Because their entire business model works on this principle?
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
Objective proof of what?There's objective proof- and we all know it if we are able to think as consumers (first)- but I suspect by the time this thread closes, the messenger will be killed, skewered, tarred & feathered, etc. I suspect pitchforks and torches are already in fan hands and they will soon be storming the castle.
Apple's statement: 8GB of RAM in Mac is the same as 16GB of RAM in a PC.
we get proof here that 8GB of RAM in a Mac is not the same as 16GB of RAM in a Mac. Which nobody ever claimed, otherwise, why even sell 16GB of RAM as an option?
There's no video comparing 8GB of RAM in a Mac to 8/16GB in a PC. Which is what would be needed to make this comparison.
And, they can count on folks telling others NOT to buy the 8 GB version, ensuring greater profits!
More accurately, Apple makes sure that no given model is completely satisfactory from a price/performance ratio aspect so that you be more likely to wander as far up the price structure as your wallet will allow.
The ramifications of the comparison are important. Already there have been articles about for example the M1 iMac SSD failing prematurely as a result of swapping.
The more swapping then obviously the more the SSD has to work and all drives have a finite life. Swapping decreases that.
This would be especially valid on base configuration of 8Gb, 256SSD, and with more sophisticated software with greater RAM demands, some already stipulating 16Gb minimum, it would be foolish for Apple not to upgrade to 16Gb RAM, as the prospect of facing yet another class action could arise and with that the bad PR that accompanies it.
Apple should bite the bullet, make 16Gb base configuration which will cost them next to nothing as they save on production of the 8Gb config.
A little research will show that swapping decreases life of an SSD, and the less RAM allied to more complex demands from software including the prospect of increasing games for the Mac, let alone those on intensive productive work via 'pro' machines could end in tears for users and Apple alike.
The more swapping then obviously the more the SSD has to work and all drives have a finite life. Swapping decreases that.
This would be especially valid on base configuration of 8Gb, 256SSD, and with more sophisticated software with greater RAM demands, some already stipulating 16Gb minimum, it would be foolish for Apple not to upgrade to 16Gb RAM, as the prospect of facing yet another class action could arise and with that the bad PR that accompanies it.
Apple should bite the bullet, make 16Gb base configuration which will cost them next to nothing as they save on production of the 8Gb config.
A little research will show that swapping decreases life of an SSD, and the less RAM allied to more complex demands from software including the prospect of increasing games for the Mac, let alone those on intensive productive work via 'pro' machines could end in tears for users and Apple alike.
I think we have objective proof that a really well done YouTube video presenting negative information about Apple will be financially beneficial to the producer of said video.
I think you meant:
Apple makes sure that no given model is completely satisfactory from a performance aspect so that you be more likely to wander as far up the price structure as your wallet will allow.
Upgrading specs worsens price/performance ratio
I think we have objective proof that a really well done click-bait YouTube video presenting misinformation about Apple will be financially beneficial to the producer of said video.I think we have objective proof that a really well done YouTube video presenting negative information about Apple will be financially beneficial to the producer of said video.
Fixed.
Until I see a video that shows something that counters what @vadimyuryev posted, I find it wrong for people to continue disparaging his workI think we have objective proof that a really well done YouTube video presenting negative information about Apple will be financially beneficial to the producer of said video.
The latter does not make sense. What you actually want is to have 16 GB cheaper
Apple would have done far better to just raise the base price by $100 to allow the base model to have 16Gb. After last year's fiasco with missing heat sinks on M2 MacBook Airs causing thermal throttling and half speed base SSDs, anything else that smacks of contempt for their own user base isn't going to help sales.
Source of M1 SSD failures? I remember lots of hysterics about swapping, not articles with proof there are a large number of failures.
In any case it would be stupid of Apple to do anyway, and especially continue to do since a large number of those base M1's are just ending their warranty/AppleCare coverage. Are you suggesting Apple is deliberately increasing their return rate? Why would they do something like that?
Any argument does not need to come in the form of a video. His thumbnail is plain wrong and just requires a trivial counter-proof.
If anything, Apple will just drop the price of an upgrade. The 8 GB model won't be ditched.
You won’t, because the dry facts of the situation aren’t sensational enough to make it worth the time for a producer to produce. EVERYONE on YouTube with lots of subscribers and views per video are primarily looking to keep the money rolling in. Producing a poorly performing video ACTUALLY hurts the channel that produced the video. When the algorithm is writing your checks, the goal is not to be accurate or truthful, it’s to appease the algorithm, be as sensational and over-the-top as possible with EVERY release or see the algorithm present your videos to fewer people.
Everyone knows that’s how it works. If one wants accurate information, YouTube is NOT the place to find it.
Asked him a question directly on here and he conveniently disappeared 😂
The problem with the video is it is irrelevaent to what Apple said:
As spotted by MacRumors, Bochers was asked about the 8GB in the entry-level MacBook Pro in an interview with Lin YiLYi on the Chinese-language video-sharing site Bilibili and he defended Apple’s decision: “8GB on an M3 MacBook Pro is probably analogous to 16GB on other systems. We just happen to be able to use it much more efficiently.”
Comparing 2 MBPs with 8 vs 16 GB of Ram using memory intensive programs shows that more Ram is better. Not a surprising conclusion. Apple didn't even say it was definitively the same.
People are running with the comaprison ot complain Apple lied and 8GB of Ram are wortheless; hardly reasonable conclusions.
Frankly, anyone who springs for FCP at $299 probably understand what is needed and will buy the configuration taht will work for them
Exactly. I doubt buyers of FCP are thinking a 8GB M3 will be up to the task.
The 8GB RAM configuration is not as fast as the 16GB configuration?? I am shocked, SHOCKED!!
I hold anyone I do business with to a high standard.
Apple is failing to meet that standard.
Anyone who needs to use these types of tools regularly won't be buying the base model. And if it's something they do once a month. So what if it takes a bit longer?
The base model is great for many roles. Most coders. Most text content writers. And on and on.
The base model is great for many roles. Most coders. Most text content writers. And on and on.