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 refuse to buy an Apple Silicon Mac with only 8 GB RAM!
- Thread starter AlixSPQR
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It could be a valid statement until fast integrated storages were implemented. I personally don't see or feel any difference when my m1 mini starts to use virtual memory. The speed difference or potential hiccups the use of VM can bring on M SOC may be important for some critical or intense tasks but not for majority of users I believe.
It isn't strange a strange use case - it is what the base MBA and Mac Mini are designed for.
I'm not against paying extra for RAM or other upgrades for bragging rights or just because it makes you happy. If someone wants buy a maxed out gaming PC with a RTX 4090 or a $50k Mac Pro to use for nothing but web browsing then that's fine. I've done it myself. Not the specific examples but bought way overspeced and overpriced systems for what I needed.
My gripe is when I see people telling newbies that they should spend hundreds of dollars for upgrades that will be almost useless for them. If it's someone who has money then no big deal but if someone is asking if they should spend $200 for an upgrade it probably means that's a bit of money to them. Not everyone lives in the USA so maybe someone had to save up all year for an M1 MacBook.
I put 32 GB of RAM in my Intel Mac mini and it was mostly used for web browsing. An occasional game or two but nothing needing 32 GB. Even 16 GB would have been overkill. It was just me being silly and wasting money. I do this sometimes. I'm careful not to tell others to do this because I know some people have a serious budget. I figure if they're asking for advice if they need to spend the money then it's not a trivial amount to them.
To see YT and a lot of MR, you'd think the base M2 MBA is unable to perform the most basic tasks. There's another thread going to this effect right now. I think YT overestimates how many of us are trying to be videographers.
I refuse to buy an Apple Silicon MacBook Pro M2 MAX with only 96 GB RAM!
I believe the 16GB are enough for most people. However as I have been saying ever since I got my M1 Pro 16GB, it's once you start messing around with Docker/VMs that you start to get really low on memory hence a 32GB upgrade is necessary.
My regular stuff, not including Vms is feeling a tad constrained with 16. I feel like 32 would be better, but I can manage with 16. If I were to upgrade to a 16" MBP (M1 refurb) or an M2, I'd definitely go for 32GB
What type of stuff are you running? I do get what you mean even without VMs I'm already running yellow... Hopefully with M3 Pro we can get 32GB baseline but I doubt it that's gonna happen.
games, chrome, adobe stuff, office stuff, and various enterprise type apps. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Pretty much regular stuff... Know what you mean. Yeah if I were to configure mine these days I would have gone for 32GB as well.
Yeah, I hate over spending but in this case, regardless if its Mac or PC, 32 GB
There’s a distinction between “Needing” and “Wanting” a certain amount of RAM. If a user is getting slow performance but no error messages/crashes on 8GB of RAM - then they don’t “Need” more than 8GB RAM. Sure, it’s paging the heck out of the storage and they’re seeing the spinning beach ball a lot - but if it works, for SOME USERS that’s going to be adequate if the alternative pushes them out of their budget.
If somebody wants 32GB, get 32GB. If you want 64GB, get 64GB. We live in a capitalistic society, how everyone else wants to spend their money is their business.
Of course
Paying a premium dollar amount for a mac, and it paging, and running slower then it could, is not an ideal situation.
We're not talking about SOME USERS. I'm talking about my myself. 16GB is constrained and I'm not pleased with how its working. So in my book, this crosses the line from want to need. SOME USERS may be ok with that, I'm not
Exactly, and it really doesn't matter if its a need or want
I think you should pay up for those 16 GB and not make yourself a fool by waiting for M3.
8GB RAM & 256GB SSD for base models started in 2012. It's time for an upgrade 11 years later.
Below is the specs of standard Mac SKUs. I doubled the RAM & SSD but kept the same price, SoC, CPU cores & GPU cores.
Note:
*If RAM & SSD were increased my choice would be the $1299 Mac mini M2 Pro if there was no iMac 27" replacement & the $2499 MBP 16" M2 Pro. Both of which would have 32GB RAM & 1TB SSD.
**My guess on the CPU core & GPU core count of the future 2023 Mac Studio M2 Max & M2 Ultra SKUs.
***iPhone chip-based Mac. If M1 & M2 can be used in an iPad Pro & iPad Air why not use iPhone chip in a cheap laptop & desktop? "Mac nano" uses the 2022 Apple TV 4K enclosure as to make it 0.27L instead of 1.39L of the Mac mini. This reduces shipping cost as you can pack in more "Mac nano" per shipping pallet.
Below is the specs of standard Mac SKUs. I doubled the RAM & SSD but kept the same price, SoC, CPU cores & GPU cores.
| Mac model | MSRP | Chip | CPU (Core) | GPU (Core) | RAM (GB) | SSD (TB) |
| iMac 24" | $1,699 | M1 | 8 | 8 | 16 | 1 |
| iMac 24" | $1,499 | M1 | 8 | 8 | 16 | 0.5 |
| iMac 24" | $1,299 | M1 | 8 | 7 | 16 | 0.5 |
| Mac mini* | $1,299 | M2 Pro | 10 | 16 | 32 | 1 |
| Mac mini | $799 | M2 | 8 | 10 | 16 | 1 |
| Mac mini | $599 | M2 | 8 | 10 | 16 | 0.5 |
| Mac Studio | $3,999 | M1 Ultra | 20 | 48 | 128 | 2 |
| Mac Studio | $1,999 | M1 Max | 10 | 24 | 64 | 1 |
| Mac Studio** | $3,999 | M2 Ultra | 24 | 60 | 128 | 2 |
| Mac Studio** | $1,999 | M2 Max | 12 | 30 | 64 | 1 |
| MBA | $1,499 | M2 | 8 | 10 | 16 | 1 |
| MBA | $1,199 | M2 | 8 | 8 | 16 | 0.5 |
| MBA | $999 | M1 | 8 | 7 | 16 | 0.5 |
| MBP 13" | $1,499 | M2 | 8 | 10 | 16 | 1 |
| MBP 13" | $1,299 | M2 | 8 | 10 | 16 | 0.5 |
| MBP 14" | $3,099 | M2 Max | 12 | 30 | 64 | 2 |
| MBP 14" | $2,499 | M2 Pro | 12 | 19 | 32 | 2 |
| MBP 14" | $1,999 | M2 Pro | 10 | 16 | 32 | 1 |
| MBP 16" | $3,499 | M2 Max | 12 | 38 | 64 | 2 |
| MBP 16" | $2,699 | M2 Pro | 12 | 19 | 32 | 2 |
| MBP 16"* | $2,499 | M2 Pro | 12 | 19 | 32 | 1 |
| MB 12"*** | $699 | A16 Bionic | 6 | 5 | 8 | 256GB |
| Mac nano*** | $299 | A16 Bionic | 6 | 5 | 8 | 256GB |
Note:
*If RAM & SSD were increased my choice would be the $1299 Mac mini M2 Pro if there was no iMac 27" replacement & the $2499 MBP 16" M2 Pro. Both of which would have 32GB RAM & 1TB SSD.
**My guess on the CPU core & GPU core count of the future 2023 Mac Studio M2 Max & M2 Ultra SKUs.
***iPhone chip-based Mac. If M1 & M2 can be used in an iPad Pro & iPad Air why not use iPhone chip in a cheap laptop & desktop? "Mac nano" uses the 2022 Apple TV 4K enclosure as to make it 0.27L instead of 1.39L of the Mac mini. This reduces shipping cost as you can pack in more "Mac nano" per shipping pallet.
Last edited:
Quite right. It amazes me that so many doggedly defend Apple about this lack of development. Why?
Only Macs that should have 8GB RAM & 256GB SSD are those that would be based on iPhone chips and not the M1 or M2.Or employees...
It’s the opposite. Nowadays a computer can last a decade. In the past future-proofing was futile. The hardware was obsolete within a year.