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

[MegaBlue]

Base level chipset isn’t as good at professional tasks as a higher end chipset. How amazing.

Tomorrow’s news: a Ferrari 488 GT3 is faster and better than an FF. Who would’ve ever thought?

 

[ProfessionalFan]

I love Apple, I own tons of Apple stuff. But I also know they aren't perfect. It is ok to call them out when they do something like put 8GB of RAM in a "pro" laptop that costs $1,600. It doesn't need to be defended just because Apple did it.

 

[TheRoxyTheatre]

Agree! The same people that complain that Apple doesn’t give enough options are the same ones that will complain if they take away the 8gb option. A bunch of complainers. There’s no satisfying them.

Nobody would complain if Apple took away the 8gb option. Stop lying.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

I don't use any of these high-end apps, nor do I play games, but I still bought 16gb because I could do something that would need it. I do use iMovie quite a bit. My work computer, a Dell Latitude running Windows 10, does fine on 8gb ram however...almost entirely spreadsheets, remote desktop, and some patient charting software (Powerchart).

I'm not sure what to think.

Agree! The same people that complain that Apple doesn’t give enough options are the same ones that will complain if they take away the 8gb option. A bunch of complainers. There’s no satisfying them.

No they wouldn't, if they kept the base price the same.

 

[jlc1978]

So real world testing shows memory intensive tasks perfrom better with more memory. Who'd have guessed that?

What next? The M3 Pro is faster at it than an M3? An M2 takes longer even with 16gb?

It's all about picking a machine that meets your needs. If you want the extra ports and other MBP features but don't do much beyond basic tasks such as using Office, web surfing, etc. 8GBs is fine. Need more? Upgrade. I'd guess users who are doing the the of stuff tested are more likely to move to the Pro or Max chip which starts with 16 given how they are positioned.

Apple chose to introduce an entry level model at a price point that will meet many user needs. No reason to have made it more powerful but raise the price; or keep the price and lower the margin just because a few posters and reviewers, who don't represent teh majority of Apple users, think Apple should do that.

 

[s004aws]

Apple's base configs and upgrade pricing are completely delusional for 2023, almost 2024. There's no excuse to be selling hardware costing $1000+ with less than 16GB RAM and SSDs smaller than 512GB. 8GB/256GB is what I'd expect out of a $500 or $600 plastic, poorly built, mostly e-waste off the assembly line Windows laptop or Chromebook. Its not acceptable on anything else.

I do software dev and network/systems admin for a living. I could go with either macOS or Linux, with macOS having a slight preference as it would more readily allow me to support co-workers on Macs. I currently have a new laptop on order... A Mac? No - These idiotic base configs, combined with insane upgrade pricing to get an actually usable config cost Apple the sale. Instead I'll be getting a Framework 16 (I'm in batch 5) and going with Linux. Total cost for a Ryzen 9 FW16 with dGPU, 64 or 96GB RAM, and 4TB NVMe SSD will be under $3,000. A 16" M3 Max MacBook Pro using the lower tier 30 core GPU would be $5300 with 96GB RAM/4TB SSD. 40 core GPU would add another $300. Those numbers don't work, especially as the economy looks to be heading for a major crash.

Apple really has nobody but themselves to blame for Mac sales being down significantly. They have got to get configurations and pricing more in line with reality. With configs/pricing so spectacularly out of line with other options they're only going to continue losing sales.

.. All before we even start discussing poor "logic board" (motherboard for those of us living in reality) engineering and refusal to repair simple issues short of trying to push users into buying entirely new machines... Let alone their lack of actual, reasonable repairability. Don't even start me on 2 MacBook Pros, costing ~$3k each, both little used and prematurely failed, which Apple outright refused to repair (known defective engineering on their part - Bad Nvidia and AMD GPUs). Also had a PowerMac G5 Dual 2.5Ghz and Mac Pro prematurely fail with motherboard issue in the last 15 years - Also with Apple either refusing to repair or asking completely insane repair costs. Only 21st century Macs I've had that wasn't problematic has been a 2003 PowerBook G4 17", a 2010 Mac Pro (given to me by a friend as surplus to replace my own dead Mac Pro), and a 2013 MacBook Air - All still functional to this day. The 2013 Air is actually sitting on my desk, running, as I write. Co-workers have had no shortage of dead MacBooks of their own.

All in all, Apple made my choice to go with System76 in 2020 and Framework this year extremely easy. Very unfortunate... I've owned and used Apple machines for 40 years. I have many Apple IIs and 80s/90s era Macs which still - With a little maintenance simply due to age - Work perfectly well. As I commented to Woz in meeting him some years ago the Apple II line remains one of my favorites - Its where I learned to work on hardware in part because of its simplicity and his solid engineering. Aside from their batteries exploding with age, early Macs are also fairly straightforward. But modern Apple hardware? I really wish I could be as enthuastic as I am for the older stuff... But Apple has made that increasingly difficult between questionable engineering and insane configs/pricing.

 

[EmanuelF]

So many people defending Apple because they refuse to add a 20$ part in an almost 2000$ machine and making a crippled garbage...

The second hand market here is full of 8gb MBA and MBP but you can't find anything with 16. This tells me that everyone buys them and then try to get rid of them while nobody sells their 16gb configuration. I was one of those people too. (and I think this is part of Apple strategy, the market flooded with second hand recent laptops and other user paying another machine)

For everyone doing car comparisons, is more like a Ferrari body, Ferrari engine but an gas tank good for 20 miles. And yeah, for some that distance might be fine, but maybe you move your job further away next year.

And again, we're talking of 20$...

 

[Swissfashion]

If you use Blender frequently, then you know to spec your Mac for this use case. If time is money, then you know how to spec your Mac accordingly. If you usually have multiple Chrome tabs open, then you know how much RAM you need. Anyone else is probably fine with 8GB RAM.

 

[jlc1978]

Nobody would complain if Apple took away the 8gb option. Stop lying.

This is the the modern Internet forum world. Someone would complain if Apple gave them away for free that Apple didn't pay you to take one...

 

[WiiDSmoker]

But why does a banker, doctor or lawyer need to run Lightroom or FCP? Or are they not professionals?


Hell, 8GB worked fine with Photoshop from my experience.

Pro tasks not Professional job titles. Wake up.

 

[Torty]

But why does a banker, doctor or lawyer need to run Lightroom or FCP? Or are they not professionals?


Hell, 8GB worked fine with Photoshop from my experience.

I see but the MBP is not upgradable. Maybe it works today and tomorrow who knows if APPs doesn't support 8GB machines.
A MBP with the same amount of RAM as the iphone you have in your pocket doesn't sound good to me.

 

[boak]

Good thing most of you aren't running companies. It's not about just $20 cost. The opportunity cost is so, so much more.

 

[boak]

Pro tasks not Professional job titles. Wake up.

Pro tasks are tasks carried out by Professionals, no?

 

[M1956]

NOO you dont understand! I am not buying a $1600 mac because i want performance! I am buying it because I like looking at the animation of tabs reloading on this beautiful 3k screen!

 

[CarAnalogy]

Apple really needs to stop being petty like this in 2023 and make 16 the base. Reminds me of the 16gb base model iPhone days. Come on.

Or at least stop just straight lying to us like we’re stupid. Not including a SIM slot does not automatically mean nobody has to “deal with a SIM slot” anymore. 8 gigs of RAM is not 16 no matter how efficiently it’s used. 24” is not the perfect size to replace 27”.

What are they going to come up with next? I feel like these pre-recorded events are making them bolder. There’s no one there to gasp and boo when they say just insultingly stupid things.

 

[TheNewLou]

As reported by John Gruber and others, the old Touch Bar MacBook Pro was the best selling model because it was the cheapest pro model. Often bought by company purchasing departments under advisement that a MacBook Pro was needed. It is important to set the higher end Macs with reasonable minimum specs for higher end tasks.

So, those poor corporate suckers trying to do their job get the worst option:

1. If you just surf the web, you might as well get a bigger 15” MacBook Air with the same RAM, for less money

2. If you do use apps that actually perform better with an M3 rather than M2, you almost certainly need more RAM

Maybe this helps corporate purchasing departments, but it doesn’t help employees

And every new version of macOS uses more memory, so while 8 GB may be barely tolerable today, in 2-3 years it will be a doorstop

Planned obsolescence is not good for climate change, but it’s great for profits

 

[playtech1]

I think Apple is unfortunately addicted to a couple of harmful business practices. Apple is doubly incentivised to have underpowered standard Mac configurations as it (a) forces users to pay over the odds for upgrades while keeping the headline sticker price low and (b) forces users to buy through Apple so it doesn't have to pay any margin to Amazon et al.

I think the only addictions Apple has worse than this are to IAPs and payment processing fees on the App Store and funky offshore tax structures.

 

[therunningman]

Isn't this just common sense? Totally reminds me of the Steve Jobs/Phil Schiller demos on stage with slower clock speed PowerPC chips beating up higher clocked Intel chips. Only worked on stage. Not in the real world.

 

[Return Zero]

Another low-quality clickbait from that channel, which doesn't know what they're talking about. Every configuration has a bottleneck.

Would you call the base M chip a bottleneck too?

Need more? Buy more. Simple as that. Not everyone needs 16 GB.

They may be click-baity but they also provide more technical information than the vast majority of youtube channels out there.

And no, the base M chip should not be called a bottleneck. Almost every computer system is built around the CPU/GPU because it is the most expensive single component (financially and thermally). SSD, RAM, fans, I/O, etc. are all way cheaper in comparison, and are built around the main chip. There's a reason you can't spec an M3 Pro chip with 8GB of RAM and 256GB SSD, but you can spec a base M3 with 24GB RAM and 2TB SSD.

I do agree not everyone needs 16GB on a Mac, though. Some people will buy the base MBP only because of the XDR screen, for instance, and they'll never do RAM-heavy tasks. So I'm fine with Apple still offering it, personally.

 

[GaryPDX]

It's just like buying a Porsche. You want extra baubles, you pay.

And it has been like that with Apple since the days of the Apple II.

 

[boak]

The 18 GB/36 GB base models for the M2 Pro/M2 Max are probably also bottlenecks then 🤣

 

[VulchR]

If Apple wants to charge premium prices, it has to offer premium quality, and it's slipping on that front.

 

[jlc1978]

If you use Blender frequently, then you know to spec your Mac for this use case. If time is money, then you know how to spec your Mac accordingly. If you usually have multiple Chrome tabs open, then you know how much RAM you need. Anyone else is probably fine with 8GB RAM.

There you go, bring facts into an internet argument.

Some people want a powerful machine at an entry level price, and because Apple doesn't do it there is somehow a giant conspiracy behind it aimed at them and rant about the unfairness.

The bottom line, as you point out, is buy the machine that has the power to do what you want. 8GB of RAM is plenty for many users, especially those that just want a few more features than an Air but where a base Air would still be powerful enough for their needs.

For everyone doing car comparisons, is more like a Ferrari body, Ferrari engine but an oil tank good for 20 miles. And yeah, for some that distance might be fine, but maybe you move your job further away next year.

Then you buy a new car and learn to better anticipate future needs.

 

[boak]

And no, the base M chip should not be called a bottleneck. Almost every computer system is built around the CPU/GPU because it is the most expensive single component (financially and thermally). SSD, RAM, fans, I/O, etc. are all way cheaper in comparison, and are built around the main chip. There's a reason you can't spec an M3 Pro chip with 8GB of RAM and 256GB SSD, but you can spec a base M3 with 24GB RAM and 2TB SSD.

This is true. I was just giving an extreme example. It was too simplistic but I didn't want to go into the trade-offs of other lesser known components.

 

[iStorm]

Put this in preceptive, I can do 99% of what I do on my laptop on iphone 14 pro, does it have 16gb of ram. NO does it need 16gb of ram to be functional, NO.. 90% of people over buy ram and never use it.

This is comparing apples to oranges... You can't compare RAM on non-like devices. These have different OSes, different memory management; one can run multiple apps at a time, the other can only run a single app at a time.