I agree, that's why I normally pay less only taking my current needs into account and if I need to get a new macbook down the line I won't feel like I paid more for nothing.
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.
Is 8GB of RAM Enough for a Mac in 2024?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think you might have missed their point.
They are pointing out that Apple is making 8GB feel adequate with various software tricks. Those same tricks stretch the usefulness of higher RAM amounts as well. The increased performance of SSDs make it a realistic path and Apple has taken it to extremes.
The part that is very much left out of the discussion though. Increased reliance on disk to fill in the gaps wears out the SSDs more. So you end up with more wear and tear on the SSD on lower RAM machines.
You also hit more issues with the wear as the SSDs fill up and Apple is also notorious for skimping on SSD storage just as much as they skimp on RAM.
Not everyone needs more Memory. I have an M1 MacBook Air. For my needs, super fast, handles all my tasks at 8gb. Why do I buy Mac’s, the eco system, reliability, longer term support, like the features. The under hood tech specs a nice to know.
So can we pay in equivalence dollars where $1000dollars of unified dollars is equivalent to $2,000 dollars payment to Apple? (tic)
The macrumors forum tab is already 424MB, so no, 8GB is not enough.
I think the problem is not that the starting model has 8GB of ram. It would be fine for most people. But say down the line you feel like you need double it because you are taking on tasks that require more. You can't upgrade it by yourself. That is where the disservice is.
Can’t beat a bit of RAM Wars. I bet the Apple execs place bets on how many pages these topics will generate.
Even for webbrowsing, 8 GB is not enough when there are many tabs open in Firefox or Safari. 16 GB RAM is a minimum. Otherwise there is swapping to the SSD.
It certainly is for a lot of people who don't only surf the web.
If you're a typical office worker you'll probably use applications like:
- Safari (or similar)
- Microsoft Office (or similar)
- Teams / Zoom (or similar)
- iCloud Drive / OneDrive / Google Drive
- Preview
- Mail + Calendar (private use)
- Apple Music / Spotify
- Photos (private use)
For the first time in more than 20 years I may just do that and buy a PC when the time comes to renew my M1 mini. Windows is not that bad anymore.
So tired of hearing is blatantly false statement. It’s not about the cost of the BOM. It’s that Apple would lose people paying an extra $200 for a RAM upgrade. I would suspect that the margin Apple achieves on those upgrade prices is huge, And for Apple, it’s all about profit. Bad for consumers, but good for shareholders.
Or rather, at all. Apple doesn't upgrade RAM later for you. You need to configure the memory you need in your initial Mac purchase with ARM Macs.
Because it's all integrated together, you would need to replace the M-series chip, RAM and SSD as a package. And that's not something they offer.
These "tricks" are used by almost every operating system out there.. there are huge benefits to computing using these methods. Virtual memory has been used in personal computing for decades. and these are not tricks... but time proven memory management features. No one is tricking anyone.
For the average consumer, these methods have negligible impact on the SSD life compared to the life of the system as a whole. I don't think any company has had issues with SSD degradation through premature wear out caused by excessive writes. Most SSD issues come about due to manufacturing defects, or surge damage/power cuts. SSD are robust and reliable... more so than spinning disk types.
If its Pixelmator pro, that alone has a recommended RAM configuration of 8-10Gb of RAM let alone other software you may have open, so inevitably more swapping occurs and efficiency drops, which is not to say its still not doing the job in the time required that suits you. I agree in some respects about value, especially Mac mini, where we bought a load of M1 iMacs, and Mac minis, but kept clear of M2 and are now looking at replacing the iMacs and waiting for the m3 Mac minis, as the existing purchases would have paid for themselves.That is quite a bit of hyperbole. I have an M2 Mac Mini w/8GB RAM and 256GB storage and I'm able to do quite a bit that goes beyond just surfing the web.
I work from home so I daily have: a remote desktop client, Audacity processing audio, iMovie rendering videos, Pixelmator cleaning up images, and MS Word open with the document of the day... all running simultaneously things are working smoothly. That doesn't include having a web browser open, Joplin notes, and e-Sword software as well.
Those who have followed my exploits in the other operating systems sub-forum will confirm that this base model is even capable of running virtual machines.
I have a 1TB external SSD for my files and an other 1TB in the dock/base for Time Machine.
But quite a few Apple advocates engage in FOMO (fear of missing out) as in: fear of not having enough RAM or storage. That's great for Apple's bottom line, but does a disservice to people who don't need the extra RAM.
IMO, the "problem" isn't that the base model comes with 8GB RAM... it is the $200 upcharge to go from 8 to 16. (and other $200 upcharges that quickly add up)
For the last 4-5 years, the best tech bargains have been Apple's base offerings. The $450 I paid for my M2 Mac Mini was money well-spent. To spend $850 for a 16GB/512GB model... not so much.
As for how to respond to Apple's pricing structure? Don't play the game. If the base model is insufficient, then go with a non-Apple competitor. What incentive does Apple have to do anything differently if people complain about the base model but then fork over those $200 increments for increased RAM and storage?
Apple doesn't care about consumer complaints as long as at the end of the day, the consumer gives them more money.
My gripe though is many customers don't even know what RAM requirement they really need, let alone new purchasers and this includes those being seduced by Apple's intent to pursue gaming market.
My gripe is also about the poor economics to Apple, as if they did away with the 8Gb configuration, it would save that a lot of dollars, and where then the 16Gb (if they went 16Gb), would be a significantly higher production run, and with that comes scale of economy bringing the price down.
It was foolish to suggest that 8Gb on Apple is equivalent to 16Gb elsewhere, and where their concerted efforts are in increasing their games revenues by entering games, and openly making that remark, then RAM will inevitable need to be increased from the 8GB.
No, Apple literally just invented paging specifically to overcome the RAM shortcoming. It's a brand new concept and does not exist in any other OS. If you think you've seen other OSs with paging you're just suffering from the Mandela effect.
(/s)
As a shareholder I say don't worry about understanding what you're purchasing. Just buy the top of the line maxed out device every time.
(/s)
Some of us buy MacBooks because we like HOW it works, not because we need to do complex stuff.
Everything I do (except for tight integration with the Apple ecosystem), could be done by a cheap Windows PC. But I like Macs and will pay a lot to avoid using Windows. Also tight integration with other Apple products is a big reason why I buy Apple products.
All the people in my close family (except my dad) and in my girlfriend's family have Macs (or no computer at all). And none of them (except my stepdad and me) does anything complex or difficult with them. And almost all the Macs have 8Gb of RAM also.
I mean, sure, tell me that I'm wrong without seeing what I'm doing. But I'll tell you: I bought my wife a base m1 air the day that they were announced. She's in grad school now, and has to use all sorts of software - some school supplied, some bog standard - to make sure that she doesn't cheat and to do school from home.
It brings the m1 mac to its knees. Between the lockdown browser that she needs to use, and Microsoft office, and Safari, 8gb is hardly cutting it.
She doesn't notice because macOS does a good enough job at using the swap file to mask the RAM limitations, but as soon as I try helping her do something SSD-heavy, there's a good bit of slowdown throughout the system, even if the topmost app never actually beachballs.
So is the computer usable with 8gb of RAM? Yes, it is. But it's also running far slower under a very typical workload than I would expect for a computer of that price.
That 8 GB is a standard across most of the computing industry for regular consumer devices.... yes, usually some will say if you can afford it, go for 16 GB... but is it absolutely essential? most certainly not. More is usually better... but then where do you stop... do ou get the 15 inch Air over 13 inch, the 10 core GPU over 8 core, 16 GB over 8 GB? when all you're doing is basic productivity and surfing the web?
If you're familiar with Apple prices... you will know that Apple prices are due to the design, ecosystem, software, support etc and mostly not related directly to the amount or spec of a particular component.
The premium feel and experience of using an Apple product isn't related to memory or disk size for most of its users.
These users will make sure that the Macs with 8Gb of RAM will be the best selling models.
True up to a point. But at some stage they start to lose disillusioned fans and lifetime customers who jump ship. It’s happening.
Who cares how Apple achieves it? The important thing is your subjective and emotional experience using the Mac.
Not everyone can handle 8 Gb of RAM.
It must be quite embarrassing, when my girlfriends's parents in their 80ties are using Macs with 8Gb of RAM just fine.
I heard they have a software patch called RAM Quadra... it uses the power of Apple Silicon to compress "on the fly" 8 GB RAM to make it look like 64 GB RAM. People are going wild.
They are celebrating this trick by sending out free Apple Juice... it's been squashed by the same algorithm and tastes amazing. I drank a can of it, and it was like Id had four of them.
It does have a warning tho, it says to only compare apples to apples, and not apples to oranges, raspberries or acorns... or PCs. 🤔