8GB RAM in M3 MacBook Pro Proves the Bottleneck in Real-World Tests

[Wildkraut]

And being apple is the only manufacturer to sell macOS, monopoly fuels arbitrary price increases. Realistically speaking, what can customer do if their work requires a Mac of some sort? They have to pay even if apple charges $24000 for a base model with 2GB of RAM or $89000 for a 16GB model. Doesn’t matter to apple either way.

Exactly, and this is probably what drives most of Apples Computer sales, the force of having to also support the large iOS customer base that is subtle locked-in by a bunch of interlaced strategies dragging their iOS monopoly further.

To be honest, that's the only reason why I still have an Apple Computer on the sideboard acting solely as a compiling device for Apple stuff. Apple as my main device ended with the iMac late 2012.

 

[jkozlow3]

8GB is completely unacceptable in 2023. I would never purchase a machine with less than 16GB. Ridiculous.

 

[hans1972]

Nobody would complain about the 8GB base model if the RAM upgrades weren't multiple times more expensive than they should be.

Most people complaining about 8Gb RAM doesn't mention price at all. They're just focusing on it being in the base configuration. Since they don't mention price at all, it can't be important.

 

[ArkSingularity]

16Gb will affect performance for memory intensive applications as tested here.

For a lot of users who are using mostly Office and similar applications, the difference in performance might not be present at all and in many cases be good enough.

I started to notice it on my 8GB Mac when I was multitasking more. It's not hard to start to push up against the limits of an 8GB Mac before it starts having to compress memory or swap stuff out (all it takes is a web browser with a half a dozen tabs before you start to get close).

Apple does such a good job of managing memory that the slowdowns are really quite minor (if noticeable at all) for everyday use, even with some moderately heavy stuff. Where I noticed the difference was in switching apps or launching new ones. If you are already running in yellow memory pressure (not hard to reach on 8GB), things will take a couple seconds longer to open or launch rather than opening almost instantly, whereas you really don't notice that nearly as much on a 16GB system.

Truthfully, the 8GB system still handled my "everyday" workloads (including most of my development workflows) just fine. Could I notice the difference? Yes, I could. But did it feel "slow"? Not at all.

 

[hans1972]

The issue is calling it a “Pro” machine since that implies it will run software for developers and creatives.

It doesn't imply that all. It only means more expensive and usually bigger and heavier.

If you use my description of "pro", you'll see it fits Apple's products much better than yours.

 

[jkozlow3]

It's pathetic when a brand new Macbook "Pro" comes with the same amount of RAM as my iPhone (15 Pro).

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

It's proof you benefit from more memory if you're using memory intensive applications like Lightroom and Final Cut Pro.

It's not proof if you're using Office, Teams and Safari using simple web applications.

I know how much RAM I need. Think of your countless fellow consumers who do not and assume Apple is going to deliver a superior computer for the relative premium price Apple demands.

We consumers(?) who know should not feel one bit of glee in fellow consumers learning this lesson the hard way (as they probably will in the next few years)... when a bit more RAM bought in Apple volume would barely nick the profitability per unit sold... as evidenced by what you or I could buy a SINGLE stick of 16GB DDR5 RAM at retail pricing.

And if 16GB was BASE, all Apple consumers would benefit. This thread wouldn't even exist, replaced with a bunch of other threads and posts by people acknowledging Apple finally stepping up and addressing this shortcoming of their own choosing. Instead, it's yet another round of pinched RAM and defenders defending such choices at the cost of customers who pay up for a Mac and not even know that it may not quite be enough for life of device.

The 8GB ship for Mac has basically sailed some number of years ago. Apple's focus on maximizing every possible nickel for "another quarter of record profit..." just hasn't acknowledged that yet. As evidenced by this thread, even pools of fans are increasingly tiring of the "19 for shareholders:1 for consumers" approach. I'm just about an Apple everything guy myself and I'm increasingly frustrated by this kind of thing. Burning accumulated goodwill lasts only so long and then it needs a refill. Shareholders can actually benefit from happier customers too.

 

[hans1972]

Then they can buy a MacBook Air. [...] A Pro should start with 16GB of RAM.

Or they can buy a MacBook Pro with 8Gb of RAM having two great choices. Just because a low-level option exist, doesn't mean that you have less choices.

A pro machine should be more expensive and usually bigger and heavier. Apple does that.

 

[Wildkraut]

It's pathetic when a brand new Macbook "Pro" comes with the same amount of RAM as my iPhone (15 Pro).

Blasphemy!
On Mac's 8GB = 16GB
On iPhone's 8GB = 8GB
/s

 

[jkozlow3]

Or they can buy a MacBook Pro with 8Gb of RAM having two great choices. Just because a low-level option exist, doesn't mean that you have less choices.

A pro machine should be more expensive and usually bigger and heavier. Apple does that.

Disagree. 8GB is unacceptable. And not having 16GB as the base configuration means:

1. We need to special order 16GB if that's the only change we want
2. We cannot ever get a good deal since it's not the stock configuration and we're basically stuck paying full MSRP.

 

[ArkSingularity]

Disagree. 8GB is unacceptable. And not having 16GB as the base configuration means:

1. We need to special order 16GB if that's the only change we want
2. We cannot ever get a good deal since it's not the stock configuration and we're basically stuck paying full MSRP.

This is the biggest issue with the new base model configuration in my opinion. Previously it was pretty easy to get a base model 14" M1 or M2 Pro with 16GB of RAM for $1500 or $1600 on a good sale. Now, it waits to be seen whether the higher end 18GB models are going to go on deep sales like before.

Unfortunately, I don't have my hopes up too high for this one. Third party retailers are much more likely to deeply discount the base models than they are to discount the upgraded ones.

 

[magbarn]

Sample bias?

A quick scan of ebay and offerup will answer your question.

 

[alexonline]

Pretty sure it’s just so Apple can claim a low entry price. Honestly, 8gb does get you pretty far for just a jack of all trades, master of none laptop.

If you’re a true pro user, you will get more RAM. If you’re an “everyday” average user, not doing ray tracing with Blender, but social media, email, office work, browsing… 8GB does the job just fine.

 

[bobcomer]

Bill Gates said 640K is enough for anyone.

That was a long, long, time ago, when computers were 8 and 16 bit -- things are different these days, even in Windows.

 

[hans1972]

Even my Mac that only sees office use needs more than 8GB. And as I said above, nobody would complain about the 8GB base models if the upgrade prices were, say, just 2x the normal rate instead of 5x or whatever it is.

So why are so many only talking about 16Gb being part of the base configuration? That means they're good even if Apple increases the price also.

Almost no ones says "Apple should increase the base configuration to include 16Gb of RAM without increasing the price".
They all say "Apple should increase the base configuration to include 16Gb of RAM".

 

[jkozlow3]

If you’re a true pro user, you will get more RAM. If you’re an “everyday” average user, not doing ray tracing with Blender, but social media, email, office work, browsing… 8GB does the job just fine.

No, it doesn't. I'm an "everyday" (non-pro) user and 8GB is trash. I upgraded my 1 year old machine for 16GB because 8GB wasn't cutting it...at all.

 

[boak]

A quick scan of ebay and offerup will answer your question.

Doesn’t answer the question. There could just simply be a lot more 8 GB models sold by Apple.

 

[hans1972]

Apple once pushed the computer industry forward,

Increasing the base memory in MacBook Pros won't push the computer industri forward either.
We don't need Apple to push the industry. We just want them to create good products and being expensive.

 

[YonTom]

Some of those people would pay extra to have a nice screen though. And this model is aimed at that market.

You’re telling me? I’d be more than fine with a base M3, but I want the 16” XDR screen so… $$$$$

 

[jgdeschamps]

Just for kicks, I just did a video capture using macOS's integrated app where:
1) I opened 22 tabs on Safari, 5 of them were 4K YouTube videos playing, not paused.
2) Proceeded to open the new Take a Day Trip Logic Pro session with 81 audio+virtual instrument tracks and pressed play to continue opening files and apps
3) Clicked on the "About this Mac" app to demonstrate it's and 8GB RAM Macbook Air, and fired up activity monitor to demonstrate that RAM is basically filled up, but the system is extremely stable and smooth
4) Opened AutoCAD with the machine's RAM filled up, loaded a real life DWG file, and switched to 3D. It did hiccup once during the 2D to 3D camera animation, but panning, zooming and drafting worked smoothly after it was fully in 3D view
5) To top it all, I didn't remember that the Grindstone game was running until I checked the dock
My MacBook ran smoothly except for the minor hiccup when I turned AutoCAD's 2D viewer to 3D, all of these tasks were done while doing a video capture with no special app or video hardware. I'm attaching the screen caps since the video weights around 1.2GB, and I love posting this type of stuff. People saying 8GB on Apple Silicon is "a laughable experience" are talking nonsense. They are great and more than capable machines. No buyers remorse at all.
PS: I said it was a 2021 M1 Air... it's actually a December 2020 M1 Air.

 

[randywolf244]

Yeah, but there is a big difference, a MacBook Air M1 with 8GB RAM had an introduction price of $999 and still serves these people very well. This bottlenecked M3/8GB has absolutely no benefit in these use cases compared to the M1/8GB, specially not for $600 more.

Okay, I'm gonna agree with you about the M1 Air, not because the new pro is a bad deal but because the M1 Air is a killer deal, still, at 2 years old. And 90% of people who want or need a laptop should go for that model.

So let's talk about the M2 Air because the M1 Air isn't even a fair comparison.

A much better chip, display, and speakers aren't worth $400? Right. The upgrade in display and speakers alone are worth $400; the chip is just a nice bonus. Don't get me wrong, I think it's dumb to buy, and if someone is looking at this laptop, they should get a MacBook Air, but I can see why someone would pay the extra 400 for the Pro instead of getting the Air.

 

[hans1972]

Because it is a MacBook PRO that costs $1600. It should be able to run those applications without much of an issue.

Putting 8GB in a relatively inexpensive MacBook Air is alright.

It is ludicrous to pay 1600 bucks for a "pro" laptop and not be able to do much with it.

But I have no interest in running any of those applications or similar applications. Why would I care if a machine can't run them?

And it does run them, only slower.

 

[hans1972]

Because they get away with it. Not only do people buy it, but countless others defend it and basically do a PR campaign for them.

The reason we defend it is because we know Apple would increase the price of the base configuration if they increased the RAM too early.

So for those user's who 8Gb is enough, they would need to pay more for a benefit they won't notice most of the time.

 

[ArkSingularity]

But I have no interest in running any of those applications or similar applications. Why would I care if a machine can't run them?

And it does run them, only slower.

It's the price point. There are plenty of people who do need to run those kinds of applications, and for $1600 you'd expect a machine that would able to do it reasonably well. The real price of a capable machine is $1800 for these users, but since it's not the base model, it's going to be harder to find in stock at third party retailers (for those who don't live near an Apple store).

It's also going to be harder to get a good discount on 16GB machines, since deep sales don't typically hit the upgraded models nearly as often. It basically raises the price for entry for the people who usually wait for sales to buy (which is a decent chunk of the market since not everyone makes six figure money).

 

[magbarn]

A $80,000 Apple Salary equals a $160,000 Microsoft salary