Apple is not going to stop starting at 8GB anytime soon. And that's good.

[klasma]

Apparently, the geekbench performance benchmarks of that CPU are about par with a typical quad core U-series Intel chip from about 2018. Quite impressive for a tiny computer running a 6W CPU in that price point and form factor.

Yes, it has double the Geekbench score than my old PC I still use (and that I also haven't run into bottlenecks with yet). If you're not into gaming or stuff like video editing, those are great little machines, also as low-power servers to put in some corner.

 

[name99]

Nice article from Macworld on this topic.

"Even relatively casual users who load up on browser tabs and inefficient Electron apps (household names like Slack, Teams, Discord, etc.) can find performance compromised by running out of RAM."

"To be clear, 8GB of LPDDR5-6400 (the RAM used in these products) costs Apple a tiny fraction of that amount. Nobody knows precisely what Apple pays its suppliers, but the going price for 64Gbits (8GB) of that sort of RAM is less than $40 in quantity. Apple’s deal likely has them paying $30 or less.

There’s nothing special about Apple’s RAM. It’s high quality, and it’s integrated on a very wide memory bus very close to the M3 chip, but those manufacturing complexities don’t make the RAM cost more. Apple’s charging you $200 for RAM it buys for $30."

"Here’s a fun experiment: Configure a MacBook Pro with the M3 Max, the full 16-core CPU version. Every additional 16GB of RAM costs $200, the same as 8GB of RAM on the lower configurations."

(a) I have never used an Electron app in my life. Lots of people haven't. This is part of the disease of the American pundit called "everyone is exactly the same as me therefore..."

(b) The ACTUAL point of interest is how the current M3 Macs (which may, or may not, have transparent memory compression -- not PAGE compression by TRANSPARENT MEMORY compression) behave differently from their M2 and M1 predecessors.
You will note that there is currently ZERO data on this fact. And yet people feel very confident in making grand generalizations... That's basically all you need to know about the difference between the people in the being-clever professions and people in the sounding-clever professions...

 

[ThailandToo]

Nice article from Macworld on this topic.

"Even relatively casual users who load up on browser tabs and inefficient Electron apps (household names like Slack, Teams, Discord, etc.) can find performance compromised by running out of RAM."

"To be clear, 8GB of LPDDR5-6400 (the RAM used in these products) costs Apple a tiny fraction of that amount. Nobody knows precisely what Apple pays its suppliers, but the going price for 64Gbits (8GB) of that sort of RAM is less than $40 in quantity. Apple’s deal likely has them paying $30 or less.

There’s nothing special about Apple’s RAM. It’s high quality, and it’s integrated on a very wide memory bus very close to the M3 chip, but those manufacturing complexities don’t make the RAM cost more. Apple’s charging you $200 for RAM it buys for $30."

"Here’s a fun experiment: Configure a MacBook Pro with the M3 Max, the full 16-core CPU version. Every additional 16GB of RAM costs $200, the same as 8GB of RAM on the lower configurations."

That extra 8GB of RAM costs AAPL about $4.62. This $30 crap is senseless. Look at economies of scale and business to business transaction not a consumer purchase at $30.

That source is what AAPL paid for 8GB of RAM two years ago. RAM prices drop not go up. All things equal let’s say they pay the same now as two years ago. This is how AAPL makes money for Tim Cook to get $100m in stock grants annually. Pure profit.

 

[ArkSingularity]

(b) The ACTUAL point of interest is how the current M3 Macs (which may, or may not, have transparent memory compression -- not PAGE compression by TRANSPARENT MEMORY compression) behave differently from their M2 and M1 predecessors.
You will note that there is currently ZERO data on this fact. And yet people feel very confident in making grand generalizations... That's basically all you need to know about the difference between the people in the being-clever professions and people in the sounding-clever professions...

If I recall, wasn't hardware memory compression introduced on the M1 / A14?

Haven't been able to find much information on this.

 

[MazingerZND]

This is what the Stockholm syndrome looks like.

 

[iF34R]

I really really want to get a mbp. I love using the MacOS. I just can't for the life of me justify the prices to get the configuration I want. The upgrade pricing is making a new Apple system never happening for me.

 

[Tuck_]

Its actually good they aren't just going to 16GB, because it incentizes them to make the system as efficient as possible, which pays dividends by making all Macs better machines.

What an absurd take. Unhealthy dose of copium right here.

 

[aevan]

Wait I've seen this one before. nVidia claimed that 8 GB of VRAM was enough in 2023.

It's not.

Enough for what? For medium-settings 1440p gaming? Sure it is.

So is 8Gb RAM - for undemanding workflows.

Would I like they made 16Gb baseline? Yes. But the outrage every year is just silly. The problem is not the 8Gb, the problem is how expensive it is to get more.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

Plus the battery life is terrible with those Alder Lake chips. If you had a Ryzen 7 5025U would be a better price per watt. In Windows land, be careful what you pay for, if you want something good you’re still paying a minimum of $1500; which Dell’s higher class laptops are pretty solid.

Again, the Dell is immaterial. I ride with a Surface Pro 9 as my portable device (although this may eventually become an MBA again) and a Acer Predator Helios Neo 16 i7-13700HX RTX 4060 8GB, 32GB RAM, 2TB NVME SSD. It's plenty fast. (And crap battery life...although it does run very cool!)

 

[eltoslightfoot]

Enough for what? For medium-settings 1440p gaming? Sure it is.

So is 8Gb RAM - for undemanding workflows.

Would I like they made 16Gb baseline? Yes. But the outrage every year is just silly. The problem is not the 8Gb, the problem is how expensive it is to get more.

Totally agree. I have a 4060 with 8GB and it is completely fine. That's the point of the DLSS after all.

 

[makingmark]

I buy the base model iPhones, Macs, iPads as far as storage & RAM.

If I ever actually fiind myself constrained by those things, I'll worry about it then. Actually no - I'll just buy the next step up and, thanks to Apple's great resale values, sell the base model.

In the meantime I enjoy the best value on all of these products. I'm sure it will more than offset any money I "lose" by having to sell a "mistake".

Apple's pricing strategy is only effective if you take the bait they've structured.

 

[0339327]

Is 8GB of Apple RAM equal to 16GB? I doubt that. But it is definitely more efficient, and with dynamic caching, even more efficient than we've seen it become.

Is it equal to 12GB of PC RAM? 10GB?

Apple isn't going to stop starting at 8GB anytime soon. They know that bumping up the low end will increase costs across the board...and especially since going to Apple Silicon, 8GB is a good amount if you're a simple user who doesn't run many apps at the same time, or you don't have 40 tabs open.

It's actually good they aren't just going to 16GB, because it incentizes them to make the system as efficient as possible, which pays dividends by making all Macs better machines. And if you are reading this, you're a power user—you come to Macrumors, come on—so you already know you want at least 16GB, so pay the tax.

It's not smoke and mirrors—Apple Silicon does use RAM better, and 8GB is increasingly enough depending on what you do with it. Bleating over and over that Apple "needs" to give away double that amount is silly...they will only do that if they look at what their average user is doing with the machines, and seeing that those folks are starting to have real memory pressure at such a level that the floor needs to be raised.

And when they do—count on it being 12 GB, not 16.

In the meantime...just buy your damn RAM up to 16GB if you are obsessing over it!

It costs Apple less than $50 to upgrade to 16 and then they r*pe the customer by overcharging for any upgrades.

They do what they want which is why we’re starting to buy non-Apple machines. Vote with your wallet.

 

[Hopscotcher]

How is this good? I mean, it's fine, I guess. The real problem is that they charge anywhere from 2 to 4 times more for RAM and SSD upgrades than literally any other company on the planet. I know they're a business that needs to make money, but it's honestly insane.

 

[EdwardC]

By the same logic, why we need more than 640K RAM? Heck, 4K in Commodore PET would get dirt cheap a couple years down the line so let’s just keep the RAM at 4K shall we? Permanently cap the demand to permanently ease supply shortages.

On that note, 5.25” floppy should be popular again, because of the same logic.

Categorically deny any and all PC just because. 😏
It’s not like Mac itself doesn’t have their own problems either.
I get it. You love macOS to death. But people out there who cannot even afford baseline M1 MacBook Air don’t give a crap about macOS.

In my office I have a M2 Pro Mini, a HP Z2 workstation a M1 air as well as a ThinkPad. Love Mac OS as well (since ‘95) but for work purposes as a Sales Engineer the PC’s with Win 11 Pro and Pro for Workstations are much better for serious work.

 

[Hopscotcher]

In my office I have a M2 Pro Mini, a HP Z2 workstation a M1 air as well as a ThinkPad. Love Mac OS as well (since ‘95) but for work purposes as a Sales Engineer the PC’s with Win 11 Pro and Pro for Workstations are much better for serious work.

For the work you do, yes. Macs are for serious work as well.

 

[allenvanhellen]

Caching wears out the SSD faster, does it not?

 

[MrMojo1]

I really really want to get a mbp. I love using the MacOS. I just can't for the life of me justify the prices to get the configuration I want. The upgrade pricing is making a new Apple system never happening for me.

Same here.
The worst thing is that the business software I use (financial/accounting/tax, etc...) are all Windows based so switching is not an option.
Already configured a decent 16" MB Pro and it's >$3,500, while a similarly PC laptop, say Lenovo 16" P1 workstation, cost ~$2K with a 4K screen. Also, can get a decent 4Tb SSD upgrade for just over $200 while Apple was asking ~$1,200!! Apple's upgrade pricing is insane!
Forget it!

 

[JustAnExpat]

What do MOST people use their computers for? For light office work - surfing the internet, writing letters, using web-based applications like Google Docs. 8 GB is more than enough for those users.

 

[JustAnExpat]

Same here.
The worst thing is that the business software I use (financial/accounting/tax, etc...) are all Windows based so switching is not an option.
Already configured a decent 16" MB Pro and it's >$3,500, while a similarly PC laptop, say Lenovo 16" P1 workstation, cost ~$2K with a 4K screen. Also, can get a decent 4Tb SSD upgrade for just over $200 while Apple was asking ~$1,200!! Apple's upgrade pricing is insane!
Forget it!

I'm not seeing the 16" P1 workstations. I can only find the 14" P1 workstations with a 4K screen on Lenovo US website. I did see some P16 Gen 2 that are 16" that I think you're referring to. https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/p/lapt...h-intel)/len101t0069?visibleDatas=704:16%20GB

The Mac Pro battery life is 26 hours. The ThinkPad is 7 hours.

Lenovo ThinkPad P16 Gen 1 Review

Its price will scare off all but the most demanding design and engineering professionals, but—on sheer muscle and usability—Lenovo's ThinkPad P16 is a tough mobile workstation to top.

www.pcmag.com

 

[tcatsninfan]

My two cents is that 8GB runs very well with "everyday" tasks on macOS, so it doesn't bother me that 8GB is the starting configuration.

HOWEVER, I do think it's totally ridiculous to charge $200 to upgrade the RAM and SSD. I mean I understand that every company needs to make profit, but buying RAM for $30 or $40 and then charging $200 for it is totally ridiculous.

 

[Hopscotcher]

What do MOST people use their computers for? For light office work - surfing the internet, writing letters, using web-based applications like Google Docs. 8 GB is more than enough for those users.

This argument is nonsense. A 15-year-old computer can do all of those things. A 200 dollar Chromebook can do all of that. A 1500 dollar computer shouldn't come with 8 GB of RAM. Whether people use it or not is irrelevant. The base models that come with 8 GB should be cheaper. And RAM and SSD upgrades shouldn't cost 2 to 4 times as much as the competition. There's not a logical argument to be made here.

 

[teh_hunterer]

It's actually good they aren't just going to 16GB

Apple can do what they like, but there is no need to do these kinds of sycophantic mental gymnastics in their honour.

It's priced this way to make more money - no other reason. One can only guess if it's just to further profit, or to make it so the base models are cheaper than they otherwise could be by subsidising them with the profits from people who upgrade.

 

[FrozenShivers]

Is 8GB of Apple RAM equal to 16GB? I doubt that. But it is definitely more efficient, and with dynamic caching, even more efficient than we've seen it become.

Is it equal to 12GB of PC RAM? 10GB?

Apple isn't going to stop starting at 8GB anytime soon. They know that bumping up the low end will increase costs across the board...and especially since going to Apple Silicon, 8GB is a good amount if you're a simple user who doesn't run many apps at the same time, or you don't have 40 tabs open.

It's actually good they aren't just going to 16GB, because it incentizes them to make the system as efficient as possible, which pays dividends by making all Macs better machines. And if you are reading this, you're a power user—you come to Macrumors, come on—so you already know you want at least 16GB, so pay the tax.

It's not smoke and mirrors—Apple Silicon does use RAM better, and 8GB is increasingly enough depending on what you do with it. Bleating over and over that Apple "needs" to give away double that amount is silly...they will only do that if they look at what their average user is doing with the machines, and seeing that those folks are starting to have real memory pressure at such a level that the floor needs to be raised.

And when they do—count on it being 12 GB, not 16.

In the meantime...just buy your damn RAM up to 16GB if you are obsessing over it!

You are the perfect Apple consumer.

 

[falainber]

(a) I have never used an Electron app in my life. Lots of people haven't. This is part of the disease of the American pundit called "everyone is exactly the same as me therefore..."

(b) The ACTUAL point of interest is how the current M3 Macs (which may, or may not, have transparent memory compression -- not PAGE compression by TRANSPARENT MEMORY compression) behave differently from their M2 and M1 predecessors.
You will note that there is currently ZERO data on this fact. And yet people feel very confident in making grand generalizations... That's basically all you need to know about the difference between the people in the being-clever professions and people in the sounding-clever professions...

(a) Do you even know if the apps you use are based on Electron? It's not like they announce that. Electron is used by many apps. Some apps are for professional use (VSCODE), but other apps, like Discord, might be used by anyone.
(b) That's just a baseless speculation on your part. Why even bring it up? Also, if Apple did implement this technology, they would probably brag about it at their grand event (they are never shy about it). They didn't.

 

[HackMacDaddy]

What do MOST people use their computers for? For light office work - surfing the internet, writing letters, using web-based applications like Google Docs. 8 GB is more than enough for those users.

That's a MacBook or MacBook AIR user, not a Pro. Don't confuse these. Apple shouldn't sell a Pro machine that crashes when using their own Pro application (Final Cut Pro) because it runs out of memory.