience using an app that hasn't even been around for a full TWO decades doesn't seem to provide much here.

What I said was "I have performed reasonably similar work using Macs for decades." That work primarily involved Photoshop since the 1990s and later the full Adobe Design Collection, Aperture and later the Affinity products; lots of film scans and Nikon DSLR captures (D100, D2x, D3, D500, D850). Reasonably similar work, for decades.

Also note that the OP faces real world computer work, and real world is not UTube bimbos (I use that derogatory term very intentionally, but not gender specific) playing at seeking clicks. Real world involves real workflows, usually with concurrent usage of multiple apps and OS/apps evolving over time.
-----------------
You state:
Yeah? So, how is YOUR experience on an M2 Pro with 32GB of RAM then? Do tell me more about how you purchased THIS machine and found it insufficient for those tasks, because I'd love to hear it.

What I said was "...determining the optimal specs of a new box is about the future (2023-2028+)." Optimal specs, not "found it insufficient." Your usage of the words sufficient/insufficient is at best misleading, because like I have said repeatedly the Mac OS memory management still allows a box to function even when lamed by sub-optimal RAM on board (see my personal-experience 16 GB example below). One individual (you) might consider a RAM-lamed, sub-optimal box sufficient, but I call that limiting.
-----------------
As to "how is YOUR experience on an M2 Pro with 32GB of RAM then?"

my answer is that I chose not to limit my new box to the Pro's half the GPU cores, half the memory bandwidth, lesser external display capability (I drive three 4K Viewsonics) and max of 32 GB RAM. Therefore I lack experience with the lesser Pro configuration. However I have no doubt that (except for the display-driving limitations) I would not in 2023 find such a box insufficient for my needs today but I would find it limiting by 2026 at the latest.
-----------------
You ask:
"Would also love to hear your statistical analysis on how one will, within the next 5-7 years (or however long Apple keeps supporting M2 Pro based MacBook Pros and Mac minis), find this configuration with 32GB of RAM insufficient BEFORE Apple drops support for it for completely unrelated reasons."

Answer: Specifically, time outgrew the (max available at the time) 16 GB RAM of my 2016 MBP. The RAM overloading presented circa 2020 as slower, less smooth operation, SBBODs, intermittent video issues on the 3 external displays, etc., requiring me to constantly quit apps not in immediate active use. The excellent Mac OS (Mojave, which is still getting upgrades) memory management still allowed the box to function; you might deem that sufficient, but I call it limiting. When I moved the workflow to an M2 Max MBP with 96 GB RAM it immediately took advantage of ~25-35 GB RAM. I am quite confident that (except for the display-driving limitations) today an M2 Pro with 32 GB RAM would qualify as sufficient for my needs today.

Which gets us to what you repeatedly fail to grasp: when buying a new box the analysis is about what one thinks one may need 2023-2028+, not about today. Which is where all that empirical experience doing reasonably similar work using Macs for decades comes in. OS/app demands on RAM always increase over time, so if a workflow is making good use of ~32 GB today one can anticipate that a similar workflow (with evolved OS and apps) will probably make good use of ~64 GB or more RAM in a few years.

That is empirical experience from years of buying Mac boxes and doing the work over decades, not UTube clickbaiting based on today only.

Note that 32 GB is 1/3 of the max RAM Apple offers in MBPs; that alone should give anyone a clue as to where Apple thinks (I would say knows) RAM usage will be going. It ain't rocket science: the RAM usage trend has now been a 40-year timeline with RAM usage always inexorably increasing.
-----------------
You state:
"...you are arguing your opinion based on empirical evidence, at best, and stating it as fact; and I can't really be bothered with much of that."

Correct, I am arguing my opinion based on decades of empirical evidence using Macs. I have found using more competent, less limited boxes impacts my state of mind and creativity in addition to the simplistic workflow operational speed metrics. It is (for me) a huge value add to not be constantly opening/closing apps, instead flying back and forth to various open tertiary apps on a whim, without even giving it a second thought.

Building FMP databases for years I learned that time is the enemy of computer based workflows. The longer an operation takes, the more likely it is that some potentially catastrophic hiccup will occur. Similarly, as a designer I found that the longer an operation takes, the more likely that some fleeting creative thought will get lost. Solid hardware competence, including avoiding being RAM-constrained, provides huge value add in both those regards; much more complex than simplistic sufficient versus insufficient. My experience says that +$400 for 32 GB more RAM is to me and to the OP very good life-cycle value.

Although my workflow is only similar, not identical to the OPs, my MBP mobile/desktop usage seems exactly the same as he describes his to be. The M2 Max MBP does everything moving desktop to mobile and back smoothly, whereas my previous MBP was the antithesis of smooth.
 
Last edited:
Also, M2 has additional tens of thousands of hours of Apple engineering beyond M1. The effects of all those engineering hours are in addition to issues of WiFi, HDMI, etc. upgrades and do not necessarily present as overt metrics. IMO the upgrade M1 to M2 is very substantive, much more than the simplistic reported ~20% improvement in benchmarks suggests.
Shout more?🙄
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Yebubbleman
Please stop falsely restating my comments.
-----------------
You state: Your "decades" of experience using an app that hasn't even been around for a full TWO decades doesn't seem to provide much here.

What I said was "I have performed reasonably similar work using Macs for decades." That work primarily involved Photoshop since the 1990s and later the full Adobe Design Collection, Aperture and later the Affinity products; lots of film scans and Nikon DSLR captures (D100, D2x, D3, D500, D850). Reasonably similar work, for decades.

Also note that the OP faces real world computer work, and real world is not UTube bimbos (I use that derogatory term very intentionally, but not gender specific) playing at seeking clicks. Real world involves real workflows, usually with concurrent usage of multiple apps and OS/apps evolving over time.
-----------------
You state:
Yeah? So, how is YOUR experience on an M2 Pro with 32GB of RAM then? Do tell me more about how you purchased THIS machine and found it insufficient for those tasks, because I'd love to hear it.

What I said was "...determining the optimal specs of a new box is about the future (2023-2028+)." Optimal specs, not "found it insufficient." Your usage of the words sufficient/insufficient is at best misleading, because like I have said repeatedly the Mac OS memory management still allows a box to function even when lamed by sub-optimal RAM on board (see my personal-experience 16 GB example below). One individual (you) might consider a RAM-lamed, sub-optimal box sufficient, but I call that limiting.
-----------------
As to "how is YOUR experience on an M2 Pro with 32GB of RAM then?"

my answer is that I chose not to limit my new box to the Pro's half the GPU cores, half the memory bandwidth, lesser external display capability (I drive three 4K Viewsonics) and max of 32 GB RAM. Therefore I lack experience with the lesser Pro configuration. However I have no doubt that (except for the display-driving limitations) I would not in 2023 find such a box insufficient for my needs today but I would find it limiting by 2026 at the latest.
-----------------
You ask:
"Would also love to hear your statistical analysis on how one will, within the next 5-7 years (or however long Apple keeps supporting M2 Pro based MacBook Pros and Mac minis), find this configuration with 32GB of RAM insufficient BEFORE Apple drops support for it for completely unrelated reasons."

Answer: Specifically, time outgrew the (max available at the time) 16 GB RAM of my 2016 MBP. The RAM overloading presented circa 2020 as slower, less smooth operation, SBBODs, intermittent video issues on the 3 external displays, etc., requiring me to constantly quit apps not in immediate active use. The excellent Mac OS (Mojave, which is still getting upgrades) memory management still allowed the box to function; you might deem that sufficient, but I call it limiting. When I moved the workflow to an M2 Max MBP with 96 GB RAM it immediately took advantage of ~25-35 GB RAM. I am quite confident that (except for the display-driving limitations) today an M2 Pro with 32 GB RAM would qualify as sufficient for my needs today.

Which gets us to what you repeatedly fail to grasp: when buying a new box the analysis is about what one thinks one may need 2023-2028+, not about today. Which is where all that empirical experience doing reasonably similar work using Macs for decades comes in. OS/app demands on RAM always increase over time, so if a workflow is making good use of ~32 GB today one can anticipate that a similar workflow (with evolved OS and apps) will probably make good use of ~64 GB or more RAM in a few years.

That is empirical experience from years of buying Mac boxes and doing the work over decades, not UTube clickbaiting based on today only.

Note that 32 GB is 1/3 of the max RAM Apple offers in MBPs; that alone should give anyone a clue as to where Apple thinks (I would say knows) RAM usage will be going. It ain't rocket science: the RAM usage trend has now been a 40-year timeline with RAM usage always inexorably increasing.
-----------------
You state:
"...you are arguing your opinion based on empirical evidence, at best, and stating it as fact; and I can't really be bothered with much of that."

Correct, I am arguing my opinion based on decades of empirical evidence using Macs. I have found using more competent, less limited boxes impacts my state of mind and creativity in addition to the simplistic workflow operational speed metrics. It is (for me) a huge value add to not be constantly opening/closing apps, instead flying back and forth to various open tertiary apps on a whim, without even giving it a second thought.

Building FMP databases for years I learned that time is the enemy of computer based workflows. The longer an operation takes, the more likely it is that some potentially catastrophic hiccup will occur. Similarly, as a designer I found that the longer an operation takes, the more likely that some fleeting creative thought will get lost. Solid hardware competence, including avoiding being RAM-constrained, provides huge value add in both those regards; much more complex than simplistic sufficient versus insufficient. My experience says that +$400 for 32 GB more RAM is to me and to the OP very good life-cycle value.

Although my workflow is only similar, not identical to the OPs, my MBP mobile/desktop usage seems exactly the same as he describes his to be. The M2 Max MBP does everything moving desktop to mobile and back smoothly, whereas my previous MBP was the antithesis of smooth.

You nailed it, and i truly appreciate the info, and have taken your input in the comment above to heart. Very important stuff there. TIME is VERY important. You only live once. The more time you wait for a program to open or something, the more fleeting thoughts and creative sparks are lost and maybe forever, thus making you get less done in life and spend less time with you dog, or loved ones, etc, and more on loading screens. Thats why galf a minute improvement in speed might not be very impressive/important to most, it adds up.
This thread is unfortunately probably turning in to a s$%*show
He's getting personal on this now, its not about computers anymore...
I would really like to hear more about your experience with using M chips doing very similar stuff to what i am planning to do, and RAM/buying recommendations maybe. I havent pullled the trigger on a M1 Max yet, no sufficient funds yet, so i can get something else, which im fine with if it will do what i need and is (yes, little higher budget) under 3500-4000 bucks. I do think as a workstation/desktop replacement it is important to be able to hook up 2-3 monitors, but honestly i have changed my mind a bit (yes, i know....): I probably will be fine with 2 minitors, thys a Pro chip is in considerstion again. However, not really since the Pro chips only support up to 32g of RAM, which will not IMO be very future-proof/long-lasting. But, i might get away with Pro chip with 16-32g of RAM for photo editing/video editing, but i think for stitching i will need 64g or more, but going Pro would be easier on the wallet. I dont know! Sorry if im driving yall crazy, especially you...just its a hard decision for me!
 
Last edited:
But, i might get away with Pro chip with 16-32g of RAM for photo editing/video editing, but i think for stitching i will need 64g or more, but going Pro would be easier on the wallet.

First part, strictly factual...! No, you do NOT NEED 64GB or more RAM for stitching! You may want to have it, but again... you do NOT NEED it!

If you do not want to believe that, have a look into this video:

At minute 13:38 Art starts talking about the Lightroom Panorama function and the results different SoC and amounts of RAM provide in such a test (which seems to reflect your stated use case). Some preliminary, very obvious conclusions:
a) You would NEED(!!!) 64GB of RAM if lower amounts of RAM could NOT handle the task!
b) As well 16GB as 32GB of RAM can handle the task, no indication that they struggle in any way!
c) Yes, different amounts of RAM result in different times to finalize such tasks!

As of this test, the difference in time to handle the task between the 16" M1 Max with 64GB of RAM and the 16" M2 Max with 32GB of RAM is 20 sec! The difference between the 16" M2 Max with 32GB of RAM and the 16" M2 Pro with 16GB of RAM is 41 sec!

Now lets put all this in perspective, just reflecting to 32GB vs 64GB:

Let´s say, you do 100 (!) of such panoramas a week. That means you will gain 33.3 min per week, means (rounded) 29 hours per year, considering you do your 100 (!) panoramas 52 (!) weeks a year!

Now, let´s even say the time difference would be a little bigger comparing a M2 Max w/ 64GB to M2 Mac w/32GB. So let´s use 20% of performance benefit in the calculation, what results then in a total gain of approx. 35 hours per year!

Let´s even go a step further and say you may gain more as you are working with larger and more files, not just the tested 14 x 36MP files. Let´s be really (!) generous and let´s say you gain another 200%. So this results in a final gain of approx. 105 hours per year, means (again very generous) approx. 5 days.

Hope you don´t mind if I spare us the same exercise with the comparison of a machine with 16GB vs 32Gb or even 64GB, I am sure we all can do that easily on our own.

The conclusion, at least from my point of view, out of this exercise: Yes, more RAM helps creating panoramas faster, means you gain time. But how much time you gain depends totally on the parameters of such a calculation. Yes, 5 days may be a lot, but what about if you only do 10 panoramas a week for 52 weeks a year, means 520 per year? How realistic is such a number? And what is then the gain?

Your statement about time, in the beginning of your last post...! Yes, time is important, no doubt about that, but the interpretation of time is also relative and may be seen by different people in a different context.

-----------------------------------------

Second part, now a little more direct and clear... and not just about computers!

This thread is unfortunately probably turning in to a s$%*show
He's getting personal on this now, its not about computers anymore...
You think this thread is "unfortunately probably turning in to a ..."? So, "he" is getting personal on this now...!

Hope you don´t mind when I dare to ask... what about your part in here, your responsibility considering the direction this thread finally took step by step? You did not get personal, it has not been you getting personal against "him" at first?

What about now finally taking really a step back, acknowledging... that you opened this thread, asked questions... that you are, at least in a certain way, completely lost... that you are, sorry to state it so hard, quite clueless regarding all these topics, something you not only proof more than once in your postings, you even admit(ted) it yourself... and then potentially come to the conclusion that your behavior in some situations, some of your statements, simply do not fit these facts.

Finally, personally I would not use such a phrase as you now used to describe this thread... maybe I am little more old school. I like much better descriptions like... Kindergarten, Kasperletheater! And everybody can think about his own role in there...!

Herbert
 
  • Love
Reactions: Yebubbleman
First part, strictly factual...! No, you do NOT NEED 64GB or more RAM for stitching! You may want to have it, but again... you do NOT NEED it!

If you do not want to believe that, have a look into this video:

At minute 13:38 Art starts talking about the Lightroom Panorama function and the results different SoC and amounts of RAM provide in such a test (which seems to reflect your stated use case). Some preliminary, very obvious conclusions:
a) You would NEED(!!!) 64GB of RAM if lower amounts of RAM could NOT handle the task!
b) As well 16GB as 32GB of RAM can handle the task, no indication that they struggle in any way!
c) Yes, different amounts of RAM result in different times to finalize such tasks!

As of this test, the difference in time to handle the task between the 16" M1 Max with 64GB of RAM and the 16" M2 Max with 32GB of RAM is 20 sec! The difference between the 16" M2 Max with 32GB of RAM and the 16" M2 Pro with 16GB of RAM is 41 sec!

Now lets put all this in perspective, just reflecting to 32GB vs 64GB:

Let´s say, you do 100 (!) of such panoramas a week. That means you will gain 33.3 min per week, means (rounded) 29 hours per year, considering you do your 100 (!) panoramas 52 (!) weeks a year!

Now, let´s even say the time difference would be a little bigger comparing a M2 Max w/ 64GB to M2 Mac w/32GB. So let´s use 20% of performance benefit in the calculation, what results then in a total gain of approx. 35 hours per year!

Let´s even go a step further and say you may gain more as you are working with larger and more files, not just the tested 14 x 36MP files. Let´s be really (!) generous and let´s say you gain another 200%. So this results in a final gain of approx. 105 hours per year, means (again very generous) approx. 5 days.

Hope you don´t mind if I spare us the same exercise with the comparison of a machine with 16GB vs 32Gb or even 64GB, I am sure we all can do that easily on our own.

The conclusion, at least from my point of view, out of this exercise: Yes, more RAM helps creating panoramas faster, means you gain time. But how much time you gain depends totally on the parameters of such a calculation. Yes, 5 days may be a lot, but what about if you only do 10 panoramas a week for 52 weeks a year, means 520 per year? How realistic is such a number? And what is then the gain?

Your statement about time, in the beginning of your last post...! Yes, time is important, no doubt about that, but the interpretation of time is also relative and may be seen by different people in a different context.

-----------------------------------------

Second part, now a little more direct and clear... and not just about computers!


You think this thread is "unfortunately probably turning in to a ..."? So, "he" is getting personal on this now...!

Hope you don´t mind when I dare to ask... what about your part in here, your responsibility considering the direction this thread finally took step by step? You did not get personal, it has not been you getting personal against "him" at first?

What about now finally taking really a step back, acknowledging... that you opened this thread, asked questions... that you are, at least in a certain way, completely lost... that you are, sorry to state it so hard, quite clueless regarding all these topics, something you not only proof more than once in your postings, you even admit(ted) it yourself... and then potentially come to the conclusion that your behavior in some situations, some of your statements, simply do not fit these facts.

Finally, personally I would not use such a phrase as you now used to describe this thread... maybe I am little more old school. I like much better descriptions like... Kindergarten, Kasperletheater! And everybody can think about his own role in there...!

Herbert
Herbert-

The thing is, although it is about time, it is mostly not about adding up the time for specific longish renders or whatever, like the UTubers like to present and like your example calculation. The fact is, whether a render takes 30 seconds or 90 seconds one's brain is immediately off doing other things during the render.

It is about (for instance) when you are adjusting an image in PS or Affinity and you try out a mask/blur or whatever. The brief time lag impacts the creative process; maybe 0.5 sec is unnoticed but 2 seconds substantively changes things in one's brain. [Note made up arbitrary timing because I lack hard data, just years of doing it.] Unfortunately demonstrating such smallish lags provides poor meat for the UTube click-baiters, so they generally do not attempt such analyses.

Also you will see folks like me sometimes use the word smooth to describe computer operation. Smooth includes display operation, etc. and is high praise. Having substantial amounts of RAM running under Apple's Unified Memory Architecture (UMA) gives us smooth. Well worth the $400 to add each +32 GB RAM IMO.

The fact that Apple offers up to 96 GB RAM in its laptops IMO gives us clear indication where UMA and future RAM demands will be heading. My last MBP offered 16 GB max RAM and OS/apps outgrew that full amount (not 1/3) in ~3 years. Suggesting 32 GB, which is 1/3 of the amount offered by Apple, to me makes no sense for any kind of an images-related workflow moving forward in a 3-6 year life cycle. UTubers of course only test for today rather than for the expected life cycle .
 
Last edited:
First part, strictly factual...! No, you do NOT NEED 64GB or more RAM for stitching! You may want to have it, but again... you do NOT NEED it!

If you do not want to believe that, have a look into this video:

At minute 13:38 Art starts talking about the Lightroom Panorama function and the results different SoC and amounts of RAM provide in such a test (which seems to reflect your stated use case). Some preliminary, very obvious conclusions:
a) You would NEED(!!!) 64GB of RAM if lower amounts of RAM could NOT handle the task!
b) As well 16GB as 32GB of RAM can handle the task, no indication that they struggle in any way!
c) Yes, different amounts of RAM result in different times to finalize such tasks!

As of this test, the difference in time to handle the task between the 16" M1 Max with 64GB of RAM and the 16" M2 Max with 32GB of RAM is 20 sec! The difference between the 16" M2 Max with 32GB of RAM and the 16" M2 Pro with 16GB of RAM is 41 sec!

Now lets put all this in perspective, just reflecting to 32GB vs 64GB:

Let´s say, you do 100 (!) of such panoramas a week. That means you will gain 33.3 min per week, means (rounded) 29 hours per year, considering you do your 100 (!) panoramas 52 (!) weeks a year!

Now, let´s even say the time difference would be a little bigger comparing a M2 Max w/ 64GB to M2 Mac w/32GB. So let´s use 20% of performance benefit in the calculation, what results then in a total gain of approx. 35 hours per year!

Let´s even go a step further and say you may gain more as you are working with larger and more files, not just the tested 14 x 36MP files. Let´s be really (!) generous and let´s say you gain another 200%. So this results in a final gain of approx. 105 hours per year, means (again very generous) approx. 5 days.

Hope you don´t mind if I spare us the same exercise with the comparison of a machine with 16GB vs 32Gb or even 64GB, I am sure we all can do that easily on our own.

The conclusion, at least from my point of view, out of this exercise: Yes, more RAM helps creating panoramas faster, means you gain time. But how much time you gain depends totally on the parameters of such a calculation. Yes, 5 days may be a lot, but what about if you only do 10 panoramas a week for 52 weeks a year, means 520 per year? How realistic is such a number? And what is then the gain?

Your statement about time, in the beginning of your last post...! Yes, time is important, no doubt about that, but the interpretation of time is also relative and may be seen by different people in a different context.

-----------------------------------------

Second part, now a little more direct and clear... and not just about computers!


You think this thread is "unfortunately probably turning in to a ..."? So, "he" is getting personal on this now...!

Hope you don´t mind when I dare to ask... what about your part in here, your responsibility considering the direction this thread finally took step by step? You did not get personal, it has not been you getting personal against "him" at first?

What about now finally taking really a step back, acknowledging... that you opened this thread, asked questions... that you are, at least in a certain way, completely lost... that you are, sorry to state it so hard, quite clueless regarding all these topics, something you not only proof more than once in your postings, you even admit(ted) it yourself... and then potentially come to the conclusion that your behavior in some situations, some of your statements, simply do not fit these facts.

Finally, personally I would not use such a phrase as you now used to describe this thread... maybe I am little more old school. I like much better descriptions like... Kindergarten, Kasperletheater! And everybody can think about his own role in there...!

Herbert
I am not plning
First part, strictly factual...! No, you do NOT NEED 64GB or more RAM for stitching! You may want to have it, but again... you do NOT NEED it!

If you do not want to believe that, have a look into this video:

At minute 13:38 Art starts talking about the Lightroom Panorama function and the results different SoC and amounts of RAM provide in such a test (which seems to reflect your stated use case). Some preliminary, very obvious conclusions:
a) You would NEED(!!!) 64GB of RAM if lower amounts of RAM could NOT handle the task!
b) As well 16GB as 32GB of RAM can handle the task, no indication that they struggle in any way!
c) Yes, different amounts of RAM result in different times to finalize such tasks!

As of this test, the difference in time to handle the task between the 16" M1 Max with 64GB of RAM and the 16" M2 Max with 32GB of RAM is 20 sec! The difference between the 16" M2 Max with 32GB of RAM and the 16" M2 Pro with 16GB of RAM is 41 sec!

Now lets put all this in perspective, just reflecting to 32GB vs 64GB:

Let´s say, you do 100 (!) of such panoramas a week. That means you will gain 33.3 min per week, means (rounded) 29 hours per year, considering you do your 100 (!) panoramas 52 (!) weeks a year!

Now, let´s even say the time difference would be a little bigger comparing a M2 Max w/ 64GB to M2 Mac w/32GB. So let´s use 20% of performance benefit in the calculation, what results then in a total gain of approx. 35 hours per year!

Let´s even go a step further and say you may gain more as you are working with larger and more files, not just the tested 14 x 36MP files. Let´s be really (!) generous and let´s say you gain another 200%. So this results in a final gain of approx. 105 hours per year, means (again very generous) approx. 5 days.

Hope you don´t mind if I spare us the same exercise with the comparison of a machine with 16GB vs 32Gb or even 64GB, I am sure we all can do that easily on our own.

The conclusion, at least from my point of view, out of this exercise: Yes, more RAM helps creating panoramas faster, means you gain time. But how much time you gain depends totally on the parameters of such a calculation. Yes, 5 days may be a lot, but what about if you only do 10 panoramas a week for 52 weeks a year, means 520 per year? How realistic is such a number? And what is then the gain?

Your statement about time, in the beginning of your last post...! Yes, time is important, no doubt about that, but the interpretation of time is also relative and may be seen by different people in a different context.

-----------------------------------------

Second part, now a little more direct and clear... and not just about computers!


You think this thread is "unfortunately probably turning in to a ..."? So, "he" is getting personal on this now...!

Hope you don´t mind when I dare to ask... what about your part in here, your responsibility considering the direction this thread finally took step by step? You did not get personal, it has not been you getting personal against "him" at first?

What about now finally taking really a step back, acknowledging... that you opened this thread, asked questions... that you are, at least in a certain way, completely lost... that you are, sorry to state it so hard, quite clueless regarding all these topics, something you not only proof more than once in your postings, you even admit(ted) it yourself... and then potentially come to the conclusion that your behavior in some situations, some of your statements, simply do not fit these facts.

Finally, personally I would not use such a phrase as you now used to describe this thread... maybe I am little more old school. I like much better descriptions like... Kindergarten, Kasperletheater! And everybody can think about his own role in there...!

Herbert
Ah, man...
I am not going to do more than a couple panoramas per month, so that is nit very important, but i will be doing several images per week. So, time us important to me, but i can wait 20 sec extra, but i i dont have to, then i would not. This is not my job, so every second doesnt necessarily count, thus is a hobby of mine which i like a lot. So, i treat it as a hobby...
 
The thing is, although it is about time, it is mostly not about adding up the time for specific longish renders or whatever, like the UTubers like to present and like your example calculation. The fact is, whether a render takes 30 seconds or 90 seconds one's brain is immediately off doing other things during the render
Yes, he doesnt understand that! Its nit so mucb about the zctual seconds, it is the thoughts that get lost while waiting
 
Also you will see folks like me sometimes use the word smooth to describe computer operation. Smooth includes display operation, etc. and is high praise. Having substantial amounts of RAM running under Apple's Unified Memory Architecture (UMA) gives us smooth. Well worth the $400 to add each +32 GB RAM IMO.
Exactly, and i mentioned earliet in this thread multiple times that a smooth/snappy/quick computer is invaluable to me, and helps creatively a lot. Thing is, like you said, it might not seem important, those few seconds, but when you are doing something brain-thought-intensive, waiting for something to process while your mind is alreadg wanderkng off and you're losing thoughts is one of the most annoying things...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Allen_Wentz
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.