Clearly most base spec customers likely don’t have as demanding of a workflow as yours which requires an M3 Max configuration. I’m not suggesting that everyone should use an 8GB base spec, or for that matter a 16GB base spec. What I am saying is that 8GB is more than enough for a lot of people. I would have expected to see a dramatic drop in base spec Mac sales if it wasn’t enough, but none of the evidence points towards that, all of the evidence I’ve seen points to the 8GB base spec Macs selling very well. Apple probably boosted the RAM on the newer base spec models for some heavier AI stuff. But many people don’t really care much about AI, and all of the current Apple Intelligence features run perfectly fine on my 8GB Mac. The only thing currently that I’m aware of that requires additional RAM is an AI feature in XCode, and I’m guessing most professional app developers would probably go with something more than a base spec in the first place…. Since the iPhones that support Apple Intelligence have 8GB RAM, I’m fairly sure we won’t end up seeing a bunch of Apple Intelligence features that require 16GB RAM anytime soon. And as I said before, many people don’t really care as much about AI. I would still recommend 8GB M1 Macs to many people.
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
So which part do you disagree with? The part where I don’t care a rats rear-end about what you think about my purchases (certified fact straight from the source), that you’ve bought the configuration that works for your needs and preferences, or that there are many people out there who don’t need an M3 Max configuration? 🤔
Ok, you didn’t answer my question, so basically, all I’m left with is you are just disagreeing for no apparent reason… Interesting…
If I thought you could discuss reasonable, I would engage, but that just isn't going to happen. I am not wasting my time.
How is asking clarifying questions to try to understand better your position on this and where you disagree with what I’ve said an unreasonable thing? Like I’ve said many times, my primary issue with this whole argument are the people going around saying that 8GB configurations are useless, aren’t enough for anyone, and that Apple was somehow just an evil greedy corp that hated it’s customers by not offering whatever subjective configuration some person throws out there that sounds good to them at the time. I don’t think you believe any of those things, but people have literally made such claims in this thread, and that’s what I mostly take issue with. 👍🏻
In my opinion, there’s a group of people out there who will always complain about base spec configurations. It’s like what some people started trying to do with base storage on the iPhones. The base spec iPhones come with 128GB of storage which is plenty of storage, yet some people are outraged and attacking Apple because they didn’t make the base spec 256GB. I don’t think such people will ever be satisfied or happy with the base spec configurations no matter how many times Apple boosts it. Just wait a year or two, and some of these same people will probably start complaining about “only” a 16GB base spec configuration…
I didn't at all, and you came at me as I did. My argument is that people buy Macs to use for years. The most basic person buying a Mac to surf the web and write a paper or your usual stuff on a computer wants said computer to last them years. With 8GB of RAM you are limiting the time that Mac last for reasonable use. In that way, the money saved by going with the base 8GB of RAM is now wasted because you need a new machine. That is my argument. Apple has always kept lower RAM specced devices longer than they should.
Sorry if it came across like I was going after you or something, that wasn’t how I was trying to come across. 👍🏻
How do you know that an 8GB Mac won’t last for years? I’m pretty sure Apple will drop official OS support for 8GB and 16GB M1 Macs at the same time. I think it really depends on what one deems “reasonable use”. Is reasonable use surfing the web, checking email, and playing some light games, or is it pro video editing, 3D animation, game development, or running high-end resource heavy games? If the first, I don’t see any major changes in RAM usage for that workflow, maybe I’m just missing something, but I don’t think Safari and the Mail app will suddenly consume double the RAM in the next 5-6 years. If the later is what one deems to be “reasonable use”, then I would recommend a higher spec. I think people can decide for themselves what reasonable use looks like for them, what spec configuration will support their workflow, and how long they wish to hold onto the device. For me, I don’t see my workflow changing to where I would need a higher configuration Mac anytime soon. I do most of my work on my iPad now anyways, I mostly use my Mac as a backup option, and for managing drives for remote storage access. When I want to do some graphic design work at my desk, I can use my design apps on their, and it runs flawlessly for me. If I want to do some 3D modeling or sculpting in Blender, that works as well. If I was heavy into 3D animation or more demanding things, I would get a higher spec configuration. But that works for running everything I want, and I can even run it all simultaneously if I want to as I’ve demonstrated earlier in this thread.
I think ultimately the problem lies when people trying to argue their subjective opinions as objective facts. I don’t think it’s helpful to tell people what they do or don’t need spec wise. Let them try and see what works for them. And going after Apple for offering a spec that some don’t like doesn’t make sense. Just go with a different spec if you don’t like it. It seems it sold very well and customer satisfaction was very high, so it seems there were plenty of customers who were happy with 8GB models. I personally know several people who own 8GB Macs that previously owned 16GB Intel Macs or Windows PCs, and are very happy with their 8GB Macs. I myself used to own a 16GB Intel Mac, and I definitely prefer my 8GB M1 Mac. 👍🏻
Sorry if it came across like I was going after you or something, that wasn’t how I was trying to come across.
How do you know that an 8GB Mac won’t last for years? I’m pretty sure Apple will drop official OS support for 8GB and 16GB M1 Macs at the same time. I think it really depends on what one deems “reasonable use”. Is reasonable use surfing the web, checking email, and playing some light games, or is it pro video editing, 3D animation, game development, or running high-end resource heavy games? If the first, I don’t see any major changes in RAM usage for that workflow, maybe I’m just missing something, but I don’t think Safari and the Mail app will suddenly consume double the RAM in the next 5-6 years. If the later is what one deems to be “reasonable use”, then I would recommend a higher spec. I think people can decide for themselves what reasonable use looks like for them, what spec configuration will support their workflow, and how long they wish to hold onto the device. For me, I don’t see my workflow changing to where I would need a higher configuration Mac anytime soon. I do most of my work on my iPad now anyways, I mostly use my Mac as a backup option, and for managing drives for remote storage access. When I want to do some graphic design work at my desk, I can use my design apps on their, and it runs flawlessly for me. If I want to do some 3D modeling or sculpting in Blender, that works as well. If I was heavy into 3D animation or more demanding things, I would get a higher spec configuration. But that works for running everything I want, and I can even run it all simultaneously if I want to as I’ve demonstrated earlier in this thread.
I think ultimately the problem lies when people trying to argue their subjective opinions as objective facts. I don’t think it’s helpful to tell people what they do or don’t need spec wise. Let them try and see what works for them. And going after Apple for offering a spec that some don’t like doesn’t make sense. Just go with a different spec if you don’t like it. It seems it sold very well and customer satisfaction was very high, so it seems there were plenty of customers who were happy with 8GB models. I personally know several people who own 8GB Macs that previously owned 16GB Intel Macs or Windows PCs, and are very happy with their 8GB Macs. I myself used to own a 16GB Intel Mac, and I definitely prefer my 8GB M1 Mac.
Here is my reasoning. We have a prime example from Apple who was somewhat taken by surprise by AI, but also trying to use the lower RAM in their phones for as long as they could. AI comes along, and suddenly 6GB of RAM isn’t enough, 8 is what is required. So a once 5-6 year device is now limited in what features it will get in iOS down the road. My point being, right now 8GB is enough to run all the MacOS features and AI, but Apple has clearly shown it doesn’t have an issue dropping support for certain features on a rather new device because of RAM limitations. I think that’s very fair to have some worry that these machines aren’t as likely to be fully supported for years to come.
I do think that Apple held on to the 8GB of RAM way too long. They offer the 16GB models that are the base now for the same price. Just as they do in phones when they deem the storage isn’t enough anymore. It’s a money grab and the margins are way higher that way. I think that’s a well known fact.
And as I pointed out, not all people care as much about AI. Here’s my reasoning. If it can do the things you want it to do today, that likely shouldn’t change over 5-6 years unless what you want to do with it also changes quite dramatically. I don’t think people really should buy hardware based on promises of future functionality that doesn’t currently exist. So if people enter with that mindset, I think things are different.
I don’t agree that it’s a “money grab”, I think it’s just the way you have to do it if you’re a company that doesn’t want to go bankrupt. As long as base specs are sufficient for most average users (which high sales of base specs and high customer satisfaction indicate they are), then it’s good. If they sold Macs for production cost and not a cent more, they wouldn’t make any money. So of course there will be a markup. The price for the base spec isn’t based on the cost of production. It’s based on the value that that configuration provides and what end customers are willing to pay for it. Products are not sold for production cost, so the existence of a markup doesn’t equal it’s a “cashgrab”…
I'm using 8GB MBA and using Xcode daily with no issues. I don't plan to upgrade just yet. I've got no issues whatsoever. No slow downs or anything. It does what I need and 8GB of RAM is enough for me and it's enough for even ItsMyNaturalColor. It works.Run and hide….
But all kidding aside, if you scroll through this forum thread (https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...still-and-hows-it-holding-up-for-you.2446947/) you notice one thing: the people with 16GB ram or more hang on to their m1 (whether air or pro), while the 8GB people indicate they either upgraded already or about to. Just saying…Of course, not a very scientific questionnaire , but still.
If and when I do upgrade from my M1 MBA, it will likely not be due to its 8gb ram, and more simply because I want something new. It’s over 4 years at this point, my computing needs as a teacher haven’t really grown any more intense in terms of resources, and I don’t see my need for ram suddenly doubling overnight so long as I stay a teacher.Run and hide….
But all kidding aside, if you scroll through this forum thread (https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...still-and-hows-it-holding-up-for-you.2446947/) you notice one thing: the people with 16GB ram or more hang on to their m1 (whether air or pro), while the 8GB people indicate they either upgraded already or about to. Just saying…Of course, not a very scientific questionnaire , but still.
In the same vein, I don’t think an M1 Mac with 16gb ram is going to be supported any longer compared to the base 8gb ram model. Apple is likely going to just cut them off based on processor model.
It’s possible to both say that nobody will say no to free ram, while also admitting that they may not necessarily have a need for that much ram in the first place.
apologies? lol if we doing that plenty of folks owes me a apology too for calling me all sorts of things for stating apple is ripping ppl off for charging 200 bucks for 20 bucks worth of ram.
good job you can run couple safari tabs open with "several other apps" do me a favor and show me the memory pressure after couple of weeks, would also help if you can show what tabs you are running, whats the load size and layers and filters on the blender. blender typically needs 16gb with 32gb recommended, and this isn't me, i'm reading this off blender's own requirement. the fact that you're claiming you are making due with just 8 tells me most likely you working with a small project that hasn't been edited much or just getting started and haven't hit memory swap yet, and when you do, everything becomes a snail crawl.
Exactly! It’s like some people expect that somehow people who are currently fine with 8GB models will somehow end up doubling their workload or something. Because AI this AI that. But the truth of the matter is that many people don’t care all that much about AI, and even with that all of the Current Apple Intelligence features run on 8GB RAM and will likely for the foreseeable future. Apple upped the RAM on iPhones to 8GB to support Apple Intelligence, so clearly they feel confident that 8GB RAM will be enough to support Apple Intelligence for a long time, otherwise they probably would have just gone with 16GB in the iPhones. So 8GB Macs can currently use all of the Apple Intelligence features, and there’s only one AI-related feature in XCode (not an app most average people are going to be using) that requires 16GB. And Apple will likely drop support for 8GB M1 Macs and 16GB M1 Macs at the same time.
It wasn’t just “a couple Safari tabs”, I had 19 tabs open. And people use Blender for 3D animation as well, which is probably where the RAM figures your citing would come from. I do some 3D modeling and sculpting, I am not creating 3D animations or doing complex renders, so the RAM use is different, and I already talked about that before. The RAM requirements that Blender is going to provide are for running every function or feature of Blender at top speed/performance. Those specs are absolutely not required for every minor tool in the app… It’s kind of like how the game minimum requirements on Steam for games is often not required to run the games at lower settings, they’re usually the specs for running the games at top settings and high frame-rates. Same here.
And using Blender in any capacity is well beyond the scope of most average user workflows… It’s a niche software for a niche workflow. If someone is a professional game developer or 3D animator, etc. then sure, get a better spec, and you know what, the base spec model is not really intended for that kind of workflow…
please provide what type of tabs, is it basic google doc you're looking at 25mb, if its more complex html you looking at 220ish mb. so again, i ask what type of tabs.
finally some details, so you are editing existing assets, whats the project size may i ask? please show the activity monitory for memory when you have your next project open if you could.
they are absolutely not defined by the most top end requirement, I can load up a low res environment texture asset and it would easily take up 4-5gb of ram. if you want to make a video game comparison, I can load up civ 5, with lowest setting, and by the time i get to turn 100 the computer would be choking on rams.
then why did you bring it up, if you knew it wasn't part of your avg users workflow.
Apple explicitly made it clear that 8GB RAM is really no longer viable for a significant number of their customers. They even bumped up the RAM on Macs still available for sale that were originally released nearly 3 years ago.
If it works for you that’s great, but this argument is over.
If it works for you that’s great, but this argument is over.
This is true in terms of newer OS releases, but it'll be more future-proof regardless.
Usually e-commerce sites like eBay, Amazon, etc. and news sites and such that most people would be interested in browsing.
I’ve never had any noticeable slowdown when working on my 3D models. I don’t recall what the project size was, usually I import the 3D models that I create in Nomad Sculpt or Valence 3D on my iPad into Blender to occasionally make some tweaks.
I brought it up to demonstrate that if it can run such niche software, it should be more than enough for the average user who wants to surf the web, check their email, stream some videos, and play Stardew Valley… I don’t think anyone should have any problems doing such things if I can run Affinity Designer with a dozen files open, Affinity Photo with a dozen files open, Blender with a project file from Valence 3D open, and Safari with 19 web tabs open, plus several other apps running simultaneously…
More future proof for who? What specs will or won’t be future proof for someone are largely subjective. For one person, 16GB is “future proof”, while for another, it would be the bare minimum and they would actually need higher specs in order for it to be “future proof” for their more demanding workflow. And for many others, 8GB is plenty future proof. Many average users don’t have extremely demanding workloads. They want a computer to stream movies, scroll social media, surf the web, check email, maybe zoom call, write some documents, and play some light games like Stardew Valley. 8GB is plenty for that, especially when I can do the niche things I can on an 8GB model… I proved that I can simultaneously run my design apps with dozens of files open, Blender with a project open, Safari with 19 tabs open, plus several other apps all open at once. I provided all of the screenshots. I doubt that most base spec customers expect to run all of these softwares simultaneously on a base spec. Most people probably don’t even expect to run Blender in any capacity on a base spec model. The fact it actually can run that complex of a workflow without a beach ball cursor speaks volumes. I doubt the average user would touch a fraction of that workload capacity. I don’t even normally use my computer that way, I don’t usually run all of my design softwares and Blender simultaneously, I would usually use either my design softwares, or Blender, not both at once. That workflow is hardly what I would call average, yet it runs fine on my 8GB Mac. And despite all your doubts, I proved it….
Last edited:
ebay, amazon, and pretty sure these news sites, all uses HTML with javascript front end, which on avg is around 220mb per tab on chrome and 100mb on safari. if you do 19 tabs thats 2-4gb of ram right there.
you're at 2-4gb already, depending on the project you could be facing yellow memory pressure.
sounds like your memory compression is working hard, i would check the the cpu usage during the compression period, if you leave everything as is for couple of weeks without hitting memory swap i'll be amazed.
Memory Swap isn’t a problem to be avoided at all costs. Computers have been using memory swap for decades. It isn’t some big boogeyman I’m scared of… I don’t really care what “memory swap” it’s using, I care that it runs smoothly. I also don’t sit there always looking at Activity Monitor fixated on it. And I’ve never seen Safari use 2-4GB of RAM when I have looked at Activity Monitor. I usually don’t use Activity Monitor, it’s not included on my iPhone or iPad, the system just does what it does in the background, and as long as things aren’t freezing, I don’t see a beach ball cursor, etc., I’m good…
mem swap is a problem if your nand speed is slower than your dram speed, if you have the lowest ssd capacity m2 mba it was especially noticeable once you hit mem swap territory.
never said that was a requirement, merely using that as a measurement standard, otherwise its all circumstantially he said she said.
safari has a way of suspending inactive tabs more aggressively than chrome, thats why you are seeing the low ram usage, but like i stated before, the longer you keep it open, the more ram it will consume, keep these 19 tabs open for couple of weeks, safari will start caching contents and sites with auto-refresh and dynamic content will chew into that 8gb real quick.
i'm not sure how thats relevant to the discussion on hand.
With nand speed as fast as it is, I really don’t think it would be that noticeable to most average users. Especially for the lighter workloads they’ll be more likely to have. I wouldn’t even normally run all of those apps plus Blender. I’ve never seen my RAM pressure go into red. It’s always been green or yellow when I’ve taken the time to look when I had lots of apps open and wanted to see how it was doing. But as I said before, I don’t use Activity Monitor that often.
The reason I mentioned my level of usage of Activity Monitor is to establish two things. One, you were asking for a bunch of Activity Monitor values that I generally don’t see or take all the time to look at because it’s unnecessary for me, and two, I think some people put far too much emphasis on Activity Monitor numbers that don’t really matter if the system is running without obvious slowdowns, freezing, beach balls, etc. Some people make a big deal if your system ever uses Swap Memory, even though it’s literally designed to do that, and computers have done that for decades, and it doesn’t cause them to go up in flames or something. I don’t waste the time looking at an Activity Monitor for my iPhone or iPad to determine if I can do something with them. So why would I with my Mac? The best test is to just try running things and see how the system performs. Does it crash? Noticeably slow down? Beachball cursor? If so, then it’s not running well. If it’s not doing any of those things, and it’s running smooth, then it’s good. And even stress-testing the system with Blender plus all those other things I would never normally run simultaneously, the system never showed any obvious signs of slowdown or crashing. So if it can do all of that smoothly, I think it should be more than enough for scrolling social media, streaming movies, checking email, writing a couple documents, scrolling through photos, and playing Stardew Valley, the kind of things that most average people want out of a laptop…
1: Did you try running it on an 8GB AS Mac, or are you basing that statement on your experience with 8GB Intel computers?
2: No one has argued that people who have actual need for 16GB AS computers should be content with 8GB. If you need 16GB, buy 16GB. That doesn’t mean 8GB is/was not enough for someone else.
What you are actually complaining about is the price of a 16GB Mac. Not the price of an 8GB Mac. Once you realize that, the discussion completely changes.