Sadly from an earnings standpoint this is probably going to work for them. This is the model tons of corporations buy en masse for their hapless employees.
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
Sadly from an earnings standpoint this is probably going to work for them. This is the model tons of corporations buy en masse for their hapless employees.
Are we allowed to focus on the $1600 price tag then? Would that satisfy you more?
A $1600 laptop no matter what it is branded as should not have 8GB RAM.
The fact it is branded as "pro" adds more fuel to the fire, but it isn't necessary to make the point.
So where’s comparison to 16 GB RAM PC to prove Apple is wrong ?🙄
Common sense. 8GB RAM is not going to be equal to 16GB RAM especially when that 8GB is universal memory being shared with the GPU. It is a putrid amount of RAM.
By insinuating that Apple is wrong for offering the 8 GB option for M3 MBP.
Is Apple also wrong for offering 18 GB and 36 GB options for the Pro and Max chips? Because they also hinder the chips' performance.
I sometimes switch between a 16GB M1 iMac and a 25GB M2 MBA.
The MBA is clearly more capable with intensive tasks. The iMac clearly gets bogged up. For example, with Final Cut Pro or mega photo projects.
I could not imagine getting an Mx computer with merely 8GB. In fact, someday I'll upgrade the iMac to an M3 with 24GB.
24GB is the minimum for me to not feel any burden on the computer with my personal usage style.
The MBA is clearly more capable with intensive tasks. The iMac clearly gets bogged up. For example, with Final Cut Pro or mega photo projects.
I could not imagine getting an Mx computer with merely 8GB. In fact, someday I'll upgrade the iMac to an M3 with 24GB.
24GB is the minimum for me to not feel any burden on the computer with my personal usage style.
For office workers though, would the 8GB suffice? There are many folks who just use office, browser internet, watch YouTube and other streaming services, and maybe do some book reading and markups. Probably 8GB suffices?
I predict that next year, Apple will raise the base spec to 12GB RAM (2x6GB), while also raising the base price by $100. The 16GB (2x8GB) upgrade will be removed, or will cost an additional $200. The price of the 24GB (2x12GB) upgrade will be increased accordingly.
I still say the issue is the lack of retail availability of 16GB versions of certain models. This appears to be getting slightly better as I've noticed BestBuy occasionally carrying some 16GB MBA models. However Costco hasn't. You can get 3 different iMacs configurations (the 3 "standard" configs) in all the available colors from Costco, but none of them have 16GB.
I know plenty of pros who get along just fine with 8GBs, The whole "Pro" moniker is really just marketing anyway - had Apple called the 2 lines Air and MacBook the whole "pro" argument would be meaningless. Bototm line is if 8GB isn't enough buy a machine ith 16.
Unless you want the extra port, nicer screen, loner battery life...
Apple has a line of MBP's that will meet a variety of use cases at different price points.
So is $1499 the right price point?
I don't think so, and everyone trying to make a punchy retort using this point is quite easily proven wrong.
1) Restart your Mac
2) Open Activity Monitor
3) Read the "Memory Used" row
It will be over 4GB, if your MacOS version is recent. Mine sits about 5.5GB due to a few background tasks. Opening Mail and Safari (and coming here to MR forums) raises it up to 7.5GB, still no swap or compression used. So, 8GB fits neatly as a base config that allows some headroom for very light work. 4GB on the other hand would not have any legitimate defense.
That said, I do think 8GB on a "Pro" model is a damaging look for Apple by now. I would have preferred to see 12 or 16.
"Pro" is just a marketing term. It's nearly meaningless. A real "Pro" knows what kind of tool they need.
My lawyer considers himself a "Pro" and uses a MacBook Pro for M$ Word and PDFs. Is he "Pro" enough to use a MacBook Pro?
My doctor friend considers herself a "Pro" and uses a MacBook Pro to basically look at medical imaging. Is she "Pro" enough?
Well, they literally have "Professional" degrees. In either case, the base model is absolutely perfect for these "Pros".
Last edited:
There's a difference between a higher performance ceiling, and lowering the performance floor.
Apple is not being upfront about the limitations of the base model. This is like them continuing to sell the Apple Watch 3 for so long, or selling a 16GB iPhone for so long. It's just an unnecessary limitation that is so clearly a money grab.
Sure it's within their rights, it's not necessarily ethically wrong. Just a ****** thing for them to do. Perhaps that's a subjective view but it certainly seems to be a pervasive one.
8GB is fine for a MacBook Air or Mac Mini, for someone who just needs a basic computer that isn't a PC. But putting the "Pro" label on it means this computer is not for those people, and that it's meant to be perfect for professional workflows, such as running the Adobe stuff and heavy multi tasking. It's like releasing a "sports" version of a car without actually making it faster, it's deceptive marketing.
This computer only exists so that you don't actually buy it and instead buy the M3 Pro version. You're not supposed to buy it, it's supposed to help you climb the ladder from the old MacBook Pro TouchBar to the new M3 Pro. It's a pure marketing gimmick.
This computer only exists so that you don't actually buy it and instead buy the M3 Pro version. You're not supposed to buy it, it's supposed to help you climb the ladder from the old MacBook Pro TouchBar to the new M3 Pro. It's a pure marketing gimmick.
This is such a wrong argument. We talk about the Apple McBook Pro. For Office workers, you probably will be happy with the Air (or iMac) and nobody is argueing here (though Apple still has a steep price in my opinion).
No office would shill out for a Pro, if they can get away with a cheaper Apple SKU.
shoutout to all the apple apologists who claims apple's unified memory architecture makes 8gb not an issue 😂
8GB for an iMac used in schools or reception or a laptop used for presentations and what we called “fuzzy” (non-techie) uses in college is fine.
My guess is this base MBP configuration has to exist to meet certain specifications in purchase agreements that the Air model can’t meet. It’s why the 13” MBP stuck around so long when a better MBA cost less.
I would never buy it. 16GB works great with the M1 and it seems to work just as well with the M3.
I know plenty of pros who get along just fine with 8GBs, The whole "Pro" moniker is really just marketing anyway - had Apple called the 2 lines Air and MacBook the whole "pro" argument would be meaningless. Bototm line is if 8GB isn't enough buy a machine with 16.
Unless you want the extra port, nicer screen, longer battery life...
Apple has a line of MBP's that will meet a variety of use cases at different price points.
So is $1499 the right price point?
Last edited:
Unified memory offers more performance at the same amount memory as the PC equivalent, which uses RAM. This is because you don't need to have copies of data being accessed from different locations.
Whether or not 8 GB unified memory has the equivalent performance of 16 GB RAM, however, is an unsubstantiated claim.
Whether or not 8 GB unified memory has the equivalent performance of 16 GB RAM, however, is an unsubstantiated claim.
8GB of RAM in a $1600 is ridiculous no matter what, but what makes this much worse is Apple's "8GB integrated is equivalent to 16GB in a PC" claim. Nonsense and a clear lie.
I know it's not apples to apples, but I'd still be curious to see the same tests being done on a laptop PC with a very good processor and 8 and then 16 GB of RAM.
I'm also in the camp of : Why the hell is Apple still releasing 8GB RAM computers, we're almost in 2024 god dammit...