I don't know about that. My point was that if you get the 8GB because you only occasionally need more RAM then you want to make sure that you have a decent amount of free space; not to mention, that the larger capacity drives are faster. If you almost always fill up your drive then get the extra RAM.
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.
I am really torn between 8GB vs. 16GB RAM
- Thread starter Booji
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
in old days also a lot of ram, but some younger age developer saying "if not ram use , useless"and some even argue reference counting . The main point of old developer is "cache" and reduce memory as possible . The main point of apple folks is buy max as you can since it was soldered . High ram not solving anything in performance . The main point is motherboard ram proc sync the fastest as possible which m1 trying to do .
maybe the implement raid like imac pro ? never yet test da vinci resolve but when try to open a ios simulator it dam quick compare mine ssd external . Previously all cache xcode ios i put in ram drive to fast execute .
** hope not so complicated to understand
I've worked with people from around the world for the past forty years. So no problems with comprehension. You generally get exposed to a lot of non-native English speakers in university STEM programs here too.
The "old days" had HDD's at 5400 RPM (7200 later). That was the bottleneck for speed for years. Extra RAM would be useful in performance as it did not need the slow HDD to read/write on demand as often. Now with NVMe SSD's this isn't an issue.
90% of the people on this forum, I suspect, would have their needs completely met with a 8GB model for quite some time. But if buying 16 makes them happier with their purchase and to not constantly stress about it, go for the 16GB. Don't read too much into "swap" size.
I admit I no longer get where you're coming from.
Let's review: you paid to upgrade one computer to 128gb of ram at pretty significant expense, and afterwards think you were misled because it doesn't speed things up that much. You admit that yourself.
You have another computer with 8gb ram and 8gb GPU ram - no evidence you were using or needed anywhere near that 8gb dedicated GPU ram (and probably anyone would tell you that 8gb system ram would be cheaper and more useful). It's possible - don't know but possible - you didn't need an expensive 8gb GPU at all; did you hear this from the same people who advised you to get 128gb of ram?
But you want to tell other people here 'that's not what matters?' Maybe you're not listening to the right people, or not understanding what they're saying, or not listening enough at all.
In simple terms: of course your on-board shared/unified video memory ... uses up onboard memory. But probably not as much as you think - by all indications not enough to justify an 8gb video card.
Shared/unified memory issue would've been true with intel too - and you would've seen more bang for your buck by just upgrading to 16gb ram with intel, too. (Does anyone _really_ configure an 8gb ram + 8gb dGPU system? Hard to imagine that making sense)
Anyway: yes, you should probably by a 16gb M1 system. It is also used for video memory. That's in the specs. But as with other uses, if you're not using that much system memory to begin with - just like with the previous macbook air - it's no more relevant than before, and because of better system speed, LESS relevant.
Whatever, good luck.
You are not understanding. "what doesn't matter" is that I was not using all 8GB of GPU. I was definitely using SOME GPU. Which would definitely be sacrificing my 8GB Mac mini since System RAM and GPU are shared now. Like I said, even it it was 500MB, which I seriously doubt, that would still mean I would be LOSING system RAM when comparing to my iMac. Even if my iMac was 8GB RAM and 500MB GPU and it was working fine, there is no 8.5GB Mac mini out there, so I would still get 16GB because 8.5 > 8.
And yes I did upgrade to 128GB as "Upgrade to max if you can afford it" is a common response people have. I CAN afford it, but does 1080p h.264 video editing REALLY need more than 8GB of RAM? No, I have tested it myself for my workflow. And yes a lot of effects applied during video editing can use a GPU, so it might need more than a integrated graphics. Also I like to game on my iMac too, which requires a top end GPU. So yes, I think people that don't need a lot of system RAM but want to game would definitely get a beefier GPU.
Last edited:
My video editing is just as fast if not faster with the new Mac mini than my iMac. What do you mean by using the right tools? I am using the Mac mini not a MacBook for my video editing.
M1 GPUs works differently than classic GPUs. It is a tile based deferred renderer instead of a direct renderer. That means it works on way smaller chunks. A lot of the action takes place in the tile buffer. And the way you calculate it, you loose 500 MB also to the RAM in the classic setup because the CPU needs to prepare those 500MB before sending it to the VRAM. And that happens in the RAM. That’s why it is a bad idea to pair 8GB VRAM with just 8GB system RAM.
I did not write that.
I do not have a Mac mini. My iMac is a late 2009 and I doubt it could do any video editing.
If you just suspect (as opposed to having hard data) then you are in no position to say one way or the other.
This RAM debate has a striking resemblance to the lack of expandability of the 2013 Mac Pro. Pro 2013 Mac Pro people argued internal expansion was unnecessary with many suspecting the majority of the people voicing their opinion against the lack of expandability as not needing it.
IMO the larger issue is the lack of upgradability which forces a buyer to decide at purchase time and forever be stuck with their decision until the system is replaced. In certain systems, like the MBA, I think it might be a reasonable tradeoff (thinness versus expandability). The problem is that Apple has been so focused on thinness they don't offer an alternative. All M1 Macs can't be upgraded. The Mini isn't constrained by thinness so it is not unreasonable to think upgradability in that system would be present. But it's not.
That said I understand the constraint which prevents upgradability...the integration of memory onto the CPU package itself. This was done in order to extract higher performance and it appears to have been successful in doing so. But then if the system is memory starved, even with today's SSDs, all that performance is lost.
Engineering decisions are a balance of many factors and Apple has decided the extra performance of non-upgradable memory is the direction they want to go. Unfortunately we have to accept it whether we like it or not. All we can do is work with what we have and that is an 8GB or 16GB system. Do the best you can in estimating what you want / need and buy accordingly. What you should not be doing is telling someone else what they do or don't need.
My conclusion is -somewhat- antidotal from online tests sure. However it is also from my own hands on usage of both machines. There is virtually no perceivable difference in performance by my use cases. I do the occasional video and photo editing, by no means pro level. Both perform the same for me. I game in world of Warcraft (already optimized for ARM) and both perform within 5 FPS of each other. I tried Fortnite and it was the same. This processor is very impressive and the best laptop I’ve ever owned.
But I tend to keep Macs for a long period and will likely keep the 16 and give the 8 to my daughter for her school work.
Are you are saying it is a bad thing to use 8GB of RAM with a 8GB GPU? I don't notice an issue on my gaming PC with this setup.
I went through this same dilemma. First bought 8GB M1 Mac Mini in store. After using it for couple weeks, I realized it was constantly using Swap Memory with medium usage (1 stock trading app and 1 tab in Safari). That was enough for me to return it and spend extra $200 for piece of mind and future proofing.
Mind you, I never shutdown my computer but still I was bit paranoid to see it hitting my Swap Memory constantly. Get the 16GB even if you don’t think you don’t need it NOW. In the future you might. We still don’t know how much memory applications will consume once they start migrating over to Apple Silicon.
Mind you, I never shutdown my computer but still I was bit paranoid to see it hitting my Swap Memory constantly. Get the 16GB even if you don’t think you don’t need it NOW. In the future you might. We still don’t know how much memory applications will consume once they start migrating over to Apple Silicon.
I think 8gb is more like a Honda civic, and 16gb is more like a Honda Odyssey, both will get you from A to B, but one is more comfortable.
According to Macrumors, remote servers only need to install 8GB of RAM. These guys don’t know what they are doing wasting their money on RAM.
remote server ?
If normal website = 1GB RAM - pure enough
If system = Database Size * 2 = ram
If wanted play games but spec doesn't support
1.https://stadia.google.com/
2. Nvdia geforce now
** for me, i don't have luxury of stadia or nvdia, so basically must have good computer pc instead if wanted to play games.
I know right. Remote servers with 8GB of RAM should be no problem with dataframes that are over 1TB in size as hard drives can take over the role of memory according to Macrumors.
What a waste of money memory is, just buy more hard drives.
it depend ,if azure with windows Os 8GB struggle also. I also have macOS vm in mac stadium , not smooth from here malaysia to usa (8GB box)(temp rent before upon my imac broken).
The only relevance this has is to your specific use case. At best we can say that, for this use case, 8GB is sufficient. If you have data to show 90% of the participants of this forum have the same use case then that would support your claim.
That said your last statement weakens your first. Despite stating 8GB is sufficient for you, you intend to purchase the 16GB model based on the length of time you intend to keep it. Some have argued that you're forced to purchase 16GB now so that, as things progress, 8GB becomes restrictive. In effect you're making their argument for them.
You're serious business on the forums. I could probably find some obscure study citing most Macbook users use their Macs for XYZ. I arrived at my conclusion from using the 8GB M1 myself, and reading/watching several reviewers try to stress test the machine beyond most normal use cases, as well as over 30 years using and being around all kinds of computers (using, building, coding, etc) and those who use them.
I could use the 8 GB without hiccup, and honestly don't want to go through the return and reorder process. Already installed and set this one up. If I were not going to gift my daughter the 8, I would have likely returned the 16 for my intended use cases.
This is just my opinion from my real world usage as well as being around those that have Macs at work (I'm in a creative industry). As I said before, if spending the Apple tax for 8 gigs makes you feel better about your purchase and ease your concerns, do it. And your point about not being able to upgrade in the future is definitely valid. Cheers.
I just received a few days ago, a 16GB/1TB MBA. I'm not really seeing why it's worth it over my 8-core 8GB/512GB model. Feels about the same to me. I'm not doing photo/video editing. Standard productivity work, but tons of apps open, and like to game a few titles, like Civ VI. I was hoping some hitches I get on the 8GB would resolve (like ocassionally opening a new tab in safari leads to major delay/lag) and the same thing happened on the 16GB, and I only usually have about 6 tabs open (i don't have any use case or even see why folks need 50 tabs open all the time).
I like the uptick in storage, and I'm sure the 16gb is better, but for 400 extra bucks, doesn't seem worth it. I'm debating which one to return. I waited well over 30 days to receive the 16GB model, so it seems a shame to send it back where folks are really clamoring for the 16GB. If you are interested, I may consider selling - not sure the rules in this forum for this kind of offer, but PM me if so.
I like the uptick in storage, and I'm sure the 16gb is better, but for 400 extra bucks, doesn't seem worth it. I'm debating which one to return. I waited well over 30 days to receive the 16GB model, so it seems a shame to send it back where folks are really clamoring for the 16GB. If you are interested, I may consider selling - not sure the rules in this forum for this kind of offer, but PM me if so.