more often than none, the base models are always discounted by 3rd party retailer like costco, walmart, b&h, therefore the price difference is more often like 300-400 bucks.
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
I did just that by upgrading my 2017 MacBook Pro i5-2.3GHz 16Gb/256Gb to a 2020 M1 MacBook Air with 16Gb/256Gb. After the academic discount, trade-in and AppleCard cash back, it was around $810.
Not quite true. On a PC, if the GPU wants data that's sitting in the RAM, it would need to grab that data from the RAM into its own memory. This, in fact, increases memory footprint.
The memory is shared, which is different from split.
After another year of tepid Mac sales, they will probably bump the base ram to 12 Gb. They have that much contempt for their own users.
This.
When i bought my MacBook Pro 13 2015, base with 8 GB Ram, the upgrade to 16 cost 200 dollar more.
This was 2015...
Yes, once you click the link the word Professional doesn't appear until the user reaches the 16GB recommended use cases.
"Casual" and "Everyday Productivity apps" being highlighted just confirms the entry model is a flat out contradiction to the rest of the product line.
It's a MacBook Air with a better screen and extra ports.
It's okay, the apologists will come up with something to back up Apple's marketing department in due course.
This report won't affect anything though, as the sheep who flock in numbers will continue to prop up Apple's record profits each quarter.
It's the people who really need these machines for work that will suffer once again.
I'm sure it doesn't help that MacOS is an unoptimised bloated piece of trash either. Launching chrome inside a linux VM is faster than launching Safari in MacOS. That's a very basic comparison but seems to hold true for any app.
Oh and that 120hz screen is useless when MacOS drops frames on every animation.
This report won't affect anything though, as the sheep who flock in numbers will continue to prop up Apple's record profits each quarter.
It's the people who really need these machines for work that will suffer once again.
I'm sure it doesn't help that MacOS is an unoptimised bloated piece of trash either. Launching chrome inside a linux VM is faster than launching Safari in MacOS. That's a very basic comparison but seems to hold true for any app.
Oh and that 120hz screen is useless when MacOS drops frames on every animation.
8GB of ram in 2023 is a joke. And apple is nickel and dimeing everyone at this point. And it’s disgusting to think. I mean go nuts give everyone 10gb of from or 12GB of ram. It’s a weird number but this is the 8GB iPhone all over again. And apple should be ashamed.
Apple's new MacBook Pro models are powered by cutting-edge M3 Apple silicon, but the base configuration 14-inch model starting at $1,599 comes with just 8GB of working memory. In 2012, Apple launched the first MacBook Pro with Retina display, which also started with 8GB of RAM. Of course, Apple now uses integrated chips with unified memory architecture, which is why the company feels confident in arguing that 8GB on a Mac is comparable to 16GB on rival systems.
But not everyone is convinced. Apple's decision not to equip base models with at least 16GB of RAM in late 2023 has proved incongruous to many users, including Vadim Yuryev, co-host of the YouTube channel Max Tech. Yuryev decided to perform several real-world tests on two 14-inch M3 MacBook Pro models, one with 8GB and the other upgraded to 16GB of unified memory. The embedded video above has all the results.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, Yuryev saw significant performance improvements across the board using the 16GB machine under both middling and heavier workloads. The 8GB model suffered double-digit losses in Cinebench benchmarks, and took several minutes longer to complete photo-merging jobs in Photoshop as well as media exports in Final Cut and Adobe Lightroom Classic.
These tests were conducted as single operations with nothing else running, but also repeated with browser tabs, YouTube videos, spreadsheets, emails, and the like, open in the background to simulate typical real-world multi-tasking scenarios. As expected, the performance gap between the two machines widened further as the 8GB increasingly relied on its SSD swap file, while all-round responsiveness took a hit. Yuryev even reported crashes on the 8GB model during Blender rendering and a Final Cut export.
Notably, Blender's raytracing acceleration was available as an option on the 16GB models, but was conspicuously absent on the 8GB MacBook Pro for an identical rendering job, suggesting the reduced memory pool actually prevents the GPU cores from utilizing certain features.
Tests like these present a dilemma for customers looking to purchase a new MacBook Pro (or a new 8GB iMac, for that matter). Settling for 8GB appears to hinder the M3 chip's performance, but choosing 16GB or 24GB configuration options at checkout costs an extra $200 and $400, respectively, and Apple's machines cannot be upgraded at a later date because of their unified memory architecture.
After factoring in the extra $200 for 16GB on a 14-inch M3 MacBook Pro, an M3 Pro model with 18GB and several other extra features is only $200 more at $1,999. More galling perhaps is the fact that rival laptops at similar ballpark prices (Microsoft Surface or Lenovo Thinkpad, for example) come with at least 16GB of memory as standard. Apple customers are expected to pay $200 extra each jump up, which surely includes a healthy markup, however much Apple pays its RAM suppliers.
Is Apple's 8GB starting configuration for a $1,599 MacBook Pro really acceptable in 2023? And has the company's memory pricing policy affected your own purchase options? Let us know in the comments.
Article Link: 8GB RAM in M3 MacBook Pro Proves the Bottleneck in Real-World Tests
I get it. But, there will still be those that will complain Apple is over charging for 16GB and if they brought back the 8 option I'd be happy, yada yada.
But, we may very well see Apple move it to 16GB on M4. I can't imagine they will have as big of an improvement YoY from M3 to M4 without the additional RAM. That and pushing up the clock rate.
What I do know is the people defending it are giving ammunition to those that say Apple customers would defend anything Apple did.
It's amazing how many Apple cult members cannot fathom any shortcomings of Apple. I am fully invested in the Apple ecosystem but I'm not oblivious to their overly greedy business practices. The prices they charge for upgraded RAM and storage are borderline criminal. Their tax dodge setup in Ireland is even more sketchy. The lowered memory bandwidth on most of the M3 chips and so called Pro machines is ridiculous. They at least used to be somewhat accommodating on service and warranty issues but those days are long gone. I'm not deifying Steve Jobs like many do but I felt better about the Apple tax under his reign because at least we saw some innovation. Now they are just product tweakers and it looks like their marketing and accounting people have taken over everything.
James
James
I’m in agreement that 8gb is too low for any machine in 2023, but this test did not compare any Macs to PC
Problem is, you can't upgrade RAM when you need more. That's one HUGE bottleneck.
I did not want to read thru 13 pages; if you've already been updated on your flawed logic, apologies for "Office Spacing" it...lol.
The main SoC fabrication does not include the RAM or the storage. Both the RAM and storage are separate chips that are added to the overall SoC Package. So Apple skimping on memory and then charging 500x market value for upgrades is just bad karma.
WTF? It’s news that a computer with 16 gb performs better than one with 8 gb?!!! What a useless video and article!
A comparison with a PC with 16gb to test Apple’s claim would be worthy of publishing.
A comparison with a PC with 16gb to test Apple’s claim would be worthy of publishing.
We have Apple Stores all over the place now. If a consumer has any questions, they have a place to get to get an answer. I'm almost 100% positive that any Apple sales team member will advise a potential customer on what to get based on their needs. And most will suggest 16GB in this instance if the user lets them know how they use will be using it. While taking price into consideration.
People in this regard are not out in the wild guessing as to what to get "IF" they go to an Apple Store or store within a store like Best Buy and speak with someone.
For those that just buy online and look at only the price, well they have only themselves to blame.
It's not a disservice, its choice. You have to take some responsibility in the choices you make. Can't just say "Its all Apples fault, they shouldn't even sell this product like this knowing I'm going to buy it and get upset afterwards!".
You either know what you're going to do with it, or you go get some help if you're not sure. It's really not that hard.
Steve Jobs in 2007 "We don't ship junk."
Apple in 2023 "We still ship laptops with only 8gb of RAM"
16gb has been pretty standard for about the last 8 years.
Apple in 2023 "We still ship laptops with only 8gb of RAM"
16gb has been pretty standard for about the last 8 years.
On the flip side, nobody really has an obligation to defend the decisions a corporation makes either. People have a right to have their opinions on it, and folks who buy their products still have the right to voice their opinions (even if they don't agree with every single decision that a corporation makes).
Consumers are allowed to look out for consumers (and I'm sure you wouldn't disagree). That's just how the free market works.
Then Apple doesn’t need to call any of their 8GB models “ Pro “ sounds fair to me.
8GB on the M series chips can be like 16 GB on a pc, but it is still not going to be as fast as 16GB on the same M series chip. If you have the use cases that this guy tested, clearly you should not settle for 8 GB. For word processing, spreadsheets and web browsing, which is all many of us do, 8 GB is fine.
To me, the big advantages of apple silicon macs are quiet, cool, consistent running, and tremendous battery life. We just moved my wife from an XPS. It was plenty fast, but it ran hot and loud. It also crashed more often and the battery life was not nearly as strong. Her 15" M2 MacBook Air has a better keyboard, trackpad and screen to boot. She got 16GB of ram, but I doubt it makes much difference for her uses.
Not really. It wasn't until the last 5-8 years that RAM has become less and less upgradable in Laptops. Apple was just "ahead of the curve" on it....
Apples ram is essentially identical to PC ram. Same chips everything. Just soldered directly next to the chip on a bus going directly to the cpu. It’s not fancier ram. It’s just ram.
You're responding to a thread where people are disagreeing about the decision to put 8GB chips in a $1600 model, which implies that you are saying "don't buy their product" in response to people voicing their opinions.