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

Zdigital2015

macrumors 601
Jul 14, 2015
4,144
5,624
East Coast, United States
I fretted a bit when I bought my 13” Pro M1 with 8GB/512GB, because I’ve never owned less than a 16GB 15” MBP. My iMac has 64GB of DRAM, and yet I don’t think anything about it anymore, I’ve never experienced anything remotely like a slow down or out of memory message. The thing just keeps going and going and going. I’m sure one can reach its limits, but these forums are like Charlie Brown and the football. If you know you need 32GB, but it. If you operate fine with 16GB, stop fretting. Future proofing is a fools errand anyways. The M1 Pro and Max will be state of the art for a hot minute and then we’re on to the next thing. This is the grindstone of technology.
 

wilberforce

macrumors 68030
Aug 15, 2020
2,932
3,210
SF Bay Area
One argument for selecting more RAM, aside from performance (for which there appears to be negligible benefit), is that it may not be a good idea to frequently be using swap files, due to the extra read/write cycles on the SSD, perhaps reducing the SSD life. Just something to consider. No idea if this really matters: for example, if it reduces the life from 100 years to 90 years, obviously not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ian87w

Brandon42

macrumors regular
Jul 24, 2019
207
588
I remember the good old days of classic Mac OS where you specified the amount of RAM an application could use. Some apps would crash if given too much or too little. We should go back to that to make the forum discussions much more fun.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: azentropy

Marzel

macrumors 6502
Sep 12, 2018
258
563
Super naive question maybe (I'm not an expert) but wouldn't faster storage greatly mitigate any issues arising from RAM memory filling up? Can't the SSD be used for cache? I understand that RAM is always a lot faster than storage but still a fast SSD should help.

Sorry if it's already been answered.
 
Last edited:

Macintosh101

macrumors 6502a
Nov 23, 2017
678
1,160
Super naive question maybe (I'm not an expert) but wouldn't faster storage greatly mitigate any issues arising from RAM memory filling up? Can't the SSD be used for cache? I understand that RAM is always a lot faster than storage but still a fast SSD should help.

Sorry if it's already been answered.
Yes you're absolutely right. See here: 16GB vs 32GB RAM M1 Pro MacBook - Multitasking RAM TEST!
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko

ian87w

macrumors G3
Feb 22, 2020
8,704
12,638
Indonesia
One argument for selecting more RAM, aside from performance (for which there appears to be negligible benefit), is that it may not be a good idea to frequently be using swap files, due to the extra read/write cycles on the SSD, perhaps reducing the SSD life. Just something to consider. No idea if this really matters: for example, if it reduces the life from 100 years to 90 years, obviously not.
This will be what we should be looking at, simply because now we have completely soldered and non-upgradeable storage. Will be interesting to see what happens to the current macs 5 years from now.
 

ian87w

macrumors G3
Feb 22, 2020
8,704
12,638
Indonesia
Super naive question maybe (I'm not an expert) but wouldn't faster storage greatly mitigate any issues arising from RAM memory filling up? Can't the SSD be used for cache? I understand that RAM is always a lot faster than storage but still a fast SSD should help.

Sorry if it's already been answered.
The problem on relying on swap is the SSD life itself. Of course, nobody really knows what will happen until these macs are years old in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jochheim

badsimian

macrumors 6502
Aug 23, 2015
374
200
Looking at what people were doing with an 8-core CPU / 7-Core GPU 8GB of RAM M1 MacBook Air, it’s crazy to think what any of the new MacBook Pros are capable of, especially the M1 Max models.
You are correct but at what price? My base MBA which I’ve had for 4 months already has 40TB written to it’s SSD. That’s insane. It might appear to be functioning entirely normally but I think it shows I need more than 8GB for my not particularly intensive workflows…I’m not convinced 16GB would be enough either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tdbrown75

0112862

Cancelled
Original poster
Sep 24, 2017
43
187
You are correct but at what price? My base MBA which I’ve had for 4 months already has 40TB written to it’s SSD. That’s insane. It might appear to be functioning entirely normally but I think it shows I need more than 8GB for my not particularly intensive workflows…I’m not convinced 16GB would be enough either.
40Tb is beyond insane! For reference the Samsung NVME 980 Pro 500GB is rated for 300 TBW (terabyte written).
 

AltecX

macrumors 6502a
Oct 28, 2016
550
1,391
Philly
The problem on relying on swap is the SSD life itself. Of course, nobody really knows what will happen until these macs are years old in the future.
The fact the average lifespan of an SSD is longer than the life span of the average laptop it's easy to assume that unless you are keeping the machine 5+yrs you're VERY unlikely to see any issue at all. All OS's use their HDD/SSD as a swap space when needed. I've not seen any issue of it since the very early days of SSD's when 64GB was crazy pricy.
 

ian87w

macrumors G3
Feb 22, 2020
8,704
12,638
Indonesia
The fact the average lifespan of an SSD is longer than the life span of the average laptop it's easy to assume that unless you are keeping the machine 5+yrs you're VERY unlikely to see any issue at all. All OS's use their HDD/SSD as a swap space when needed. I've not seen any issue of it since the very early days of SSD's when 64GB was crazy pricy.
I don’t think that’s a general factual statement, other than the manufacturers’ claim. The proof will be in the pudding, on the machines. It would be great if we can see real data, but imo 5 years is no good for a laptop. Heck, Apple even supports iPhones and iPads longer than 5 years now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shirasaki

legato01

macrumors newbie
Jun 4, 2015
28
20
The only time you should be concerned about swapping is if it impacts performance.

Swapping is normal behavior when the computer is compensating for limited memory.

Yes it will write to SSD, but pretty much everything you do in a computer will i.e. browsing, downloading files, watching videos, etc.


History of "swapping bad" I think is more when servers are involved.

For example, when an enterprise database process swaps to disks,
it will slow down everyone connected to that database to a crawl.
It's the reason why IT size servers properly.
It affects everyone and not just one single user.
Usually it's also housed in a separate server with only the database running in that server.
I think this is where OP is coming from.

But for a single user on one machine, swapping should not be an issue.
Especially when that machine contains an SSD that's blazing fast.


Having said that, I hope Max Tech sends me the 32GB model. LOL.
 

0112862

Cancelled
Original poster
Sep 24, 2017
43
187
I will try to make my point again. I bought a mid-2009 MBP in early 2010 and it came with 2gb of ram. The only reason I was able to use it for almost 10 years was because I upgraded my ram from 2GB to 8GB in 2012. When it come to computer, the component that make the biggest difference in term of performance* is the ram. I'm not saying having more ram will make your computer faster, but not having enough ram will for sure make your computer slower. I'm not expecting crazy IPC improvement from Apple Silicon in years to come. At the end of the day i'm making a prediction, like it or not.
I'm predicting huge performance difference 5 years from now between the 16GB and 32GB version of the MacbookPro. For Apple it's a win-win. Customers upgrade ram, they make huge premium. Customers doesn't, will upgrade computer sooner (4-5 years instead of 7-8 years).
 

Sanpete

macrumors 68040
Nov 17, 2016
3,695
1,665
Utah
How did I do what?
That answers my questions well enough.

One argument for selecting more RAM, aside from performance (for which there appears to be negligible benefit), is that it may not be a good idea to frequently be using swap files, due to the extra read/write cycles on the SSD, perhaps reducing the SSD life. Just something to consider. No idea if this really matters: for example, if it reduces the life from 100 years to 90 years, obviously not.
This has often been discussed, with no good evidence it's a problem in real life. You can be sure that the people who produce memory and use it on a large scale have tested this to the max, though, and apparently don't share this concern.

Reports of huge writes on a daily basis may not be what they appear.

I will try to make my point again. I bought a mid-2009 MBP in early 2010 and it came with 2gb of ram. The only reason I was able to use it for almost 10 years was because I upgraded my ram from 2GB to 8GB in 2012. When it come to computer, the component that make the biggest difference in term of performance* is the ram. I'm not saying having more ram will make your computer faster, but not having enough ram will for sure make your computer slower. I'm not expecting crazy IPC improvement from Apple Silicon in years to come. At the end of the day i'm making a prediction, like it or not.
I'm predicting huge performance difference 5 years from now between the 16GB and 32GB version of the MacbookPro. For Apple it's a win-win. Customers upgrade ram, they make huge premium. Customers doesn't, will upgrade computer sooner (4-5 years instead of 7-8 years).
Your point was clear enough, but your argument remains vague and poorly supported.
 

0112862

Cancelled
Original poster
Sep 24, 2017
43
187
That answers my questions well enough.


This has often been discussed, with no good evidence it's a problem in real life. You can be sure that the people who produce memory and use it on a large scale have tested this to the max, though, and apparently don't share this concern.

Reports of huge writes on a daily basis may not be what they appear.


Your point was clear enough, but your argument remains vague and poorly supported.
The same way all your guys points is supported by a single youtube video using today OS and Apps. So I will go ahead, lose a few hours to “support” my points
 
  • Love
Reactions: tdbrown75

AltecX

macrumors 6502a
Oct 28, 2016
550
1,391
Philly
I don’t think that’s a general factual statement, other than the manufacturers’ claim. The proof will be in the pudding, on the machines. It would be great if we can see real data, but imo 5 years is no good for a laptop. Heck, Apple even supports iPhones and iPads longer than 5 years now.
Most laptops are only in service 3-4 years, for personal machines this creeps up to 5yrs average. Warranty is less than that, so that's really all a maker has to care about. We also have machines at this point with SSD's that are coming up on 10 years old as people, least home builders, bring an SSD from one machine to the next. SSD's also last in servers with heavy usage for 4+ years with a sub 2% failure rate. There are also many people using Android tablets from 2013 even.

SSD's and memory caching to SSD is NOT new and hasn't been new for YEARS now. If there was an issue we would have huge waves of laptops/SSD's sold from 2012-2014 having heavy failures. We don't, or enough machines from that period are no longer in use that even if they were failing, no one cares any more.

In fact, I can count on one hand how many SSD's I have EVER seen fail in 15yrs of IT. It's 4. I have had more RAM chips, LCD's and Motherboards go bad on me than I have SSD's.
 

Sanpete

macrumors 68040
Nov 17, 2016
3,695
1,665
Utah
The same way all your guys points is supported by a single youtube video using today OS and Apps.

As I said before:

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: agent mac

BigMac?

macrumors 6502
Jan 30, 2007
276
264
Erlangen, Bavaria
That answers my questions well enough.


This has often been discussed, with no good evidence it's a problem in real life. You can be sure that the people who produce memory and use it on a large scale have tested this to the max, though, and apparently don't share this concern.

Reports of huge writes on a daily basis may not be what they appear.


Your point was clear enough, but your argument remains vague and poorly supported.
Funny dude.
You asked a question with ties to two possible storylines.

If you don’t know a demanding workflow, than maybe a MacBook Pro is not the right device for you.

On how to return a device, Apple will guide you in you.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.