Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

16gb MBP in 2021 isn’t enough for long-term

Your logic would make sense if it wasn’t for the fact that Apple is making both their hardware and software more memory efficient to the point that 8 GB machines are handling things that windows machines can’t with double the RAM. If we kept the trend of the OS being more RAM hungry every year that would be one thing, but Apple stopped the trend when they released M1.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko, Argoduck and waquzy
For those of y'all saying 8GB is enough, why are y'all on a Macbook PRO forum if you think 8GB is enough? You are already going to spend a minimum $2K and will have min 16GB.

Seriously, the people arguing AGAINST 32GB are as bad as the ones arguing FOR 32GB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMac?
I remember when people thought 640k RAM was all one would ever need. Now you have systems with 64GBs of RAM and terabytes of storage. Hate to tell you this folks... but the trend is and always has been to require more and more resources.

Let's get real... why in the hell would a web browser require so many damn resources in the first place? Everything you run on your machine is designed to slow it down over time. If you never upgrade the software (which is impossible for some software because it is perpetually being updated), you wouldn't need so many resources. It's all a ploy to get you to constantly replace what you have.

So there is no future proofing unless you live in a vacuum. Every Safari update you install increases it's requirements... it never reduces them. It's because the requirements for software is ever changing that your machine slows down. At the time it was built, software didn't tax it like it will later. So your machine is stuck in a vacuum but everything that you put on it isn't.

You want to future proof your computer. Never update any of its software. It will purr like a kitten forever. You update the software, expect to replace the machine in short order. That is the cycle of things. So in reality, dumping a load on a machine thinking it will save you money by doing so down the road is a fallacy. You'll end up replacing it right along with everyone else, only you will have spent a much higher entry price than most.

Some people can afford to eat that. If you can't, don't buy large... buy conservative... and replace it when you need to... which based on Apple's viewpoint is every 2 years on average.
 
pmiles said:
I remember when people thought 640k RAM was all one would ever need. Now you have systems with 64GBs of RAM and terabytes of storage. Hate to tell you this folks... but the trend is and always has been to require more and more resources.

Let's get real... why in the hell would a web browser require so many damn resources in the first place? Everything you run on your machine is designed to slow it down over time. If you never upgrade the software (which is impossible for some software because it is perpetually being updated), you wouldn't need so many resources. It's all a ploy to get you to constantly replace what you have.

So there is no future proofing unless you live in a vacuum. Every Safari update you install increases it's requirements... it never reduces them. It's because the requirements for software is ever changing that your machine slows down. At the time it was built, software didn't tax it like it will later. So your machine is stuck in a vacuum but everything that you put on it isn't.

You want to future proof your computer. Never update any of its software. It will purr like a kitten forever. You update the software, expect to replace the machine in short order. That is the cycle of things. So in reality, dumping a load on a machine thinking it will save you money by doing so down the road is a fallacy. You'll end up replacing it right along with everyone else, only you will have spent a much higher entry price than most.

Some people can afford to eat that. If you can't, don't buy large... buy conservative... and replace it when you need to... which based on Apple's viewpoint is every 2 years on average.
Click to expand...
A lot of nonsense in this post. I haven’t had to replace any Mac in two years because of performance in … ever. That’s not Apple’s viewpoint, that is yours. Now granted, Apple’s support is more like 5-6 years, but I have machines from over a decade ago still running perfectly fine, and they’re running patched versions of the new versions of macOS and they still run perfectly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko, Rashy, fa8362 and 1 other person
Bandaman said:
A lot of nonsense in this post. I haven’t had to replace any Mac in two years because of performance in … ever. That’s not Apple’s viewpoint, that is yours. Now granted, Apple’s support is more like 5-6 years, but I have machines from over a decade ago still running perfectly fine, and they’re running patched versions of the new versions of macOS and they still run perfectly.
Click to expand...
Lovely when a reply starts out with "a lot of nonsense in this post." Software demands do generally increase over time.
Love these anecdotal stories. Maybe you haven't had to replace it in two years, but I have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMac?
AFK said:
Lovely when a reply starts out with "a lot of nonsense in this post." Software demands do generally increase over time.
Love these anecdotal stories. Maybe you haven't had to replace it in two years, but I have.
Click to expand...
And maybe you’ve had to replace yours in two years, but most haven’t. Lovely when an anecdotal post talks about anecdotal posts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko, spaceranger and Rashy
Oh god, another one of these nonsense threads. If you have no clue how RAM works, please stop advising others and spreading false information...

Not going to repeat myself because I've done so in similar threads that popped up last couple days.

Anyway, 16GB is still the sweetspot for the majority. Only people with heavy workloads benefit from 32GB or more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko and Rashy
AFK said:
For those of y'all saying 8GB is enough, why are y'all on a Macbook PRO forum if you think 8GB is enough? You are already going to spend a minimum $2K and will have min 16GB.

Seriously, the people arguing AGAINST 32GB are as bad as the ones arguing FOR 32GB.
Click to expand...
Almost no one needs 32GB. No argument is needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko
AFK said:
For those of y'all saying 8GB is enough, why are y'all on a Macbook PRO forum if you think 8GB is enough? You are already going to spend a minimum $2K and will have min 16GB.

Seriously, the people arguing AGAINST 32GB are as bad as the ones arguing FOR 32GB.
Click to expand...
Lol - did I miss the configuration where you can buy an M1 Pro with 8GB?
 
AFK said:
I'm referring to the new 14" and 16" MBPs. Possible I may have missed the 8GB if it exists.
Click to expand...
If you could buy an M1P based system with 8Gb, I don’t think that one would be “obsolete” or slow in a few years either. It depends on what you need. For generic workflows honestly it’s probably Ok.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hans1972
MrBrault said:
If you keep your mac only a few years it’s ok but if you are planning to keep your mac for 5 years you should absolutely upgrade to 32gb.
Click to expand...

Lol random guy on the internet wanders into an Apple store and plays with a Mac he does not own for a few Minutes and says you should absolutely upgrade to 32GB if you plan to keep for 5 years on the basis of very little data, when most detailed reviews backed up by extensive testing show that in reality even with heavy workloads 32GB makes little difference for the vast majority of users and for most people not worth the extra cost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko
The OP's theory comes up and is beaten to death several times with every new model, whatever the level of RAM in it. Simply making a sweeping claim like that with nothing but the vaguest evidence doesn't advance anything, and can hardly be successfully refuted with equally vague sweeping claims, but that's the stuff of internet forums.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko, ascender and James_C
MrBrault said:
I went to Apple store yesterday to see the 14/16” MacbookPro and do some testing. With a few basic apps open, 2 safari tabs it was using 10.5gb/16gb. Restarted the Mac and repeated the sam ram usage after 10-15 minutes.

If you keep your mac only a few years it’s ok but if you are planning to keep your mac for 5 years you should absolutely upgrade to 32gb.
Click to expand...
Apple did not make 16GB standard on the 15” MacBook Pro until the Mid 2014 model, and has maintained that base 16GB of DRAM for 7 years. Upgrading to 32GB wasn’t available until the mid-2018 15” MacBook Pro and the early 2020
13” MacBook Pro (4TB 3 ports). If you’re concerned with getting the most power out of your computer, then you’re only keeping a Mac of 3 years (36 month lease), more likely 24 months. If you’re keeping it for longevity, then 32GB only make sense for certain specific use cases (Xcode, VMs, et al.) even video work is done fine with 8 or 16GB and 32GB is plenty, 64 GB is overkill for a lot of video editing, where storage speed may be more important.

Most Pro users not at the upper extremes of the curve will do just fine with 16GB over a 5-7 year lifespan. Those at the upper end aren’t keeping the machine for longer than 2-3 years anyways and so 32GB maybe more than enough. But for the vast majority of people 16GB is just fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko, Rashy, marmiteturkey and 1 other person
ASX said:
I would buy the 32 gb version if its available. 16 gb is not enough. The m1 pro costs arround 3000 Euros. The M1 Max with 32 GB costs only 3850 Euros. So i would buy this instead of the 400 Euro cheaper M1 Pro with half bandwith and gpu cores. If you could upgrade the M1 with ram. I would buy the 16 gb model and add or replace the ram.

@Rashy

If there is not enough ram it has to swap. Max. 7 gbyte/s isn't fast compared with 200-400 gbyte/s ram. Even my windows desktop with pcie 4.0 ssd has 5 gbyte/s peak. But it's only the speed for huge files. For smallers you will get only a few hundred mbyte/s up to 2 gbyte/s.
Click to expand...
Most of us have already established that you’re here to grind an anti-MBP axe rather than to contribute objectively. WHY is 16gb not enough? You offer no evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KUKitch, haruhiko, ascender and 3 others
Interested to know whether people would say Android Studio development is one of the 32GB-essential cases?
 
mosh.jinton said:
Interested to know whether people would say Android Studio development is one of the 32GB-essential cases?
Click to expand...
I think 16GB would be fine, but if your computing habits are anything like mine, I would go with 32GB.

I rarely close anything, have multiple iOS and Android projects loaded, use virtualization, multiple chat programs and have all the big 3 browsers always running at a minimum. I also use Brave (memory hog because it's based on Chromium) which I use for Crypto. And many other little utilities, as well.

On my 16GB M1 MBP, I've received the out of memory warning dialog multiple times instructing me to close applications. It's annoying when it happens, because I don't like to close stuff and it interrupts my flow. I'm also constantly chasing faster compile times because I hate waiting for things to finish.

Can I work with 16GB? Yes. But I feel much better with 32GB. I want my tools to get out of the way when I'm working, not work against me. To that end, I'm most likely going to go with 64GB this time around (depending on how the battery life difference pans out between the M1 Pro and the Max).
 
Last edited:
mosh.jinton said:
Interested to know whether people would say Android Studio development is one of the 32GB-essential cases?
Click to expand...

No. I would say the dev related use cases would be either heavy VM or game (3d modeling, heavy asset handling).

I'm a dev going on 25 years and just got a base 14", despite my work purchasing a maxed 16" i9 last year 2/ 64 gb. It's surely fine for almost anything I'd throw at it, including React Native and native native iOS and Android dev.
 
For what it's worth, here is my experience with a 14" M1 Pro 10/16 with 16GB of ram.

My test workload:
1. Xcode with 2 workspaces open
2. `fastlane snapshot` running in the background to take simulator screenshots (4 devices, UI Tests running)
3. Browsing the web (Gmail, MacRumors, App Store Connect tabs open)
4. Sketch open with a moderately large file (50 symbols and 100 artboards).

I kept hitting yellow memory pressure in Activity Monitor. I didn't notice any slowdown which is good, but the fans did kick in and the bottom of the machine did get warm. Not hot, but noticeably warmer than the ambient temperature in my apartment.

For my use cases, I'll be swapping for a 32GB machine to avoid running into the yellow for memory pressure.

Screen Shot 2021-10-30 at 10.04.30 PM.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back