And for the record, nobody was arguing Apple wouldn’t potentially switch to 16GB in the M4 models. People were saying that the 8GB base configuration for the M3 is more than enough for many people, and Apple didn’t make the “wrong decision” by sticking with an 8GB base-spec configuration with the M3. These facts remain. Apple deciding to up specs in a new model doesn’t prove they were supposedly wrong for not doing so in a prior model. That wouldn’t be a logical argument. So no, it isn’t the “win” some want to claim it as… 😂🤣🙄
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
8GB RAM in M3 MacBook Pro Proves the Bottleneck in Real-World Tests
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It was just greed and clearly wrong for their consumers. Apple modifying their product line before a refresh pretty much negates all the mental gymnastics that were on display throughout the year about what constitutes as a ‘pro’ machine. We already had the benchmarks to prove it.
So yes, we ‘won’ a silly argument in good fun.
You didn’t “win” anything…. Keep on telling yourself that all you want, but it doesn’t make it true…
Furthermore, you have no evidence for your accusations of “greed” and such… You still lack evidence as you did before. The M3 base-spec models were already at a huge price reduction from the prior-gen base-spec models, so cutting yet deeper into profits by changing the base spec configuration was likely not a good move. Now with the M4 base-spec models, they likely are able to make this change due to decrease in production cost from increased production of the 14” MacBook chassis and such, so the changing of the base spec configuration for this production model may be less impactful to profits then it would have been for the M3 models which had already likely taken a significant cut to profitability by reducing the price-point of the base-spec 14” MacBook Pros…
It was and still is good for Apple’s customers. My 8GB Mac Mini performs beautifully.
Last edited:
And a 24 GB machine is better than a 16 GB machine.
And a 32 GB machine is better than a 24 GB machine.
Anybody can create a benchmark that makes a machine look slow.
Most computer users don’t run Lightroom with 20 tabs open, and they don’t merge 12-layer ultra high res Photoshop files together. I use photo editing apps, so I bought a 16 GB machine. But my children (who are in college) and my wife use 8 GB machines with no complaints. It’s useful for people to know the benefits of different feature levels, but just because there are ways to bottleneck the machine doesn’t mean you ’need’ 8 GB of RAM. My first Mac had a whopping 1 MB of RAM and it was awesome!
Exactly. And Apple deciding to change a spec on a new model proves nothing about whether it was somehow “wrong” or “greed” to not do so with a prior spec. Was it “greed” or “wrong” that the iPad Pro before the last model didn’t have a dual-layer OLED display? No. Products change over time, and new devices get new specs or features. That’s the way things work. It’s illogical to conclude that a company changing a spec with a new model somehow proves the reason they didn’t on the prior model was “greed”… 🙄😂👍🏻
The cope in here is real. I’m not mentioning 24/32GB models at all. My argument has always centered around the 8GB RAM units and questioning just how long they would satisfy the needs of those looking for a ‘pro’ machine. Let alone lower level consumer products.
Turns out it was worse than I thought. Not only is Apple acknowledging that they are no longer comfortable selling expensive MacBooks with 8GB RAM they introduced ~7 months ago, but that entry level mac mini desktops that start at $500 for college students likely needed the extra breathing room as well.
You guys were wrong and no amount of mental gymnastics to hurdle over these facts is going to change that. The RAM issue caused Apple to pivot away from their tried and true product refresh cycle which tends to happen every few years.
The bright side of it all? Expect great deals on secondhand markets and outlets like Walmart to have these at much lower prices for the holidays.
Turns out it was worse than I thought. Not only is Apple acknowledging that they are no longer comfortable selling expensive MacBooks with 8GB RAM they introduced ~7 months ago, but that entry level mac mini desktops that start at $500 for college students likely needed the extra breathing room as well.
You guys were wrong and no amount of mental gymnastics to hurdle over these facts is going to change that. The RAM issue caused Apple to pivot away from their tried and true product refresh cycle which tends to happen every few years.
The bright side of it all? Expect great deals on secondhand markets and outlets like Walmart to have these at much lower prices for the holidays.
Maybe Apple has simply been listening to their customers. Someday the minimum will be 24 GB. Probably 512GB storage is the next minimum. I think Apple’s most focused on what they can deliver in the entry level price point. And, I’m not a CPU architecture expert, but I think that, as they add more and more cores, they need more RAM because, I think, each core needs its own pipeline fed out of RAM and if a pipeline pages out it will slow down a lot.
Even so, there are many, many people (including just about everyone I personally know) who run Office apps and web browsers and nothing else and 8 GB has been fine for them.
Wahahahahaha told you so:
Just one reason: those 8Gb Macs are NOT futureproof.
Apple actually admits they made a mistake. Did anyone ever see Apple bumping the spec (either ssd or ram) on last year(s)’s models? Those 8GB are going to lose out on features really soon….
Just one reason: those 8Gb Macs are NOT futureproof.
Apple actually admits they made a mistake. Did anyone ever see Apple bumping the spec (either ssd or ram) on last year(s)’s models? Those 8GB are going to lose out on features really soon….
My 8GB Mac is plenty future-proof. I intend to use it for many years to come. Apple didn’t say they made a mistake, they made a new model with new specs. Nobody was arguing “Apple will be using 8GB for the next 5-10 years. People like you claimed “8GB isn’t enough” and people like us have repeatedly proven that it is more than enough for many many users. You haven’t won anything, Apple wasn’t/isn’t wrong, and you don’t know better how to run Apple than Apple…
Ah, yes, that is why Apple is upping their previous base Mac models to 16GB, something pretty much unheard off I think? 8GB Mac models: gone, woosh! Why would they do this? For plenty of people 8GB is enough! Give us back our 8GB macs!
PS. I remember certain 8GB believers saying that Apple would need to up the price if they would up the base ram. Again, told you so...And you know why: ram is dirty cheap and it leave Apple breathing room to include additional (AI) features in the (maybe even already the next) Mac OS version that will need 16GB to function properly. The example is already here: see how only the iPhone 15 Pro (and not the very recent 15) can run AI in iOS18.1, because of lack of ram of the latter.
PS2. therefore, I think the resell value will drop like a brick on these 8GB Macs by the time the next Mac OS hits....
Upgrading the M2 is indeed unusual.
In general, I’d say they did it because the next Air isn’t coming for a while.
So what, they changed the offerings their selling for older models. Perhaps they already sold through most of their stock of 8GB models because they’re so popular, so they decided to change to selling 16GB. We don’t know, and it’s completely irrelevant to whether or not 8GB is more than enough for most users, and whether or not 8GB models will be supported by new updates for many years to come. There’s no reason to believe the 8GB M3 Macs will not be supported just as long as the 16GB M3 Macs. Apple has never dropped software support for only one particular RAM configuration for a given model year. And they aren’t likely to do so in the future. The absolute “worst case” scenario would be there’s some throw-away AI feature that doesn’t support 8GB Macs. Many base spec customers don’t care about running every AI feature, and currently there isn’t a single Apple Intelligence feature that requires 16GB of RAM. Nor do I believe that’s likely to happen any time soon since Apple Intelligence is designed to also run on iPhones and iPads that are using 8GB of RAM.
And 8GB is more than enough for many users. I’m not going to be rushing out to upgrade my Mac because somehow it’s suddenly not enough to run my workflow… 🙄😂. I plan on using my current Mac for probably at least the next 3-4 years. It’s running beautifully for my graphic design and 3D modeling/sculpting workflows, and I don’t see that changing anytime soon…
I said a price increase was a likely outcome of upping the base spec, and in the past that has happened when Apple upped base-spec configurations. I didn’t say it was guaranteed or a fact. I said I didn’t want the price to increase just appease some who aren’t even buying Macs and who dislike Apple and Macs, people who just want to stir the pot…
And if resale value goes down, who cares. That’s actually a good thing for people on a budget who would be looking at either buying used or getting a base spec configuration. People will be able to get better hardware cheaper if that does happen.
You’re side of this debate seems to want to try to claim this as some sort of “victory” but the problem is that you didn’t “prove” or “win” anything… Apple deciding to change specs on a new model of product doesn’t mean the last model was somehow some kind of “rip-off scheme” and that Apple is “bad, meany business that doesn’t give things away for free”… Since the M3 base spec 14” MacBook Pro models were already sold at a hefty discount vs prior base-spec 14” MacBook Pro models, it’s possible that they didn’t want to cut yet further into profits for these models since they were already selling them at a hefty discount. Now, with presumably increased production, changing the specs likely doesn’t make as much impact in profits as it may have initially with the M3 models. We don’t know if this is true or not, but it’s possible. And Apple knows best how to run Apple, period. If it’s best to offer a base spec model with 8GB of RAM, Apple will do it, if it’s best to offer a base spec model with 16GB, Apple will do that. Neither you or anyone else in this forum know better how to run Apple than Apple does…
For all of their 8GB Macs, all sold out at the same time, so now they need to go and sell their 16GB Macs? The coping is strong in this one.
I am not saying these will lose Mac OS support soon, just features. And now you suddenly know what base spec customers want? Look at the current AI features such as the writing tools or photo editing stuff. You do not think more sophisticated versions of these, that would need 16GB (i.e. movie editing), would be useful for "base spec" customers?
Comparing a full-fledged multitasking OS vs. iOS. The first is probably the reason to up the ram: add necessary breathing room.
Because, we did "win" (or you must be drinking lots Koolaid or Coping Cola), but most importantly the customer won: he/she gets now the 16GB Ram version for "free". Something the 8GB defenders would not happen any time soon. And to top it: even the PREVIOUS models get 16GB.
To me, these are 2 separate matters.
That Apple is including 16gb ram in all Macs is by no means any addition that 8gb ram does not suffice for consumers, and I see many people here attempting to conflate the two matters, which has always been my area of contention, because I am not one to say no to more free stuff either.
There is a line between getting more stuff for free, and arguing that a product is crippled due to the absence of that extra stuff. Which is precisely what is happening here. Apple has finally decide to include more ram in their Macs without increasing the price, I am genuinely happy for all future customers, and I continue to type this on an M1 MBA which shows no signs of slowing down (touch wood).
But I maintain that an argument should not only be right, but it should also be correct for the correct reasons. If you all think it's okay to lie about 8gb ram in an attempt to pressure Apple into doing something about it (I honestly doubt this thread has had any impact or influence but we will never know), then maybe it's a sign that I am getting too old for this place.
Because I for one can't knowingly argue about something I don't believe in, even if I know the outcome would be to my benefit. That's just the kind of person that I am.
They didn’t change all of their old models, just the MacBook Air models as far as I’m aware. So maybe they slowed down 8GB production in anticipation of switching to 16GB when the new MacBook Pro models came out. We simply don’t know. Staring a possible reason for this change isn’t “coping”, it’s just a potential reason for the change.
I’ve never claimed to know what all base-spec customers want. I specifically said “many” because I’ve seen several polls of Mac users in general who don’t care much about Apple Intelligence. If base spec customers do care about using every obscure AI feature, I’m sure they’ll buy accordingly.
This isn’t about a comparison between macOS, iOS, and iPadOS, but a fact that Apple Intelligence is designed to run on all of them. Because of this, I don’t think it’s likely there will be many Apple Intelligence features that won’t support 8GB Macs. There currently isn’t a single Apple Intelligence feature that doesn’t support 8GB Macs. Perhaps they’ll add some first-party app features that use higher RAM configurations, but I doubt they’d be directly tied to Apple Intelligence since Apple Intelligence is designed to run on all of these platforms. And customers can decide to buy the spec that supports the features they want.
You didn’t win anything. Keep telling yourself you did, but it doesn’t change anything. Apple adding a new model with different specs doesn’t prove the prior model was a “rip-off”, Apple was “wrong for offering it”, it “wasn’t more than enough for many customers”, or any such ideas your side of the debate has tried to claim as if it were fact… It would be like trying to claim that Apple releasing an M1 Mac is somehow proof that Intel Macs were useless… This simply doesn’t logically follow…
Exactly, very well said! 👍🏻. I have never said that it would be bad for Apple to up the base spec free-of-charge, the ideas I have been opposing this entire debate are claims like “8GB isn’t enough for anyone”, “8GB isn’t enough for “pros”” (insert other side’s arbitrary standard about what a “pro” computer user is), “Apple is just being greedy by not giving away higher specs for free because we think it costs them x assumed cost”, “Apple doesn’t respect their customers because they offer a spec configuration I don’t like”, etc…. Such arguments are illogical, and remain unproven and have failed to “win” anything…
If I owned one right now, I'd be selling it ASAP before folks realize what's going on here
Musical chairs .. get a seat before the music stops
Agreed, and this is why it's even harder, and even more crucial to continue to stay honest at a time when more people are interested in making statements rooted in ideology more than they are in making statements that are rooted in facts.
Apple did just literally enhance spec for free on the older model. They were definitely greedy asking 200 dollars for the same upgrade just yesterday.
“8GB isn’t enough for anyone”, “8GB isn’t enough for “pros””
Here we go again: 8GB is fine for some/serval/most (?) people (I did read posts), for NOW. But: what is the point of upgrading to M2 or M3 from M1 with just 8GB?
And 8GB is not enough for “pros”. A pro can be any working individual. But with a “pro” computer, Apple implies you can do heavy computing stuff. Like the (I)Mac pro. And these Mx processors are amazing for that! But the 8GB held the M3 MBP back to work at its full potential. And Apple realized this, so added 16 to the pro, AND nonpro machines. And the latter should worry the 8GB people here in terms of longevity of their machines.
And now production costs are probably lower, so upping base specs probably doesn’t impact profit as bad as it would have a year ago. Offering an older model with 16GB at a discount isn’t proof that they were “greedy” charging more when the models were brand new…. Apple also reduced the price of the iPad 10th gen, that doesn’t mean they were being “greedy” charging more for it when it was brand new.
What is the point of upgrading to the M2 or M3? The CPU capabilities are much improved. Often when people upgrade they don’t change the RAM spec when they do so. I at least don’t usually do so. The M3 has ray tracing and a lot of advantages vs the M1. That doesn’t mean the M1 isn’t still a good option for some. I like my M1 Mac (with 8GB). But for others, the M2 and M3 chips performance enhancements warrant an upgrade. By that “logic” 16GB RAM is holding the M3 back from reaching its “full potential”. It should start and end at 128GB of RAM so nobody gets an M3 that “doesn’t run at full potential”… This simply doesn’t make sense and doesn’t work as an argument. RAM specs don’t “prevent the chip from reaching its full potential”, they cater to different use-cases. Otherwise, you must argue that anything less than the highest RAM configuration is “holding the chip back”, which, of course, is a completely ridiculous argument…
I’m not worried in the slightest about the longevity of my 8GB M1 Mac. I plan to use it for at least 3-4 years. It’s performing wonderfully for my graphic design and 3D modeling/sculpting use-case. I’m even emulating Windows games on it. I don’t see my workflow suddenly needing double the RAM over the course of that timeframe. And I don’t see Apple dropping software support for it either. So I will continue to happily use my 8GB M1 Mac for my personal and professional use…
Last edited:
Are the 16 GB machines “future proof”? Is anything? I think that by the time M8 or M10 comes out, 16 GB won’t be enough.
Last edited:
Macs are typically kept for ~four years. So that’s the future they should endure.
No worries. When it's time, it's time.
I mean, my 2017 5k iMac stopped receiving software updates about 5-6 years later, and I am still keeping it because its display makes for a gorgeous YouTube viewing experience for my dad. It's not like it suddenly just stopped working overnight.