Doesn't take a self-proclaimed genius to know that 8 GB of universal memory would not be as good as 16 GB of RAM + an additional 8 GB VRAM like many PC laptops in this price range possess. The 8 GB MBP has 8 GB total for the pool.
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
Show you proof of what? That that is what Apple said and not “the 8GB RAM model of M3 MacBook is just as fast as the 16GB RAM model of M3 MacBook”, or that an 8 GB M-series chip runs as well as 16GB Intel? I know several people who upgraded with an 8GB RAM MacBook Air and were beating a prior gen 16GB Intel model. I’ve personally experienced the difference, and an 8GB M chip works faster than a 16GB Intel in my experience. I remember there were even articles and videos at the time where 8GB M1s were smashing 16GB Intel computers in the same price range.
So obviously no one here should get the base model- we all would want a different machine. I think the heart of the issue is whether Apple if fooling novices into getting the 8GB model. I'm not that concerned.
If a novice comes into an Apple Store determined to get a "Pro" laptop while also not understanding 8 GB vs 16, they still see several "MacBook Pros" sitting next to each other. I don't think they are being fooled if they pick up the cheapest one without asking any questions and it performs notably worse than any of the others would.
If a novice comes into an Apple Store determined to get a "Pro" laptop while also not understanding 8 GB vs 16, they still see several "MacBook Pros" sitting next to each other. I don't think they are being fooled if they pick up the cheapest one without asking any questions and it performs notably worse than any of the others would.
They said it was true, so they must have seen evidence of it. Therefore the obligation to show proof is on them.
That's how it works, friend.
You said it is true that 16GB in a PC is the same as 8 GB in the base M3 MBP.
If its true, you must have some evidence of it besides "Apple said so" so lets see those charts.
what a dissapointment that aapl went with only 8gb
these numbers prove that 16gb should be minimum - for power usage
however
if i were a power user - i would shell out an extra 200$
and just bite it
these numbers prove that 16gb should be minimum - for power usage
however
if i were a power user - i would shell out an extra 200$
and just bite it
Aww, but here’s the problem with that, and the reason an 8GB RAM chip with Unified Memory can beat 16GB non-unified memory: Virtual Memory swap. Because you don’t have the added latency of bus connections etc. between the “RAM” and the storage, Virtual RAM isn’t much slower than native RAM, and is way faster than virtual RAM on a non-unified system.
The point is that the 8Gb M1/M2/M3 machines are going to be unnecessarily hitting on the SSD for swap to compensate for the low ram configuration and thus will be wearing out the SSD prematurely. Apple never misses a beat in accelerating the product replacement cycle (such as not providing a user settable hard charge limit on the laptop batteries).
Not necessarily. Duplicate data may exist on both the RAM and VRAM.
Also, performance is hit by the need to transfer data between RAM and VRAM.
Welcome to the world of none binary memory where everything doesn't have to double up anymore.
What are you people wanna? Beefed up MBP for 300 more then 15" Air? Have you failed in Math classes?
You wanna double storage, double RAM, Pro screen, more ports, better speakers, bigger battery and New CPU for 300 bucks?
I would never buy new mac to pay full Apple tax but I do not need it. Who is not sattisfied can get refurbished M1 Max. You can get pretty beefed up for similar price and it will be much better for multitasking.
I am anything but not apologizing Apple but until they make all machines 16 GB it is crying on wrong grave.
While the high prices Apple charges for upgrades is a legitimate argument, what exactly is wrong with them offering a lower cost, lower spec option for those who might want it?
Previously, if you wanted the MacBook Pro chassis, you had no choice but to pay $2,000. If that was too expensive or was more than you needed, you were stuck with an Air or the old-school 13" Pro.
Now, the $2000 level is still the same. They just added another cheaper option.
To be clear, I do think 16GB should be the minimum standard for Pro, but within the context of their existing model lineup, it could be an interesting option for some people.
Previously, if you wanted the MacBook Pro chassis, you had no choice but to pay $2,000. If that was too expensive or was more than you needed, you were stuck with an Air or the old-school 13" Pro.
Now, the $2000 level is still the same. They just added another cheaper option.
To be clear, I do think 16GB should be the minimum standard for Pro, but within the context of their existing model lineup, it could be an interesting option for some people.
The Apple rep is probably the same person who stiffed some younger kids into taking nickels over dimes because the nickels are bigger.
That would make sense if the entry price was actually low... but it's not. The problem is not that Apple put 8GB in a "Pro" machine, it's that Apple put 8GB in a pro machine that is priced like something much more capable. I would argue that at Apple's current prices almost all of the lower end Macbook Pros and Airs should ship with 16GB standard. If Apple wants to offer less capable 8GB machines they should lower the starting price.
Which I did by purchasing a 16Gb/256Gb M1 MacBook Air this past month instead of an M2 MacBook Air. Between the thermal throttling and the half speed base 256Gb of the single chip SSD, there is only so much contempt for the customer that one can tolerate.... and I say this as someone who has been purchasing Macs since the original model.
You suggest that "Apple has clearly changed the order of importance" but I would say that Apple just (IMO appropriately) adjusts to what buyers want/need. E.g. 2000-2010 for instance, every graphics person needed a stronger desktop tower and many of us also had a (performance limited) laptop. Then 2011 Apple introduced Apple-exclusive-for-a-year Thunderbolt and the first true desktop-replacement competent laptop. Today Apple gives us the Studio, and most graphics pros no longer need to chase stronger desktop towers.
It's not just application memory requirement creep. Even with current apps, you will be hitting the swap on the SSD and prematurely wearing out the device.
If Apple wants to sell 8GB, do that on the Air. But the Pro should be 16GB default.
It’s embarrassing and comes across as greedy.
My 2017 iMac has started its final 3 years due to it now only receiving security updates for the next 3 years. At the end of that period, I will need to upgrade. I will only upgrade if the keyboard/mouse is USB-C and the base model is higher than 8GB. If I reach the end of 3 years (or end of security updates) and both of these items have not been met, I will completely drop the Mac all together.
I will not play Apple’s games and while it might be petty, I feel strongly about this because of principle. Apple needs to stop using proprietary lighting ports and they need to stop lying to customers and claiming 8GB is equal to 16GB on other hardware.
They also need to fire the executive that claimed that.
It’s embarrassing and comes across as greedy.
My 2017 iMac has started its final 3 years due to it now only receiving security updates for the next 3 years. At the end of that period, I will need to upgrade. I will only upgrade if the keyboard/mouse is USB-C and the base model is higher than 8GB. If I reach the end of 3 years (or end of security updates) and both of these items have not been met, I will completely drop the Mac all together.
I will not play Apple’s games and while it might be petty, I feel strongly about this because of principle. Apple needs to stop using proprietary lighting ports and they need to stop lying to customers and claiming 8GB is equal to 16GB on other hardware.
They also need to fire the executive that claimed that.
Thank you for the support and very glad to help!
We're also planning on making on this video as well
8GB M3 MacBook Pro vs 16GB Windows Laptop which is similarly priced.
A $1600 laptop is not lower cost at all. Should have more than 8 and shouldn’t have to pay $200 more to get it
Wrong. What is so hard to understand about granny with her email not needing more than 8 GB RAM?
I already provided you with plenty of evidence. I don’t have every link I’ve ever looked at in the last 3 years readily available, but I know beyond the shadow of a doubt I’ve seen videos, I’ve read articles, I have my own experience, and I’ve seen friends of mine’s systems pitted against each other, and 8GB Apple Silicon really does hold it’s own against 16GB Intel.
Since you're here, what did Apple do wrong?Thank you for the support and very glad to help!
We're also planning on making on this video as well
8GB M3 MacBook Pro vs 16GB Windows Laptop which is similarly priced.