For people who believe 64GB memory is too much. It's possibly not.

[Gloor]

word play. It was said many times and explained many times. You are just cherry picking words.
Good luck with that, I'm unsubscribing. You must be real joy to be around if you cherry pick words even though the meaning was already explained. Lol

No, they weren't.

You're moving away from the main topic, so hopefully this one more question-answer will be enough to close this sub-thread.

No one said they pushed their Apple Silicon Mac to yellow and then to red memory pressure, and in yellow they didn't notice any difference in responsiveness. Actual test of responsiveness when memory is under stress is what makes me believe an argument - not a theoretical sentence which might as well be false. Needs to be real.

 

[digimari]

My wife's iMac memory usage under: "I've got nothing open!" is below.

I don't know why she said that; clearly, she's got everything open.

I saw several people here concerned about having "wasted" or "idle" memory, when opting for 32 or 64GB with a new Mac. I believe there is no such thing, really, as "wasted" memory, under specialist professional use, with a 64GB config and under.

I want to show that under this real-world scenario, without opening any kind of movie files and working on just 1 project file per large application, Mac OS uses 75GB for application memory plus 18.6 GB for caching, making it

93.6 GB in total.

I'm not suggesting to anyone to get any specific amount of memory. Of course this will work on 32GB. The question is - how much lag will the user experience when switching between applications, and is the user willing to put up with these lags?

The primary meaning of this post is to prompt undecided potential buyers to examine their RAM requirements very carefully.
View attachment 2334107
TLDR version of comments.

I liked the comment from @throAU best:

"And yes, this is complicated to measure. This is why apple/macOS does this for you with the "memory pressure" graph. That's the most accurate overview of how stressed the machine is for resources as it represents how often the machine is trying to actually access memory that isn't available. The machine itself can calculate that based on far more metrics than it can display or that you can easily read on activity monitor.

I've pushed my M1 Pro into orange and eventually red memory pressure and it was still fairly responsive. Orange was not noticeable in terms of response compared to green for my usage.

YMMV, but suffice to say - if you want to get an overview of whether the machine is stressed for memory, use the memory pressure graph and don't over think it by trying to investigate the numbers. If the graph is orange or red - then go looking for what is consuming it all."

Thank you for that super helpful explanation. The point should be instantly obvious to any critical thinker. Can you please explain how to quickly access the memory pressure graph on a MacBook Pro while bogging down in an application such as Photoshop or Lightroom? My instinct is that it may be accessible near the address bar. It would be incredibly helpful to my workflow and upcoming Macbook Pro upgrade. Thanks so much in advance if anyone has input. I grasp 64 ram is essential, need to get a feel for which Apple M chip version will suit my needs as I budget to upgrade my Macbook Pro.- M PS- I know I can research it and figure it out but at 65 I’m behind the curve on too many things to count🙂

 

[Andrey84]

Thank you for that super helpful explanation. The point should be instantly obvious to any critical thinker. Can you please explain how to quickly access the memory pressure graph on a MacBook Pro while bogging down in an application such as Photoshop or Lightroom? My instinct is that it may be accessible near the address bar. It would be incredibly helpful to my workflow and upcoming Macbook Pro upgrade. Thanks so much in advance if anyone has input. I grasp 64 ram is essential, need to get a feel for which Apple M chip version will suit my needs as I budget to upgrade my Macbook Pro.- M PS- I know I can research it and figure it out but at 65 I’m behind the curve on too many things to count🙂

This explanation is not mine, it's from @throAU!
I assume iStat Menus should support this, but I'm not 100% sure
If you don't get a full answer here, I suggest creating a separate thread and asking your question, as it'd be nice to monitor your memory pressure and make a confident decision

 

[JouniS]

Prove what? I'm not making some exaggerated claim, this is simply how modern RAM management works. The computer will use as much as you let it (while also reserving a buffer for new stuff). A 1TB machine can cache more stuff in RAM, and so it will, it's as simple as that.

It's not as simple as that. When you have a lot of memory, large parts of it are often completely empty outside periods of peak usage.

A concrete example: My MBP has 96 GB memory, out of which 30 GB is in use and another 30 GB is used for caching files. I start a quick task that reads 40 GB of files and uses 45 GB of memory. Because I don't have 85 GB available, the OS has to purge something. After the task finishes, memory usage is 25 GB and cached files use another 30 GB.

If you have a lot of memory and never actually need it, memory usage depends on what you actually use. If you work with large files such as video, it can grow arbitrarily. But if you are a software developer like me, you will eventually run out of files to cache.

 

[ignatius345]

Great productivity hack: leave Activity Monitor closed and don't worry about "memory pressure" or swap or anything else until you actually have a problem.

 

[Andrey84]

Great productivity hack: leave Activity Monitor closed and don't worry about "memory pressure" or swap or anything else until you actually have a problem.

This is a good next step. Honestly, I support this for existing systems. Had to write this 🙂

1. Don't worry about used memory
2. Don't worry about swap
3. Don't worry about memory pressure
4. Don't worry 😎

 

[CraigJDuffy]

My wife's iMac memory usage under: "I've got nothing open!" is below.

I don't know why she said that; clearly, she's got everything open.

I saw several people here concerned about having "wasted" or "idle" memory, when opting for 32 or 64GB with a new Mac. I believe there is no such thing, really, as "wasted" memory, under specialist professional use, with a 64GB config and under.

I want to show that under this real-world scenario, without opening any kind of movie files and working on just 1 project file per large application, Mac OS uses 75GB for application memory plus 18.6 GB for caching, making it

93.6 GB in total.

I'm not suggesting to anyone to get any specific amount of memory. Of course this will work on 32GB. The question is - how much lag will the user experience when switching between applications, and is the user willing to put up with these lags?

The primary meaning of this post is to prompt undecided potential buyers to examine their RAM requirements very carefully.
View attachment 2334107
TLDR version of comments.

I liked the comment from @throAU best:

"And yes, this is complicated to measure. This is why apple/macOS does this for you with the "memory pressure" graph. That's the most accurate overview of how stressed the machine is for resources as it represents how often the machine is trying to actually access memory that isn't available. The machine itself can calculate that based on far more metrics than it can display or that you can easily read on activity monitor.

I've pushed my M1 Pro into orange and eventually red memory pressure and it was still fairly responsive. Orange was not noticeable in terms of response compared to green for my usage.

YMMV, but suffice to say - if you want to get an overview of whether the machine is stressed for memory, use the memory pressure graph and don't over think it by trying to investigate the numbers. If the graph is orange or red - then go looking for what is consuming it all."

This is technically true but misses the point, you could probably get by with similar performance on less RAM. Equally though, if you had 2TB of RAM your machine would be using more RAM in all likelihood and more RAM is always better.

 

[digimari]

This explanation is not mine, it's from @throAU!
I assume iStat Menus should support this, but I'm not 100% sure
If you don't get a full answer here, I suggest creating a separate thread and asking your question, as it'd be nice to monitor your memory pressure and make a confident decision

Thank you!- Marilyn

 

[TechnoMonk]

As some one who owns a base M2 MBA with 8GB ram and a maxed out 64 GB RAM on M1 Max MBP 16, both machines use as much RAM available. I like how Mac OS manages memory proactively. Memory pressure is all I look at if the system/apps slow down. 8 GB ram is plenty for regular usage and coding. And for anything intense just depends on your needs. You need 32,64 or what ever get more RAM. For regular computing even a Base model isn’t bad.

 

[Rychiar]

For years i worked on an imac with 40gb and had adobe photoshop, illustrator and indesign open. I was frequently using like 80 gigs of scratch disc on basic design usage even with 40 gigs of ram. I have 64 now and still push my new studio

 

[ignatius345]

As some one who owns a base M2 MBA with 8GB ram and a maxed out 64 GB RAM on M1 Max MBP 16, both machines use as much RAM available. I like how Mac OS manages memory proactively. Memory pressure is all I look at if the system/apps slow down. 8 GB ram is plenty for regular usage and coding. And for anything intense just depends on your needs. You need 32,64 or what ever get more RAM. For regular computing even a Base model isn’t bad.

That's been my experience as well with the base model M1 Air. Swap used to be a nightmare when we all had HDD boot drives. Everything would stop cold and you'd hear the drive spin up as something big was swapped with the RAM. Now with the fast NVMe SSDs in modern Macs, the performance hit is a lot less noticible.

 

[Agincourt]

At this point it's not so much what you start out with so much as what the computer can be upgraded to.

iMac used to be upgradable to 128 GB RAM. 128 GB!!!!

Now what is it?

Apple decided to upgrade the iMac to 8 GB base with the potential to 24 GB!!!

Mac Pro now can only reach 128... whereas the previous generation could hit 1.5 TB.

Yeah I'm kinda looking at these extreme downgrades in RAM capacity and simply shake my head over where Apple has gone in the last four years.

 

[h.gilbert]

What a pointless post. MacOS uses as much memory as is available.

 

[Schlumpf]

Unpopular opinion: Even 8gb is more than enough for most use cases, at least for a MBA. Yes, it will swap when you run Illustrator, Lightroom, a dozen Safaritabs and Solidworks in Parallels at the same time, but compared to most laptops from even just a few years ago it runs very smooth. Of course for professional use, more than 8gb will certainly be quicker in switching between open windows, but saying you really need 16gb for everything, even casual use, no way. Remember spending 400 dollar extra, could be used for buying a new machine a few years earlier. The upgrade from 8 to 24gb is 36% of the total cost of the basemodel

 

[Andrey84]

What a pointless post. MacOS uses as much memory as is available.

Not true. Two other people in this thread suggested this, and two other people said it’s not so. If there are no more files to cash and you’re not opening any new applications, the memory usage stabilises. Not many workflows require constant opening of new files.

 

[PsykX]

If you put in 256GB of RAM, it will try to use it if possible.
It doesn't mean it's actually better, I'm certainly not saying it's worse, but at this point it's fractions of fractions of seconds better... Negligibly better.

If there's 0 memory pressure and 0 swap file used : you can conclude you have enough memory for what you do, but you cannot conclude you have too much.

 

[zap2]

Anyone who argues that “X computer spec is too much” is setting themselves up for a comment that ages poorly.

The real question someone should ask is “Do my budget/needs make X, Y or Z the right specifics for me”

My father’s laptop is ancient by my standard. When I offered to buy a him a new one, he turns me down, because his machine works for his very basic needs.

It’s why very large businesses make for easier customers in many cases. The small number of people in charge of procurement won’t be using all the hardware they order, so they end up purchasing more than some employees need (to make sure those who do need a certain requirement get it.)

 

[zap2]

With that logic, you might as well run your entire OS and all files off a RAM disk. Just to clarify, I don't think 64GB is too much for everyone. I have 96GB, the most I could equip my M2 Max with.

If you want to lose everything when you computer loses power, sure that would be a great idea.

It doesn’t mean having multiple things cached isn’t useful (or a legitimate use of a computer’s RAM…although legitimate is an odd way to describe it) in the middle of a specific project.

 

[HawkTheHusky1902]

My wife's iMac memory usage under: "I've got nothing open!" is below.

I don't know why she said that; clearly, she's got everything open.

I saw several people here concerned about having "wasted" or "idle" memory, when opting for 32 or 64GB with a new Mac. I believe there is no such thing, really, as "wasted" memory, under specialist professional use, with a 64GB config and under.

I want to show that under this real-world scenario, without opening any kind of movie files and working on just 1 project file per large application, Mac OS uses 75GB for application memory plus 18.6 GB for caching, making it

93.6 GB in total.

I'm not suggesting to anyone to get any specific amount of memory. Of course this will work on 32GB. The question is - how much lag will the user experience when switching between applications, and is the user willing to put up with these lags?

The primary meaning of this post is to prompt undecided potential buyers to examine their RAM requirements very carefully.
View attachment 2334107
TLDR version of comments.

I liked the comment from @throAU best:

"And yes, this is complicated to measure. This is why apple/macOS does this for you with the "memory pressure" graph. That's the most accurate overview of how stressed the machine is for resources as it represents how often the machine is trying to actually access memory that isn't available. The machine itself can calculate that based on far more metrics than it can display or that you can easily read on activity monitor.

I've pushed my M1 Pro into orange and eventually red memory pressure and it was still fairly responsive. Orange was not noticeable in terms of response compared to green for my usage.

YMMV, but suffice to say - if you want to get an overview of whether the machine is stressed for memory, use the memory pressure graph and don't over think it by trying to investigate the numbers. If the graph is orange or red - then go looking for what is consuming it all."

I think you didn't mention the most important part here- those are Adobe apps. Adobe apps eat up as much as you will give it. It won't stop eating your resources even if you have 192gb, or 256, or 384gb. That does not mean all professionals need that much. It also will just use whatever you have to try to make it run as smoothly as possible. So using this as a buying guide is kind of pathetic imo.

 

[HawkTheHusky1902]

For my husband I specifically and willingly bought an 8GB RAM MacBook Air because that's more than enough for regular use and some light photoshop and even blender...

You must be joking.







Wtf.

 

[kschendel]

As an FYI, just about any modern or even not-so-modern operating system that I can think of handles memory more or less the same way as MacOS, even Windoze. Some might be better than others in some particular situations, but they all use memory as a file page cache, and all will let programs allocate memory that may or may not exist physically. (That's why it's called virtual memory!) MacOS, Windows, Linux, BSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX ... you name it and they all work more or less the same as far as physical memory handling is concerned.

 

[kschendel]

You must be joking.

It seems to be working for them, so why would they be joking? Sounds more like an actual data point to me. Maybe their photos are small and they don't care if blender runs for minutes or whatever.

 

[HawkTheHusky1902]

It seems to be working for them, so why would they be joking? Sounds more like an actual data point to me. Maybe their photos are small and they don't care if blender runs for minutes or whatever.

Well, true, but that is a bit silly




But if it works for them, who am I to judge.

 

[edubfromktown]

For my husband I specifically and willingly bought an 8GB RAM MacBook Air because that's more than enough for regular use and some light photoshop and even blender...

Though I have discretionay income to throw at more resources I just dont. Did the same for my wife- 8 GB in an MBA is plenty for her purposes on M1 architecture.

I run a 32 GB Studio Base Max. Dev tools, LrC (all the creative cloud resource sapping garbage is ripped out) among other things and see no signs of memory pressure.

Even with extraneous Adobe cloud garbage processes running in the background, it wasn't a problem.

 

[PsykX]

Anyone who argues that “X computer spec is too much” is setting themselves up for a comment that ages poorly.

If someone gives me a computer with 128 GB of RAM, but also 128 GB of storage, I don't care, I don't want it. The RAM spec is way too high for nothing in this case (for my needs at least). That being said, I'm not saying I won't ever need 128 GB of RAM sometime in my life.

A well-balanced computer is better for me than a computer with an astounding spec and a serious bottleneck at the same time.