I used to have 16GB on my 15 inch Pro which I sold. Now I got the 8GB m1 Pro. It does everything I want it to do and does it fast. Does it arguably better than my 15 inch pro ever did despite the pro costing me $3500 back in 2017.
That's got nothing to do with RAM and everything to do with how well a Kaby Lake (if purchased in the latter half of 2017) or Skylake (if purchased in the former half of 2017) H series Intel processor performs under the thin thermal envelope of that MacBook Pro when compared to an M1 SoC. If you are not realizing this, then you probably shouldn't be giving technology advice.
I agree with Russell, some people are too obsessed with running various sensors, monitors, etc. and going off of the results rather than just using the computer.
If you are obsessed with looking at various indicators, get the expensive models and enjoy seeing green arrows.
Other than trying to determine which, of two given machines, is faster, sensors and monitors and results DO provide insight as to how well a computer is operating. Those that monitor those things usually do so because they either need to or were burned in the past for not doing so and are all the more hypervigilant about doing so now.
Just because you don't push a computer to its limits doesn't mean that other people are "obsessed" with whether or not they are able to with theirs.
I, and most users, do not look at any arrows, we just go by how we feel using the computer and for those users 8GB is just fine. Even benchmarks/real world usage/YouTube comparisons show that the 16GB does not make a big - or any difference - for most use cases.
16GB vs. 8GB doesn't make a huge difference TODAY. People said the exact same thing of me when I put 2GB of RAM in a 20" Early 2006 iMac (the first with Intel). Lo and behold, I got WAY more life out of that thing than I would've if I had only configured it with the base 512MB. Incidentally, Apple DOES up the minimum RAM requirement of their OSes from time to time (and much moreso with platforms that have been running on Apple Silicon for a while). Incidentally, there are also features in macOS Monterey that require, not just an M1 Mac, but one with 16GB of RAM. But if you're only about shelling out money for what you need today with zero f*cks given about the future, then sure, 8GB is adequate.
As for future proofing, that was my logic when I shelled out $3500 for my 15 inch pro. What a dumb idea that was. I sold mine for about $1200.. so basically lost $2300 in value for nothing.
I've monitored eBay and Swappa for Macs for decades. Your upgrades DO add value, but they devalue at the same overall rate. If your Pro cost $3500 in 2017, you ought to have, at worst, been able to get $2000 for it. Though, that completely discounts the effects that the butterfly keyboard, the advent of the 16" MacBook Pro, and the impending craze about Apple Silicon would have. Your average eBay-er isn't caring about or even understanding of specs, so you're going to have less people look at your Mac (which is usually why it's better to do a fixed price listing than an auction); they're going to see 2017 and only be willing to pay so much, neverminding the specs. That being said, this is a marketing problem on your end. I did a search for 2016 MacBook Pros as recently as four months ago and couldn't find any that were cheaper than $1200 (and those were all base models; higher end spec models were way more than that).
If I got the computer I *needed* that time versus worrying about "future proofing" and what I may end up needing it for, I could have spent half the money, sell it and get another one, and do that probably several times over the next 10 years before I would have spent $3500 out of pocket. What a shame, but lessons were learned.
Buying more than you think you'll need is foolhardy unless it gives you peace of mind. That being said, there are wise and unwise ways to future-proof. Buying more graphics horsepower doesn't future proof you unless you want to play games that haven't come out yet or use newer video editing tools that will take advantage of that stuff down the road. Buying more RAM DOES future proof you as eventually ALL things require more and more RAM. That 15" MacBook Pro will lose support for whatever macOS version will be the first to not support it regardless of RAM capacity. At least, this is what is statistically most likely to happen. But to say that extra RAM won't have STILL enabled that Mac to do more than if it had less proves that you don't understand how RAM works.
Be smart, buy what you will actually USE. As for future-proofing, just sell your computer in 2-3 years when you feel you actually *need* something better and yours isn't performing and just buy a new one. By then for sure there will be some new design tweaks, features, etc you are going to want which your "future proof" computer won't ever get!
Not everyone can afford to buy a new computer every three years. In fact, since Macs cost so much money, most people tend to cling to them for 7-10 years, only replacing when they absolutely have to. Most don't want to deal with the hassle of reselling either and because they're afraid they'll get ripped off the way you did for your 15". And, to be fair, if they're not careful and knowing what they're doing, they WILL get ripped off. Better to buy for the long haul and then buy again when enough time has passed. Less hassle too.
Unused RAM is wasted RAM.
What's the point of spending money on RAM that will stay empty? 8 GB RAM in yellow and 16 GB RAM in green perform identically, since only the amount of unused RAM changes.
This post showcases an utter lack of understanding of what RAM is and how it works.
8GB of RAM in yellow will result in greater swapping and increased SSD wear when compared to 16GB of RAM in green. Great, you don't notice the performance difference; big whoop-dee-doo. That doesn't mean that the end result on your computer is the same. The SSDs are not replaceable on M1 Macs (nor the vast majority of T2 Intel Macs for that matter). That kind of replacement necessitates a complete main logic board replacement (which, if you didn't know this, is seriously expensive; practically the cost of a new engine in a car relative to the car's value).
Better to have unused RAM than over-used RAM.
The reason M1 is so fast is because it’s SoC so RAM is not user-upgradable and never will be. So the M1 is the least rip off Apple has ever been for upgrades in its entire existence.
What does that even mean? Seriously, what you wrote looks like you skimmed an 8 year old's understanding of what the M1 is as detailed in an elementary school science report and then regurgitated it crudely in a forum post.
It's okay to not know things. But to talk about things you don't know like you know them is where things become asinine.
An SoC is a "system on a chip". All that means is that components that used to be separate on a computer's logic board are now integrated onto a single chip. Nothing more.
The RAM not being user-upgradable IS THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE POST.
The M1 being a rip-off or not IS ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT TO THE POST.
As for RAM efficiency as it pertains to the M1, the RAM is shared across all elements of the SoC which results in efficient RAM usage. This has SOME effect on how much RAM you'll need to be using at once, but it doesn't negate the total amount of RAM that any one file, app, or process (or sets of files, apps, or processes) will need in order to function.
As SSD drives get faster and faster, extra RAM is becoming more and more useless. A MacBook Air M1 can read and write to SSD at around 2 GB/sec. That means the OS can offload less used stuff to swap memory and load in what's needed and the user usually won't notice a thing. That's why even people editing giant 8K movies and have huge coding projects open don't notice any slowdowns with 8 GB on M1. The OS doesn't need to keep it all in the memory. The SSD swap is good enough for the overwhelming majority of the time.
SSD swap is NOT preferable to having more RAM. The fact that you might not notice a slowdown is wonderful. But that still doesn't change the fact that it's better to have more RAM than it is to swap.
That’s what I argued as well. You simply can’t convince the more-ram crowd.
Certainly not when their arguments for more RAM are far more educated and rational than your arguments for less!
Hello guys, understand this is about 8GB / 16GB ram thread.
But what about the 7 core GPU with 16GB ram on the 24" iMac? Will it better compare to 8 core GPU with 8GB ram?
Let say, I will use it mostly for Photoshop and occasional Lightroom / Capture One raw export, and will not be doing any video editing stuff or gaming. Well, $200 save up is kinda big in my country considering the current pandemic is still going on.
Sorry if this question has answered before, but new answer is appreciate!
The 7 GPU core version of the iMac lacks a dedicated fan and heat pipe to cool the M1 directly. It's also underclocked to 2.5GHz compared to the 3.2GHz that literally every other M1 Mac implentation has (including the 7 GPU core version of the MacBook Air). For those reasons, and having nothing to do with RAM, I'd steer clear of that model entirely. That said, for a 24" iMac that has the 8 GPU core model (and the dedicated fan and heat pipe), I'd get 16GB of RAM. If it's a cost issue, then you could buy an M1 Mac mini, configure it with 16GB of RAM, get an okay 4K monitor and barely be over the cost of the base model 7 GPU core 24" iMac and you'd probably be better off for it. Photoshop CAN be RAM intensive. But, on top of that, more RAM equates to being able to do more at once (the M1's relative RAM efficiencies over Intel Macs doesn't negate that whatsoever).
