I'm saying a "pro product" is meaningless.
Apple just names some products "Pro" has part of a naming convention and it usually just means more expensive and usually better in some areas but not all.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How can Apple sell a Mac with 8GB of RAM in 2023 and call it "Pro"
- Thread starter parseckadet
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm saying a "pro product" is meaningless.
Apple just names some products "Pro" has part of a naming convention and it usually just means more expensive and usually better in some areas but not all.
It's definitely not. It's more like
8gm on a Mac is 32 gm on a PC. PCs are just so bad now.
I don't quite get the vitriol. No one is forced to get an 8GB machine. If you need/want more, get more. If a consumer truly is a pro consumer, they'll know what they need and won't be 'fooled' by a more modest amount of RAM on a base configuration. Someone who isn't a professional with regards to how/why they use their laptop, and is just buying it because they need a machine of some kind and figure 'pro' is better than non-pro, the 8GB may very well be good enough for them. Heck, it's even been good enough for my son on his M1 that he's been using while studying to be a software engineer.
Personally? I don't get a machine with less than 32GB of RAM, and generally prefer 64GB or more. The base configuration doesn't really matter to me and, honestly, won't matter to someone that is getting a machine for professional use.
Personally? I don't get a machine with less than 32GB of RAM, and generally prefer 64GB or more. The base configuration doesn't really matter to me and, honestly, won't matter to someone that is getting a machine for professional use.
Why would anybody be happy to be charged $500 for an extra 8GB of RAM?
I recently added a second 32 GB to my iMac (making it 64 GB) for $75.
I get that some people are here because they want the best devices for the consumer while others are here because AAPL.
I don't like Apple's commercial strategy on SSD and RAM, it's obvious, I don't like paying dearly for what can be found for much less.
However, I am in the position of having to accept paying this price, because I prefer to pay for RAM and SSD rather than using windows.
The real problem with Apple and its pricing policy is that it can do whatever it wants, because there is no real alternative to Apple, there is no brand that can really compete...
At most everyone else draws inspiration from what Apple does.
However, I am in the position of having to accept paying this price, because I prefer to pay for RAM and SSD rather than using windows.
The real problem with Apple and its pricing policy is that it can do whatever it wants, because there is no real alternative to Apple, there is no brand that can really compete...
At most everyone else draws inspiration from what Apple does.
The MPB, which we're discussing here, has had 8Gb of RAM as base since 2012. The 256 Gb SSD has been the base since 2016.
So no progress in 11 and 7 years, and still Apple and its customers seem to be doing good.
Those people should complain about the price then and not what the base configuration is.
Statement: "I'll be happy when the base model has 16Gb of RAM"
World #1: Base model has 8Gb of RAM and costs $1000
They're unhappy
World #2 Base model has 16Gb of RAM and costs $5000
They're happy.
And we know that's not true because they want the Macs to be cheaper in higher configurations.
Wow, these posts keep devolving.
I think people get way to hyper focused on definitions rather than the real world.
What Apple did this year people should be really happy about is that they didn't raise the price on the 14" MBP with M3 Pro and 16gb ram and 512gb SSD. As configured you get the same $2000 as last year but you don't get a binned chip and you get M3 despite inflation and higher cost of production. Pretty nice.
The other thing Apple did is get rid of the old 13" Pro, charge a little bit more and cut out a port but give you all the 14" goodness like a much better screen and speakers, new design, etc.
But instead of being happy about more choice and same price as last year for same configuration everyone is on here complaining about 8gb ram..
I think people get way to hyper focused on definitions rather than the real world.
What Apple did this year people should be really happy about is that they didn't raise the price on the 14" MBP with M3 Pro and 16gb ram and 512gb SSD. As configured you get the same $2000 as last year but you don't get a binned chip and you get M3 despite inflation and higher cost of production. Pretty nice.
The other thing Apple did is get rid of the old 13" Pro, charge a little bit more and cut out a port but give you all the 14" goodness like a much better screen and speakers, new design, etc.
But instead of being happy about more choice and same price as last year for same configuration everyone is on here complaining about 8gb ram..
Ruthless and blatant irresponsible Marketing (which to me seems everyone is using btw) will make it a reality, i promise.
MBPs have been all SSD since the Retina era and MBA since the 2010 refresh. What are you referring to?
SO, you are just going to ignore the differentiation of high and low quality Ram.
Cool.
I can't wait for your next "but what about this"
So you just quoted Ram that is twice as much as the original poster. You see what is happening here right. You are proving my point that not all Ram is equal and the pricing is not equal.
Thank you for your support with respect to your first and second point.
My point was mostly that RAM drops in price per GB and that the price early adopters pay isn’t reflective of the average price. Yes $40 per GB is only for the slowest DDR5, but we got onto this topic by someone claiming 32 GB of DDR5 was $1000 and that this was a good representation of RAM capacities over time.
What you have to consider is that every year the MacOS operating system and Apps get more complex requiring more and more RAM. A base system with 8GB of RAM in 2017 is not the same as one in 2023.
Notice how Apple markets the improvements in the M series processor. They iterate on these on a yearly basis. Today the processor speed of these M series chips are WAY more than 95% of users will need for the next decade. Contrast that with the lack of upgrades in RAM size. What people do not understand or are not considering is that RAM is the current limiting factor for current computer longevity. This is especially true of Apple computers as they are non-upgradable.
Apple at a minimum should create a cadence of RAM upgrades to coincide with processor upgrades to at least some extent. Otherwise they are selling base model computers that are going to require most users to replace in less than five years.
Basically, you are getting a raw deal buying an 8GB system today as the rest of your system will be high performance for a long time. If people are OK with this then great, but I don't think the average user understands that.
Wow. How did I manage to be a dev on Windows for 11 years running a Dell with 12GB? (It's still working, now relegated to the closet where I remote desktop into occasionally if I need to run some old Windows stuff.)
Or for that matter, how am I running Windows 11 arm in Parallels with 6gb RAM allocated to it in order to run office, because office on Mac is gimped. Clearly, I'm some kind of PC admin wizard
I know this much: with similar workload, m1 Mac with 16gb is hitting swap more than my 12gb PC. I have 6TBW after 2+ years on the PC, and already I'm up to 10TBW after 6 months on the Mac (yes I know that is very little compared to other people), but that's after offloading all my files and downloads to external SSD because when the internal SSD dies on the Mac that's all she wrote.
If you think it's worth it to pay these extortionist pricing for RAM and storage because you think Mac is better, fine. But stop pretending Windows is some kind of computing hellscape. It's pathetic and make you look just like the Kool aid drinkers Mac haters accuse you of being
$1000 is not reflective of the current market for desktop Ram. I don't remember it being reflective of the early adopters market either but I passed on early PC builds requiring DDR5, even with MicroCenter giving away 32GB with the purchase of a AMD CPU and MB. I was more shocked with the price of a gaming MB that was DDR5 and PCI-E 5.0. Although it is much better than it was.
Also, and not a huge deal, but individual sticks of laptop Ram never run as fast as desktop. The price is a bit higher too. I actually haven't seen laptop Ram above DDR5-5600 where desktop Ram goes up to DDR5-8000.
The fact that Apple uses a more complex structure that is unified adds to the cost too. The benefits are not a one to one comparison.
No, you gave a feature that was system limited, which was exactly my point.
It is related: 8GB of top class premium superfast hyper Magic Sprinkle high quality polished shiny ram is still just 8Gb, no matter how you turn. Thus, with several apps open this superfast Magic sprinkle dust 8GB fills up and your Mac starts to swap to the not so sprinkly SSD, partly defeating the purpose of your superfast turbo hyper ram that is supposedly in your MacBook. Example usage here:
My initial example was specifically that they might want to start adding transformer based AI models for photo editing and that they might restrict the most powerful features based on ram. We then got off on a tangent about whether they had ever restricted things in the past based on RAM. I actually just remembered that the minimum specs for macOS itself used to list RAM minimums and many games have minimum combined system + GPU vram requirements that are more than 8GB
Yet again…
You are buying a user experience, not a name, not a spec sheet, if it’s not for you, you go after what meant for you.
You are buying a user experience, not a name, not a spec sheet, if it’s not for you, you go after what meant for you.
I haven't watched the video you linked because Maxtech is a terrible source of information, but I assume it boils down to 16GB being better than 8GB. No one is disputing that. If you buy a machine that's underspecced for your needs, you made a mistake. If you buy a 32GB machine when you need 64GB, you'll face similar issues, but that doesn't mean no one could possibly get by with 32GB, it just means you bought the wrong computer.
What people are willing to pay for something doesn't always come down to $/Gb of RAM or storage. If you're not happy with this config, just don't buy it. No one is forcing you to. Buy a specced up Pro or Max config. Buy an M2 Air. Hell, buy an M1 Air. Look at your budget and figure out what your actual needs are and buy a computer that meets those criteria. Why complain so much about a machine you clearly never intended to buy in the first place?
As I have pointed out, defaults matter, not one of the default configs come with more than 8GB of memory. I know you don’t care if certain things improve over time but that logic could have kept us at 2GB Of memory, or even 4GB of memory. At some point it starts to look absurd. How long can Apple ignore memory density progress for? On the iMac it seems like 11 years and counting is the answer. The entry level MacBook (Pro)* and base Pro level MacBook Pro** are up to 7 years and counting since the last memory increase. The Air is doing a little better at only 5 years.
Let’s give Apple a bit of credit, the base 14” MBP finally comes with 512 GB of storage which I think is a great move and deserving of praise.
They somehow managed to make the iMac configs ridiculous though. They charge $200 just for the final two GPU cores, and then another $200 on top of that to get from 256 to 512 GB of storage.
I will say, storage matters more than memory to me, storage is easier to fill up especially as data accumulates over a lifetime and it is nice to see the entry level mid range Mac notebook finally starts with 512.
* Note: The entry level 14” MacBook Pro with M3 was preceded by the 13” with two Thunderbolt ports model which received 8 GB of memory in fall of 2016 - 7 years ago.
** Note 2: The base pro level MacBook Pro is the M3 Pro and was preceded by the four thunderbolt port 13” MacBook Pro, which received 16 GB of memory in 2016 at its introduction 7 years ago.
The base Pro and Max configs come with 18GB, although I guess you could argue those aren't base models. In that case, I guess the 16" Pro base model still counts.
EDIT: I was curious what the lineup actully looks like these days so I went through and checked base RAM spec for the lowest config of every body style they sell and a 1/3 start above 8GB. If we want to count different chips as different base models, it's over half.
M1 Air - 8GB
M2 Air 13 - 8GB
M2 Air 15 - 8GB
M3 Pro 14 - 8GB
M3 Pro 16 - 18GB
iMac - 8GB
Mac Mini - 8GB
Mac Studio - 32GB
Mac Pro - 64GB
Except that 2 and 4GB of RAM are actually not enough to run the OS and basic apps without significantly degrading the experience. 8GB runs fine. When that's no longer true, they should stop selling machine with 8GB of RAM.
They're not. You can put more RAM in a MacBook now than ever before. You're muddling your points.
Sure. I'm not really interested in the iMac so I'm not going to comment on this.
👍
Last edited:
The 18GB is essentially equivalent to the 16 GB they replace, its just that the new ones have a different memory controller that changes the sizes of the configuration of modules they use.
I actually think the Pro and Max should come with 32 GB the iMac Pro back in 2017 showed a great base configuration for proper prosumer devices at 32 GB + 1 TB.
I actually think 4GB would probably be fine if, as you contend, the only purpose of the default configurations you can buy on the shelf is to have open a small selection of browser tabs, mail, calendar, messages, and photos. Yeah 2GB would probably be completely unusable though.
Let’s consider that Apple last sold 4GB as standard in the 2017 Air. I would consider that any Mac should be expected to last at least 5 years with the same level of user experience. However I would say that in 2022, 5 years after that MacBook Air was introduced, that 4 GB was verging on unusable if you did more than the absolute basics with your Mac. Do we think that in 2028 that 8 GB will seem just as usable as it is today?
I have said it before and I’ll say it again, I care about the default configurations more than whatever you can add on top for an additional $1200 dollars because it is the base machines that are available on store shelves, that should still be usable in 5 years.