8GB RAM is a disappointment?

[Lucifer666]

Bottom line - we all can wait for real world reviews. But with an 8-wide L1 cache decoder, a lot of L2 cache, dedicated paging buffer for the GPU cores, and likely a much higher bandwidth (not sure how many gbit/sec) memory interface, along with PCIe-4 SSD - means that this will depart a bit from x86 world, with Intel still operating on narrowed micro-architecture and needing to go outside of the SoC to access RAM - I'm still predicting much better performance considering 8GB RAM than limits you may find in the Intel/AMD x86 world right now. Owning several 8GB ram intel machines, and not being a video editor, I see no real issues at hand.

However, I do notice hard limits with texture swap for games, and a limit on the resolution before performance has a ceiling, but all limits a dev can work around to optimize performance and we all know Mac's ain't really gaming focused! However, for games pushing the limits on passively cooled phones/ipads, the M1 will absolutely crush them.

So for the vast majority of PC/MAC users, 8GB is plenty sufficient - and anyone coming in here to show us how they know because "their ram is full" can be ignored. RAM is supposed to be full, if you aren't filling it up, you bought too much for your specific application. Page files exist even if you have 32GB of ram, I know because I can see that on my 32GB desktop. We are quickly converging likely to a future where SSDs may obviate the need for dedicated RAM if they can get speed and latency, and random access speed on par with RAM - but that dream may never fully come as I'm sure RAM will get faster and faster.

Thanks. I actually needs to hear this ?

 

[0906742]

im an average user. Apple isn’t cheating anyone With the base.

i buy 8gb, then there are all these threads, which makes average Joe wonder wtf? You read these post and think “Do I need 16gb...32gb?” I’m sooo confused

im sure I’m not alone here

I'm not claiming anyone is cheating anyone but just mentioning different CPU architecture needing more RAM. I don't know how they can avoid not needing double RAM to match CISC counterpart by using RISC. Do you?

 

[deeddawg]

To contrast my M1 Mini that I ordered for home use:

Major irony using Microsoft's Flight Simulator 2020 on my 8th gen i7 PC did not have enough RAM (8GB) as soon as the program loaded (I got the full download deluxe version).

Then I upgrade the RAM to 64GB ($250) and voila the program loads and installs.

Then to add injury to insult, the on board Intel 630UHD video card says it will not run the basic simulator training without it freezing.

So next I upgrade the PC with a $300 8GB NVIDIA GT1660 video card and now the program runs smooth.

Finally, I notice the graphics looked choppy and colors were off so then my 5 year old 22" Dell monitor was the culprit.

Ordered a Dell Alienware 1ms IPS 27" display for $450 and finally the game runs perfectly.

This on top of the flight yoke, quadrant controls, sidestick thrust controls, and flight rudders w/ braking ($600).

So for gaming, I really wish that the $1600+ that I just spent for ONE GAME would be it, but no - PC world has us trained that we always need more and more.

I am hoping Apple does not put us in a vicious cycle of spending more money like the PC world...

Good gracious.

Reading books on my Kindle seems like much less expensive and troublesome entertainment.

 

[deeddawg]

To get 16GB of RAM all you have to do when ordering is click the little box that says 16GB for $200. That makes it BTO? Is that such a big deal?

In some parts of the world, I believe, this is not an option. Only the pre-configured systems are available for purchase, often through third party retailers.

Folks in that situation will just need to wait for the higher tier systems to transition to Apple Silicon.

 

[BigSplash]

No it won't, you are confusing ram speed with capacity.

I believe that virtual memory (swapping) will be faster for the M1. If swapping latencies are low enough then you may indeed appear to have the same performance from a machine with less physical memory. This phenomenon is not new.

 

[Ybersetzer]

To get 16GB of RAM all you have to do when ordering is click the little box that says 16GB for $200. That makes it BTO? Is that such a big deal?

I used to wonder about this, too, but it can be a big deal in certain countries, where BTO-specifications simply are not available, or, if they are, take significantly longer to be available.

 

[shaown]

I am pretty confident 8GB will be terrible in the short term (now), and less terrible in the long term. I know that seems counterintuitive, but a lot of basic SW will just not be optimized for the refreshed platform. It will consume (I suspect) more memory than an Intel Mac to deal with overhead from Rosetta 2 and/or poorly optimized SW. If everyone builds their apps (as they did for iOS) targeting this platform (MacOS/Arm) different story. How long for that to happen? I don't mean compatible, I mean designed thoughtfully for an 8gb ram envelope on ARM. That being said, I bet longevity on the platform will be better than people expect.
-Shaown

 

[jazz1]

I am pretty confident 8GB will be terrible in the short term (now), and less terrible in the long term. I know that seems counterintuitive, but a lot of basic SW will just not be optimized for the refreshed platform. It will consume (I suspect) more memory than an Intel Mac to deal with overhead from Rosetta 2 and/or poorly optimized SW. If everyone builds their apps (as they did for iOS) targeting this platform (MacOS/Arm) different story. How long for that to happen? I don't mean compatible, I mean designed thoughtfully for an 8gb ram envelope on ARM. That being said, I bet longevity on the platform will be better than people expect.
-Shaow

I look forward to the day! I mean look what the iPad apps can do with little memory and smaller size (comparatively speaking to the Intel days of the Macs).

 

[MacBH928]

That’s 8GB on the graphics card! These Macs use a unified memory pool, that RAM is for the OS and its processes, all apps and their data, and serves as graphics memory.

8GB RAM is a pitiful, cut to the bone minimum.

Look, the new consoles running lightweight OS:s pack 16GB of high speed RAM, and 1TB really fast SSD in their base configurations. (And they sell for $500 with that configuration.) It’s possible to like Mac products and still admit that Apples prices for RAM and storage is highway robbery. And with no user upgradeability...

Yea when you put it like that, a PS5 costs $500($400 without BD drive) and extra 8GB RAM on AS Macbook is $200...thats really bad. Although we have to know that Sony sells it at loss and make money on game sales royalties.

 

[bklement]

I believe that virtual memory (swapping) will be faster for the M1. If swapping latencies are low enough then you may indeed appear to have the same performance from a machine with less physical memory. This phenomenon is not new.

Yeah but it's limited, foremost applies to data, not programs, especially when they should interact with each other. Originally my mac mini had 8 gigs, and the latency was quite noticeable.

 

[M1 Processor]

No. Your mac allocated 5GB, it‘s not using it. That‘s a big difference. Read this: https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/378981/high-memory-usage-on-macos-catalina

The pure existence of a swap file is not bad (especially because it‘s only 35mb). As long as it doesn‘t start growing out of control...

macOS sometimes moves memory that wasn‘t addressed for a while into the swap file. That‘s part of the memory management.

As long as you don‘t have 8 of 8 in use AND a swap file with several hundred mb you don‘t have a problem.

This wasn't an example of the mac being under pressure, it was that macOS RAM utilization is higher than the other two major OSes, and that 8GB is not much room. RAM allocation is still about double Linux. That one YouTube video used (not allocated) like 1.5GB of RAM? One video made it start drawing into swap, albeit a little. You can imagine what will happen if you open up several heavy websites such as Facebook, CNN, ect.

 

[Herrpod]

For the Air, there's no real reason to get more than 8. If you need 16 on an Air, you probably actually need a MBP.

 

[Runs For Fun]

For the Air, there's no real reason to get more than 8. If you need 16 on an Air, you probably actually need a MBP.

I disagree. My 2015 MBA has 8GB and I have several applications open. I'm not doing graphical design or video editing but I'm definitely feeling the constraints of 8GB. Web browsers themselves use a lot of resources these days. 8GB is definitely constraining these days which is why I went with 16GB on the M1 MBA I ordered.

 

[psingh01]

8gb ram probably has more to do with Apple optimizing their supply chain than how arm/macOS use ram.

 

[deeddawg]

8gb ram probably has more to do with Apple optimizing their supply chain than how arm/macOS use ram.

... or Apple is matching the base configs they had on the Intel Air and two-port MBPs...

The 8GB base hasn't changed for those models. For a lot of folks it's going to be sufficient. Those who need more can upgrade to 16. Those who need even more would choose a four port model, just as before. Only difference is those haven't yet shifted to ARM.

 

[MacModMachine]

8gb ram probably has more to do with Apple optimizing their supply chain than how arm/macOS use ram.

what it experience do you have with arm ?

 

[Abazigal]

8gb ram probably has more to do with Apple optimizing their supply chain than how arm/macOS use ram.

I think it’s more that Apple knows that many of the MBA user base is going to be fine with 8gb ram.

 

[drmeatball]

This thread has way too many opines from people who weren't comp sci majors.

 

[OriginalClone]

If you do a dummy purchase of a Macbook Air, after you click Buy you should see a 16GB upgrade option. With the Air it seems clicking 16GB also automatically ups you to 512GB storage (so no 16/256 option).

Clicking 16gb ram option does not give you the 512gb storage. That’s extra.

 

[dogslobber]

I am pretty confident 8GB will be terrible in the short term (now), and less terrible in the long term. I know that seems counterintuitive, but a lot of basic SW will just not be optimized for the refreshed platform. It will consume (I suspect) more memory than an Intel Mac to deal with overhead from Rosetta 2 and/or poorly optimized SW. If everyone builds their apps (as they did for iOS) targeting this platform (MacOS/Arm) different story. How long for that to happen? I don't mean compatible, I mean designed thoughtfully for an 8gb ram envelope on ARM. That being said, I bet longevity on the platform will be better than people expect.
-Shaown

Apple doesn't have a historical track record for reducing the resources their system software consumes. It just grows over time so this simply won't change now that Apple computers ship with an ARM chip in them.

 

[ian87w]

Try running a couple VMs, or a local k8s cluster with an application stack for dev work, or just a ton of browser tabs. I regularly hit 8GB of browser RAM usage on my work laptop between chrome and firefox, and I have to carefuly manage VM RAM usage right now, which is why my next work machine will have 32GB of RAM and my next personal laptop certainly isnt going below the 16GB in my 2020 MBA

You don't even have to do VMs to realize the need of 16GB

I think it’s more that Apple knows that many of the MBA user base is going to be fine with 8gb ram.

Coming from a company that put 1GB RAM on the iPhone 6, and 2GB on the 9.7" iPad PRO, I'd say it's about upselling and shortening the future upgrade cycle. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Abazigal]

Coming from a company that put 1GB RAM on the iPhone 6, and 2GB on the 9.7" iPad PRO, I'd say it's about upselling and shortening the future upgrade cycle. Just my 2 cents.

I look at it this way.

Say amongst the people who get a MBA, 80% of them need only 8gb ram for their work while the remaining 20% would see legitimate benefit from going up to 16gb.

It makes more sense to provide the base spec that would cater to the majority of your user base. This way, Apple doesn’t overserve the market by spending more on parts and components than they absolutely need to. And if the user needs more ram or storage, they always have the option of paying more for better specs, albeit at fairly marked up prices.

 

[Mr. Dee]

I am going with the 8 GB MacBook Pro M1 and 512 GBs of storage. I have a 8 GB Early 2015 13 inch and outside of running virtual machines, it performs well, especially today, considering I normally have three different web browsers open with multiple tabs. Well I look at my usage patterns have changed, I really don’t require to have a beast of a machine these days. Also, I use multiple devices: Mac, iPad and iPhone. Some websites and activities are offloaded elsewhere. Surely, if you are an engineer or creative, your needs might be different. For instance, if you are gonna be Adobe CC and other types of designer apps, max out the RAM.

I would have maxed out to 16 GBs, but this Mac is really a stop gap for me until upgrade everything in 2023. I really wanted a larger screen Mac, but I don’t know when the M1 iMacs will be here.

 

[Erehy Dobon]

This thread has way too many opines from people who weren't comp sci majors.

I'm pretty sure that most Mac users aren't comp sci majors.

And that's a good thing. I'd rather see more MR commenters with math, physics, or EE degrees than comp sci.

That said, the average MR commenter seems to be running notorious resource pig Google Chrome with 15-20 tabs. If these are CS graduates, the world is doomed.

 

[deeddawg]

I'm pretty sure that most Mac users aren't comp sci majors.

And that's a good thing. I'd rather see more MR commenters with math, physics, or EE degrees than comp sci.

While true, the CS major is more likely to understand virtual memory, paging, etc. and their implications on user experience in a RAM constrained system than might a physicist. I like physicists, I’ve worked with a bunch of them. Super book smart. World smart? Not always.

That said, the average MR commenter seems to be running notorious resource pig Google Chrome with 15-20 tabs. If these are CS graduates, the world is doomed.

They’re probably the ******* majors.