8GB RAM is a disappointment?

[M1 Processor]

Even though the m1 in air, base mbp and macmini is fast and capable of doing pro work doesn’t mean it’s marketed toward pro users who previously need 16-64gb of ram on intel macs. It’s marketed toward students and casual tasks users. As much as I want a 16gb a the default, 8gb still makes sense for this lineup in term of apple as a company who are looking to maximize profit.

For other pros, better wait for the 16” mbp and imac.

I agree 100 percent. I need the RAM, however.

 

[alien3dx]

Hard to say, according to Apple 4GB is the minimum system requirements for macOS, and according to Microsoft, Windows is 2GB which would mean Windows is lighter than macOS on RAM at least. I have not used Windows in a while, however.

no worry. If apple m1 available me to order last week i would bought it and max 16 gb ram also but since no news yet avaibility i need to work so bought the windows laptop and repair the imac 2017 today.

I used ubuntu(mostly server hosting) , mac and windows also .

 

[Sanpete]

I know exactly what those number mean. MacOS allocates more memory than it actually uses, but if it says Safari is using 2.7GB of RAM, it's using that amount.

Some people are fine with 8GB and some, including myself are not. The fact numerous users have problems with only 8GB of RAM suggests that 8GB is the bare minimum. The fact that this thread as went on for almost 30 pages, and plenty of users posted evidence of this, is proof that 8GB can struggle in modern workloads, let alone future workloads. When you are spending 1000 and above on a machine, I'm assuming that most Mac users keep their systems for several years. In two or so years 8GB of RAM will struggle more than it does today. I NEVER said the average user cannot get by today with 8GB of RAM. You rarely if ever have complains with 16GB which suggests it is the "sweet spot".

I just pulled up my Ryzen rig and loaded the exact same tabs. I restarted the system to prevent any memory leaks. MacOS has allocated more than double the RAM that the Linux machine is. It should be noted than macOS and Linux treat RAM in a similar way, macOS just needs WAY more. I don't think Big Sur can run with 2.5 GB or RAM, let alone have four decent sized websites open. ?

The conclusions you're drawing from those numbers just don't follow. Plenty of people in this thread have been doing fine with 8GB. I don't want to mislead people who haven't read all of it. Fortunately people can try these out and decide for themselves.

 

[LiE_]

So, how do you explain the memory pressure being green and still 1.6Gb being used for cache?

I don't pay much attention to memory pressure. If my memory usage looks high and the system performance has degraded, it doesn't matter if some graph is green or not.

 

[Sanpete]

I don't pay much attention to memory pressure. If my memory usage looks high and the system performance has degraded, it doesn't matter if some graph is green or not.

It doesn't show that memory is the reason the performance has degraded either, though it's a likely suspect. There are various potential causes for that, especially with software not yet fully optimized for the M1.

I too thought it was curious that your memory pressure was showing fairly low, with still a fair amount of RAM shown as free, while the swap number was so high. Odd case.

If you get the 16GB, please let us know how it behaves.

 

[LiE_]

It doesn't show that memory is the reason the performance has degraded either, though it's a likely suspect. There are various potential causes for that, especially with software not yet fully optimized for the M1.

I too thought it was curious that your memory pressure was showing fairly low, with still a fair amount of RAM shown as free, while the swap number was so high. Odd case.

If you get the 16GB, please let us know how it behaves.

I believe the system reserves at least 1-1.5GB. I've never seen it use the full 8GB, presumably because the iGPU needs some for vRAM.

Using big web apps in Safari did cause memory to go high and it did cause the system to feel sluggish.

 

[alien3dx]

I believe the system reserves at least 1-1.5GB. I've never seen it use the full 8GB, presumably because the iGPU needs some for vRAM.

Using big web apps in Safari did cause memory to go high and it did cause the system to feel sluggish.

facebook web apps the worst culprit ( new version )

 

[russell_314]

I hear many people complain 8GB is not enough, in What world is 8GB RAM is not enough?!

There are like full 3D HD games that are not 8GB in size. Am I missing something?

If you do photoshop with 1000 layers or build 3D worlds for MMORPGs in MAYA this entry laptop is not for you but I can't imagine 8GB not enough, the iphone and ipads are running on 4 and 6 and people are very happy with them. I remember a time when 1GB RAM was a machine for "creative" work.


And $1300 laptop is not expensive, this is cheap! Laptops used to cost north of $1500 easy of weak specs! Steve Jobs introduced the ibook in '99 for $2500+(FFI) to make it "within reach of education customers and consumer customers" ! (btw it had 0.032GB RAM and 6hr battery) I feel old...

Edit: Is 8GB enough? This is the answer!

Edit 2: the power of 8GB RAM on M1

Edit 3: Video demonstrating how far 8GB will take you, and it takes you very far. credits for @MrGunnyPT for sharing.

You have people who would complain about 64 GB. To some it’s just a number they can brag to their friends about ?

 

[Sanpete]

I believe the system reserves at least 1-1.5GB. I've never seen it use the full 8GB, presumably because the iGPU needs some for vRAM.

Using big web apps in Safari did cause memory to go high and it did cause the system to feel sluggish.

Not sure what you're getting at about the system, but the RAM reserved for the system is included in the memory numbers in Activity Monitor as Wired.

People are reporting that some apps use a lot of swap regardless of the amount of RAM available, so it would be interesting to see if it would be different with 16GB and the same apps/pages. 7GB does seem like a lot to me.

 

[Stitch666]

facebook web apps the worst culprit ( new version )

When you say Facebook web apps, do you mean just browsing the Facebook website? Ive been having reloads half way through messages I've been writing on Facebook. I only

had 2 tabs and some other office type apps earlier and it was sluggish. Here was my use;

 

[jazz1]

When you say Facebook web apps, do you mean just browsing the Facebook website? Ive been having reloads half way through messages I've been writing on Facebook. I only View attachment 1685312 had 2 tabs and some other office type apps earlier and it was sluggish. Here was my use;

What is the process “WindowServer”? It is using 1.15GB.

 

[Jinbei]

What is the process “WindowServer”? It is using 1.15GB.

What Is the Process WindowServer, and Why Is It Running on My Mac?

While checking the Activity Monitor, you noticed something called WindowServer occasionally taking up a bunch of CPU power.

www.google.fr

 

[Stitch666]

What is the process “WindowServer”? It is using 1.15GB.

Don't know but it seems to be the literal act of drawing stuff on the screen. https://www.howtogeek.com/312755/what-is-the-process-windowserver-and-why-is-it-running-on-my-mac/

 

[jazz1]

What Is the Process WindowServer, and Why Is It Running on My Mac?

While checking the Activity Monitor, you noticed something called WindowServer occasionally taking up a bunch of CPU power.

www.google.fr

Thanks for the link! Very good to know. I’ll have to check it out once my MacMini arrives, and I run two monitors vs. one monitor.

 

[alien3dx]

When you say Facebook web apps, do you mean just browsing the Facebook website? Ive been having reloads half way through messages I've been writing on Facebook. I only View attachment 1685312 had 2 tabs and some other office type apps earlier and it was sluggish. Here was my use;

to make easier if you use chrome, 3 dot --> more tools --> task manager.
** if you have a lot of ram no need to disable the hardware acceleration if yes disable it (no swap please)
** safari i'm not sure in the app got same task manager.

 

[M1 Processor]

The conclusions you're drawing from those numbers just don't follow. Plenty of people in this thread have been doing fine with 8GB. I don't want to mislead people who haven't read all of it. Fortunately people can try these out and decide for themselves.

The conclusions I am drawing from those numbers is that macOS is more RAM hungry than Linux, and that's UNDENIABLE. Are you saying otherwise? As for whether 8GB is enough or not, for some it is and for others its not, that's also UNDENIABLE. It was not just me and others are voicing their opinions. Until this week I had 8GB and 16GB MacBooks and I can see first hand the differences between the two. An 8GB of system draw swap far more often, where as the 16GB system does not unless apps like browsers start to leak memory. The 16GB system is also more responsive.

 

[Ethosik]

I disagree. Browser tabs are a very good test for memory usage because it's the most common task people use their computers for. Why ignore it? This purpose of this thread discussion is whether 8GB or RAM is enough for daily use. Why ignore the single most common use case in which people use their machines? And I have been using ad blockers for a half a decade, browser still devour RAM.

I do not know any basic user that has 50+ tabs open. At most they have two or three. One for email and one for Facebook. Not 20 or 50 or hundreds that these tests like to show.

 

[Ethosik]

The conclusions I am drawing from those numbers is that macOS is more RAM hungry than Linux, and that's UNDENIABLE. Are you saying otherwise? As for whether 8GB is enough or not, for some it is and for others its not, that's also UNDENIABLE. It was not just me and others are voicing their opinions. Until this week I had 8GB and 16GB MacBooks and I can see first hand the differences between the two. An 8GB of system draw swap far more often, where as the 16GB system does not unless apps like browsers start to leak memory. The 16GB system is also more responsive.

Well which linux? There are many that are designed for very very low powered systems, so obviously they will run with lower RAM requirements. There are literally dozens if not hundreds of Linux distros that require various system requirements. Elementary.io took as much memory as my Mac does with the same stuff open.

Also, some programs will ALWAYS use swap, regardless of memory. I discovered this when I saw Chrome on Windows on 128GB of RAM with nothing else opened was using swap with just a few tabs opened. This was a year ago so not sure if Chrome addressed this or not. But my RAM certainly was not filled and it was already using swap.

 

[hans1972]

I don't pay much attention to memory pressure. If my memory usage looks high and the system performance has degraded, it doesn't matter if some graph is green or not.

You should.

Using swap used or memory used is not a good indicator.

 

[Sanpete]

The conclusions I am drawing from those numbers is that macOS is more RAM hungry than Linux, and that's UNDENIABLE. Are you saying otherwise? As for whether 8GB is enough or not, for some it is and for others its not, that's also UNDENIABLE. It was not just me and others are voicing their opinions. Until this week I had 8GB and 16GB MacBooks and I can see first hand the differences between the two. An 8GB of system draw swap far more often, where as the 16GB system does not unless apps like browsers start to leak memory. The 16GB system is also more responsive.

Again, you can't draw even that conclusion (and it's not the only one you've drawn) from those numbers. The numbers don't show what RAM is actually being used.

There's nothing wrong with swap, doesn't indicate a performance issue. If 16GB is more responsive with your usage, that's what matters, though there might be other differences contributing to that.

I do not know any basic user that has 50+ tabs open.

I keep 40 open for casual use. The main reason I don't keep more open is lack of screen space. Maybe when I get a 16" I'll keep 50 open ...

Using swap used or memory used is not a good indicator.

Looks like memory pressure may not be a good indicator for his use either.

 

[Ethosik]

I keep 40 open for casual use. The main reason I don't keep more open is lack of screen space. Maybe when I get a 16" I'll keep 50 open ...

Hah! Keyword was basic user. Like my parents or grandparents. Heck I don't even see the point having so many tabs open. You can't possible need to reference all 50 at the same time. I just bookmark and get back to it tomorrow or a few hours later.

 

[hans1972]

The conclusions I am drawing from those numbers is that macOS is more RAM hungry than Linux, and that's UNDENIABLE. Are you saying otherwise? [...] An 8GB of system draw swap far more often,

Linux might use less memory in this situation which makes it a worse OS. Any OS who can't use almost all the RAM all the time is not a good OS, unless you have an extreme amount of memory.

Using swap is often a good thing, especially if swapping occurs while the machine is idling.

I would be much more worried if the OS leaves free RAM just sitting there and only starts to use swap when it is running out of memory.

 

[Saturn007]

I do not know any basic user that has 50+ tabs open. At most they have two or three. One for email and one for Facebook. Not 20 or 50 or hundreds that these tests like to show.

I'm a basic user. When I'm checking CD rates at a bunch of banks, I have a set of tabs to open automatically. Probably about 8. That's usually in one window, but I’ll have other windows open as well, each with several tabs.

When doing academic research, I may end up with a dozen or more tabs open In a given window to different sources.

When I'm shopping, I may end up with 10-20 tabs open, Serra Ning for coupons, different sites, and even many products at a given site.

In other words, more than 2 or 4 tabs open at a time! But definitely not 50.

I think we're all at risk of getting it wrong when we generalize about what “basic users” do. We simply don't have the needed empirical evidence!

But as to these tests, they're designed to show whether the laptop can handle what would be, to many people, an excessive workload to see how the new M1 chip copes. It seems it does quite well in most cases. They're not trying to test the laptops for basic usage, or for a basic user, whatever those would be!

 

[Sanpete]

Hah! Keyword was basic user. Like my parents or grandparents. Heck I don't even see the point having so many tabs open. You can't possible need to reference all 50 at the same time. I just bookmark and get back to it tomorrow or a few hours later.

Open tabs are more handy than bookmarks. I know where each page is already, can get to it more quickly, and each page has its own list of past pages I can return to as well, also sometimes handy. If I had an 18", I'd probably keep 60 open routinely. Like @Saturn007, I sometimes keep quite a few open for research of some sort, might like to have room for quite a few more once in a while for something intense. All that's mostly for nonprofessional use, or what most would consider nonprofessional (such as writing a customer review).

I agree I'm not typical that way, but I'm sure there are a lot of people who like to keep more than a few tabs open. If it caused a serious problem, I'd use bookmarks instead, but since I can just use tabs, I do.

 

[IowaLynn]

With 10+ tabs per window, a different window for various subjects - tech news, Mac, Windows,, and Android news sites all have their own web page, forums, general news, shopping, multiple search tabs...

I want a toolbar that I don't need to squint, prefer folders with bookmarks on toolbar instead of on side.

So I definitely use browsers to their fullest.

Dock: click and see the windows, and a quick click to show/hide - something Taskbar does but Mac won't.