Buyer’s remorse for 64gb ram?

[Macshroomer]

By the time you need 64GB in a laptop the other hardware will be obsolete.

Which means you don't need it but I do.

I use it now for heavy use cases. If software optimization changes that well that is one thing. But I don't see that happening when I stitch 24x 50MP raw files to output to one giant DNG file for export to a 15' to 25' foot client deliverable...on location.

 

[mightyjabba]

Again, I’m not saying that no one needs it. I’m pushing back against the idea that “regular” users should get it “just to be safe.”

 

[baypharm]

All of this talk about “needing” ram...and how it’s a waste of money....but some forum members break no sweat paying cash for a $6,000 laptop or even a $65,000 Mac Pro. So it becomes a matter of want rather than need. If you have the cash available and want to buy something, just whip it out.

 

[badsimian]

So I am going to backtrack on this and be slightly hypocritical I realised that I don’t really need the 64GB, it was a lovely machine but in reality, most of the time I don’t even need 8 cores. I have a new 16” on order with the base i7, 32GB and 1TB. Sweet spot for me, I do enough VM work occasionally that I know the 32GB will benefit me. I can easily get by with 1TB instead of 2 and the core count really given the VM work I do is unimportant. Many of the VMs don’t do that much most of the time.


This is in no way a comment on anyone else’s situation but a personal thing. Anyway pretty sure I will be happier with the new one.

 

[impulse462]

The people getting 64gb of ram know what they need it for. If they don’t know, they don’t need it.

 

[buran-energia]

"32GB ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates.

 

[Grumply]

I think it's actually quite an interesting question now that Thunderbolt 3, eGPUs and NVME storage allow laptops (like the 16") to take on computing tasks that were previously inconceivable on anything much shy of a workstation.

It seems you can now put the laptop onto tasks that might actually require the hefty levels of RAM, where previously the rest of your hardware was likely to be a bottleneck before you could ever get there.

 

[TiggrToo]

As soon a the new year starts we're hitting the corporate budget early (before everyone else dips their toes in it and depletes it!) to get all the current MBP users in IT 2019 16" MBPs with 32GB.

Except for me, I'm going for a 64GB one simply because I'm going to be running 2 Sql Server docker containers and a Parallels VM. So yeah, I'm gonna need all 64 GiggleBits. That said, I'm no ordinary user either...

 

[Freyqq]

This is going to be my first Mac and I have no idea my use case (java web development mainly, will ran mysql, MongoD, Reid’s, elastic search in the background, intellij and several tomcat or springboot apps for developing. Occasionally exploring other things with docker compose and maybe other vms. Excel in windows parallel vm.) needs how many gbs of ram. I currently use a win 10 hades canyon with 32GB ram and sometimes it hits 20+ gb ram without running any vm. now I don’t know if the number will be similar on a macO.
since I can’t upgrade ram later, I really don’t want to feel bad later when hitting the ram ceiling. But again, if I max out, I could waste $400 which could‘ve been for my next iPhone or whatever Mac apps I need.

I wonder if there is anybody who thought they needed 64gb ram and later found out they actually don’t? Or the other way around, anybody regrets for not getting 64gb? Please share. Thanks.

make sure you're actually using all that ram and it isn't just cached

 

[Ries]

Which means you don't need it but I do.

I use it now for heavy use cases. If software optimization changes that well that is one thing. But I don't see that happening when I stitch 24x 50MP raw files to output to one giant DNG file for export to a 15' to 25' foot client deliverable...on location.

A uncompressed 50MP raw image:

RAW/DNG 16 bits/pixel

101 MB

Megapixel calculator · toolstud.io

Megapixel calculator: estimate aspect ratio, TIFF, BMP, JPG file size from pixel dimensions

toolstud.io

24 times that, 2.4GB. Could be done on a 16GB machine.

 

[jinnyman]

I know there are some people who actually need 64. But I'd bet most people get 64 doing things that doesn't really require 64. Some probably went 64 for future proofing . For me, I only run personal thing or maybe one instance of VM. I never get swaps with using 32 gig. So I'd hardly consider anything above 32 for now.

Of course, for my desktop, I hit the ceiling. It's dirt cheap in desktop so why not? As for mobile, I'd rather upgrade sooner than planning to use for more than its effective lifetime.

 

[robvas]

A uncompressed 50MP raw image:

RAW/DNG 16 bits/pixel

101 MB

Megapixel calculator · toolstud.io

Megapixel calculator: estimate aspect ratio, TIFF, BMP, JPG file size from pixel dimensions

toolstud.io

24 times that, 2.4GB. Could be done on a 16GB machine.

You actually need at least 32 bits per pixel for an image to be in RAM in photoshop, as opposed to being on disk, so double your number. But still it's not > 16GB

 

[stevemiller]

back when i had my first unibody macbook pro in 2008, i was constantly hitting the ram ceiling, primarily when using after effects. i could watch the ram fill in activity monitor and completely freeze the machine simply by previewing an empty timeline. a lot of that i think was due to some bad bugs in memory management between macos and adobe.

things improved a lot with my 2011 with 16gb, which i was stuck with as an upper limit on laptops until i got my 2018. since it'd been 7 years, i assumed it was worth stepping up to 32gb, even if i wasn't explicitly hitting any walls yet - the complexity of projects i was working had definitely increased.

but to be honest, i don't really notice any appreciable improvement in this machine over my 2013. for my uses doing 3d/game engine work, i'm FAR more hamstrung by the 550x gpu than the ram. and either way, opening a single safari tab can still regularly bring the machine to its knees for ~30s for unknown reasons.

 

[buran-energia]

I know that Adobe After Effects and alike loves RAM and will use all available memory for things like caching, so 64 GB won't be a complete waste in these cases. But like many have said, if you wonder whether you need 64 GB, you probably don't.

 

[wallysb01]

There are basically two ways to think about this:

1. I know I need X RAM now or in the near future. So I get X RAM.

2. I don’t know my future use, and I don’t want to worry about. This case is a bit more like buying AppleCare. For ~10-15% of the cost of the machine you can double the RAM and have the piece of mind that it’s there if you need it. Just like I don’t plan on a hardware failure or dropping the machine, I still think the risk mitigation is worth it because changing machines has a time and monetary cost associated with it.

we see these threads pop up a lot, but the basic answer is always the same. Know your usage and know you risk tolerance. There is no right answer here, it just depends on how you value your options and the marginal cost associated with them.

For me personally, I work with fairly large data, but tend not to push my personal laptop that hard (have servers/cloud for that) and have been getting by with 16GB. However, I still opted for the 64GB because I don’t want to be limited should I find it easier to one day work on a dataset locally, and honestly $400 ($360 really) isn’t that much of an issue for a business expense to improve the primary tool I work with. Essentially, if I ever use it for 1 project that takes a few weeks to months, it will more than pay for itself. That’s good enough for me to pull the trigger.

 

[currahee2100]

MBP is not upgrade able. If you intend on keeping it for a long time then don't feel bad.
I have 64GB on my Windows desktop. After Effects and Premiere Pro looooove it.

 

[kmahmood]

I finally went for the i9 with 64Gb Ram MBP 16" , and pleased that I went with 64GB RAM instead of 32GB - in fact I'm using 38GB right now , plenty of apps open, about 50 tabs in Chrome, multiple VMs running, Docker for Mac with 8GB ram allocated, three separate Kubernetes clusters all running locally. And it's still got plenty of breathing space and machine is running comfortably, just what I was looking for.

 

[jinnyman]

I personally don't understand a group of people opting for higher memory for future proof even though they don't need at the time of purchase. I'd rather upgrade the computer 2~3 years after. If you think you may need more ram in 2~3 year period, you should go for higher from the beginning.

This is really simple issue. Unless you want to burn your cash and brag about how your MBP has 64 gig, you are free to do so. Otherwise, you should know how much you'd need it period.

 

[Stephen.R]

I personally don't understand a group of people opting for higher memory for future proof even though they don't need at the time of purchase.

If you think you may need more ram in 2~3 year period, you should go for higher from the beginning.

You're literally recommending what you say you "don't understand".

 

[baypharm]

I personally don't understand a group of people opting for higher memory for future proof even though they don't need at the time of purchase. I'd rather upgrade the computer 2~3 years after. If you think you may need more ram in 2~3 year period, you should go for higher from the beginning.

This is really simple issue. Unless you want to burn your cash and brag about how your MBP has 64 gig, you are free to do so. Otherwise, you should know how much you'd need it period.

You don't understand? Ok. How about this? I have the cash to buy one outright without having to worry where my next meal is coming from. Some of us just "want" it and can easily afford it.

 

[Steve686]

I have 32GB on my 2019 MacBook Pro and no matter what I do I cannot get the memory pressure even close to the yellow even when I open every application on the machine and push it in ways that are unrealistic I don't even approach the limit. Photo/video editing won't get even close to putting pressure on 32GB. Unless you know you're going to be using the machine in a manner that necessitates the extreme use of memory I don't think 64GB is needed.

Same here.

But my memory pressure sure likes to hover around 16gb when I am using my machine. 2.3 ghz i9, 32gb RAM, 5500 8GB Vram.

This makes me glad I am at 32 and didn't pop for the 64.
[automerge]1584162251[/automerge]

I personally don't understand a group of people opting for higher memory for future proof even though they don't need at the time of purchase. I'd rather upgrade the computer 2~3 years after. If you think you may need more ram in 2~3 year period, you should go for higher from the beginning.

This is really simple issue. Unless you want to burn your cash and brag about how your MBP has 64 gig, you are free to do so. Otherwise, you should know how much you'd need it period.

LOL.

Why know how much you need? Some people like to max out and not even think about it.

 

[jerwin]

Otherwise, you should know how much you'd need it period.

In the old days, reviewers used to publish these things called benchmarks, which would tell you whether that $400 was worth it, or best allocated elsewhere.

(I suppose the days of buying a computer with the expectation of being able to to try out new things are long over. Should have configured it properly at point of sale, n00b!)

 

[MacGizmo]

I personally don't understand a group of people...

We can't understand how you can be so ignorant.

opting for higher memory for future proof even though they don't need at the time of purchase.

Clearly, you don't understand the definition of the term "future-proofing."

I'd rather upgrade the computer 2~3 years after....

Please tell me you're not that unaware?

If you think you may need more ram in 2~3 year period, you should go for higher from the beginning.

Which is it? You're bashing people for future-proofing and buying 64GB now, and with that statement you're actually recommending it.

This is really simple issue.

The only thing "simple" here is your thinking.

Honest to God, you clearly don't even understand how the mac hardware and OS work, so why are you trying to come off as some expert giving advice? Please don't answer...

 

[wegster]

LOL - I don't visit the site often except for when I'm considering or have bought a new apple device, but having flashbacks to where I said flat out - I won't buy another MBP until they give a 32GB option, fix the goofy touchbar (no ESC key), and the keyboard. Won't re-iterate the reasons in depth as others in this thread have it covered (VMs, development, large data set manipulation, etc.)

The 'you'll KNOW if you need it' is the best comment in the thread, and very true. Fair enough for new guys/girls into Apple's ecosystem or speccing out systems (e.g. should I go to 32GB, 16GB or is 8GB enough for X, Y), but ti's really not worth arguing with people who KNOW what they need due to their specific use cases.

Ironically, I am still on my 16GB 2015MBP, and was pretty happy with the 16" MBP release overall, and am now just waiting to see what they announce for the 13" MBP refresh - if they offer a 32GB option in the upcoming refresh, with 4 core, scissor keyboard (all of which seem plausible), I'll be picking it up. Were I more desk-bound and less travel, the 16" looks to be what many of us 'power users' (and RAM need-ers) have been waiting for. Bonus to me and VI/VIM users everywhere, no more stupid touchkey ESC key - it took kicking Ives to the curb (or he left - don't care), and 5 years, but finally looks like a decent set of machines again. Would love to see more cores on the 13" but thermals are what they are, it will be a solid system for me at 32GB.

Sadly, my wife manages to kill 13" MBPs somehow, the same exact way (random power offs - can never reproduce it, 2 different MBPs now) did it again, so she's got an Air with the butterfly kb - so fingers crossed on that one, but I'm hoping the MBP 13" refresh will allow 32GB selection then I'm good.

Here's hoping COVID-19 doesn't slow down the MBP 13 refresh and everyone is as sage and unimpacted as can be.
[automerge]1584294187[/automerge]

Same here.

But my memory pressure sure likes to hover around 16gb when I am using my machine. 2.3 ghz i9, 32gb RAM, 5500 8GB Vram.

This makes me glad I am at 32 and didn't pop for the 64.
[automerge]1584162251[/automerge]


LOL.

Why know how much you need? Some people like to max out and not even think about it.

Absolute LOL, indeed.
If someone is looking for 'fragging rights' to say they have 64GB to do what non-technical (engineer including SW, data science, CAD/CAM, real videography(not editing on an iphone), etc.) people use as the normal set of actions - web, mail, some misc office apps, more web and social sites.... huge waste of cash, especially going to 64GB. For that group, depending on their specific usage, yeah, I could see going from 8GB to 16GB if it's cheap enough. I've been bitching for years waiting for a 32GB option, but I truly don'e see a way for an average non-technical user to 'need' 64GB any time soon, as in the lifetime of the machine. Famous last words perhaps, but that would need to be an incredible abuse of resources - how many 4K videos will you be watching at a time?

No long debate from me, but what I biy or recommend for my wife (teacher, does PPT, some Excel work, plus usual use activity) 8GB, one step up in storage from what you think you 'need,' 5 year refresh cycle. Had been doing MBPs for her, but we're giving an Air a shot this time through. Typical user non-technical very likely can go with an Air if they feel like it, although I wouldn't recommend for heavy lift computation, etc. Get 16GB if it makes you happy - may indeed extend the life of the system for you a bit, depending on planned upgrade frequency.

Anyone in a technical computation type of field (partial list above), life starts at 16GB and MBP only, and they are the best positioned looking at datasets, # of VMs, as to what they individually need/could use. Normal non-technical usage going to 32GB+ = wow, enjoy the wasted $ or 157 chrome tabs open for no reason, but it's your $.

 

[impulse462]

I just ran into an application that actually needs more than 32gb of RAM otherwise it doesn't run. This is an image reconstruction technique in an academic lab so its not very optimized well at all (like most academic programmers), but damn I do wonder if 64gb could have helped