Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
If RAM upgrades were $100 instead of 200, I could forgive the low amount of RAM. But having to pay that much for 8 extra gigs of RAM is absurd.
I’ve looked at many different Windows PC manufacturers, and compared their RAM upgrade pricing, and they usually charge more than $100. Average low-end upgrade pricing is around $150, and many PC manufacturers charge more than $200 to upgrade RAM. Case in point, Microsoft’s Surface line of computers, where in several cases they’re charging nearly double what Apple does. And none of those systems have nearly the same battery runtime, and a lot of them also don’t have the same quality display, sound system, etc. Apple’s $200 RAM upgrades are perfectly fine. If you don’t want to pay to upgrade RAM, you can buy base spec, or go with something else. But nobody gives away RAM upgrades for free. Most PC manufacturers don’t charge $100 either, they generally charge more than that, especially when you look at PC manufacturers that are using faster energy efficient soldered RAM rather than slow, antique, and chinsy RAM cards.
 
^-----AAAAAnnnnnnd: You cannot do it later, if after a few years you want to extend the life of all that other wonderful hardware.

It makes me want to go buy the cheapest 8/512 I can find and then "chuck it" when it gets slow. Such a shame.
Apple’s soldered Unified Memory is far better than what you get with slow, antique RAM cards. It’s faster, more power efficient, and is a big part of why the M-series chips are so blazing fast. You replace the high-speed Unified Memory with RAM cards (which also would take up far more internal room on a MacBook Air and would mean you wouldn’t have as much room for things like battery), and performance would take a major hit. Better to stick with Unified Memory, and most people just buy the configuration they want. Most PC manufacturers I’ve seen using similar soldered RAM are charging close to the same, the same, or more than Apple. High-performance RAM on a high-performance chip isn’t cheap, and none of those Windows PC flunky computers using soldered RAM can really compare to the Macs on performance. And 8GB of RAM on the M-series Macs goes a very long way, as someone who owns one and does video editing, 3D modeling/sculpting, graphic design, etc, an 8GB M-series Mac absolutely compares to roughly a 16GB Windows PC, and actually beats them on many other fronts such as thermal management and not having loud fans whirring, better quality display, better sound-system, etc.
 
Our family of guys at :apple: will never exceed 8GB of ram on their base MacBooks
because the Simpsons have not did that!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ric22
The M-series of chips with 8GB of RAM is more than enough for most people, and lots of pro workflows. If you edit 8K video a lot, then you’re probably not shopping for a base-spec model, and are going to be more interested in higher-spec configurations.
 
Apple’s soldered Unified Memory is far better than what you get with slow, antique RAM cards. It’s faster, more power efficient, and is a big part of why the M-series chips are so blazing fast. You replace the high-speed Unified Memory with RAM cards (which also would take up far more internal room on a MacBook Air and would mean you wouldn’t have as much room for things like battery), and performance would take a major hit. Better to stick with Unified Memory, and most people just buy the configuration they want. Most PC manufacturers I’ve seen using similar soldered RAM are charging close to the same, the same, or more than Apple. High-performance RAM on a high-performance chip isn’t cheap, and none of those Windows PC flunky computers using soldered RAM can really compare to the Macs on performance. And 8GB of RAM on the M-series Macs goes a very long way, as someone who owns one and does video editing, 3D modeling/sculpting, graphic design, etc, an 8GB M-series Mac absolutely compares to roughly a 16GB Windows PC, and actually beats them on many other fronts such as thermal management and not having loud fans whirring, better quality display, better sound-system, etc.
New CAMM RAM standard allows the same LPDDR5 to be used in a replaceable module and takes up less space than the old SO-DIMMs. Should start shipping PCs soon. And even with PC OEMs upgrading the soldered memory is cheaper. Going from 16GB to 32 GB is $400 on a M2 Pro Mac Mini. It's $225 on a Lenovo X1 Carbon.

And no 8GB on a Mac is absolutely not the same as 16GB on a PC. The second you use more than 8GB, you start swapping and performance suffers. Here's a video comparing exactly that:

 
New CAMM RAM standard allows the same LPDDR5 to be used in a replaceable module and takes up less space than the old SO-DIMMs. Should start shipping PCs soon. And even with PC OEMs upgrading the soldered memory is cheaper. Going from 16GB to 32 GB is $400 on a M2 Pro Mac Mini. It's $225 on a Lenovo X1 Carbon.

And no 8GB on a Mac is absolutely not the same as 16GB on a PC. The second you use more than 8GB, you start swapping and performance suffers. Here's a video comparing exactly that:

Ya, and those “standards” haven’t shipped, so next…

It’s $200 upgrade on a MacBook Air, or a MacBook Pro. You’re comparing a desktop workstation computer against a laptop to try to get a higher alleged price difference, but Lenovo is actually charging more for their upgrade than what Apple charges for upgrades on their MacBooks.

And that video isn’t a valid comparison. The supposed 16GB PC in this comparison is actually like a 24GB PC because it has a dedicated graphics card with it’s own 8GBs of RAM which can be used for file exports and many of the operations running in these comparisons. And the results in most of these test aren’t very far apart anyways, even with an unfair advantage.
 
Ya, and those “standards” haven’t shipped, so next…

It’s $200 upgrade on a MacBook Air, or a MacBook Pro. You’re comparing a desktop workstation computer against a laptop to try to get a higher alleged price difference, but Lenovo is actually charging more for their upgrade than what Apple charges for upgrades on their MacBooks.

And that video isn’t a valid comparison. The supposed 16GB PC in this comparison is actually like a 24GB PC because it has a dedicated graphics card with it’s own 8GBs of RAM which can be used for file exports and many of the operations running in these comparisons. And the results in most of these test aren’t very far apart anyways, even with an unfair advantage.
It's not $200 on a MacBook Air or Pro. The M2 Airs don't support 32GB. They max out at 24GB. Upgrading a 16GB Air to 24GB costs $200 for just 8GB RAM extra. So for $25 more on the Lenovo you get 8GB more. It's cheaper per GB. Then on the M3 Pro MBP it's $400 to go from 18GB to 36GB. Per GB, again the Lenovo is cheaper. Weird. I chose to compare the M2 Pro Mini to the Lenovo because it's an equal jump from 16GB to 32GB. When Apple sold M2 Pro MBPs it was the same price to upgrade.

It's a significant enough difference between the two that I wouldn't say it's the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: polaris20 and ric22
It's not $200 on a MacBook Air or Pro. The M2 Airs don't support 32GB. They max out at 24GB. Upgrading a 16GB Air to 24GB costs $200 for just 8GB RAM extra. So for $25 more on the Lenovo you get 8GB more. It's cheaper per GB. Then on the M3 Pro MBP it's $400 to go from 18GB to 36GB. Per GB, again the Lenovo is cheaper. Weird. I chose to compare the M2 Pro Mini to the Lenovo because it's an equal jump from 16GB to 32GB. When Apple sold M2 Pro MBPs it was the same price to upgrade.

It's a significant enough difference between the two that I wouldn't say it's the same.
And the Mac’s Unified Memory goes farther performance-wise. When there isn’t a very meaningful performance difference on most tests between an 8GB MacBook and a 24GB gaming laptop with a separate graphics card, that says volumes for the performance of Apple’s system. The performance-to-GB ratio on a M-series Mac is higher, so makes sense that the pricing is higher than a mediocre Lenovo.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: polaris20
Wanted to get the M3 iMac, but un-upgradeable, un-repairable. How disappointing the Mac lineup is. Keep selling the 512GB for $200 Apple, I'm sure you will conquer the gaming market in no time.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: Kal Madda and ric22
Apple’s soldered Unified Memory is far better than what you get with slow, antique RAM cards. It’s faster, more power efficient, and is a big part of why the M-series chips are so blazing fast. You replace the high-speed Unified Memory with RAM cards (which also would take up far more internal room on a MacBook Air and would mean you wouldn’t have as much room for things like battery), and performance would take a major hit. Better to stick with Unified Memory, and most people just buy the configuration they want. Most PC manufacturers I’ve seen using similar soldered RAM are charging close to the same, the same, or more than Apple. High-performance RAM on a high-performance chip isn’t cheap, and none of those Windows PC flunky computers using soldered RAM can really compare to the Macs on performance. And 8GB of RAM on the M-series Macs goes a very long way, as someone who owns one and does video editing, 3D modeling/sculpting, graphic design, etc, an 8GB M-series Mac absolutely compares to roughly a 16GB Windows PC, and actually beats them on many other fronts such as thermal management and not having loud fans whirring, better quality display, better sound-system, etc.
I bet your solution to traffic congestion on highways is "just increase the speed limit or widen lanes". It's not the speed that matters as much as the amount of traffic ;)

8 GB MacBook Pro configurations should not exist, period. They should start at 16 GB. Absolutely no reason that they can't, other than the Tim C🤑🤑k reason Apple has been crippling the RAM and storage on various products for many years at this point. 16 GB iPhone 6s and 5400 RPM HDD iMac are a couple of the most horrendous examples. No one cares how fast that 16 GB storage is if it's constantly filling up and causing problems.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: polaris20 and ric22
I bet your solution to traffic congestion on highways is "just increase the speed limit or widen lanes". It's not the speed that matters as much as the amount of traffic ;)
The 8GB M-Series chips handle lots of traffic just fine. And if you want more RAM, you can just buy one with more RAM…. Simple… 🤷🏼‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abazigal
8 GB MacBook Pro configurations should not exist, period. They should start at 16 GB. Absolutely no reason that they can't, other than the Tim C🤑🤑k reason Apple has been crippling the RAM and storage on various products for many years at this point. 16 GB iPhone 6s and 5400 RPM HDD iMac are a couple of the most horrendous examples. No one cares how fast that 16 GB storage is if it's constantly filling up and causing problems.
They should exist, because they offer a cheaper point-of-entry for those who don’t want or need 16GB of RAM. They sell very well, so clearly 8GBs is plenty for very many people. Customer satisfaction is also very high. Besides, with the new MacBook Pro base configuration, you can configure it with 16GB of RAM and still save money compared to the base spec MacBook Pros from the last two years.
 
They should exist, because they offer a cheaper point-of-entry for those who don’t want or need 16GB of RAM. They sell very well, so clearly 8GBs is plenty for very many people. Customer satisfaction is also very high. Besides, with the new MacBook Pro base configuration, you can configure it with 16GB of RAM and still save money compared to the base spec MacBook Pros from the last two years.
Pretty much anyone who actually needs a MacBook Pro (as opposed to an Air) can benefit somehow from 16 GB, even if they can 'make do' with 8 GB and the performance penalties incurred with disk swap. This is especially true for the long-term use which any computer in this price range should be able to provide. Why not just make it standard?

Performance penalties or 'it's good enough for the basics' is fine when we're talking about my 2013 iMac kitchen computer with 8 GB, but this is a $1,500 brand new computer being marketed for professional / prosumer usage.
 
Pretty much anyone who actually needs a MacBook Pro (as opposed to an Air) can benefit somehow from 16 GB, even if they can 'make do' with 8 GB and the performance penalties incurred with disk swap. This is especially true for the long-term use which any computer in this price range should be able to provide. Why not just make it standard?

Performance penalties or 'it's good enough for the basics' is fine when we're talking about my 2013 iMac kitchen computer with 8 GB, but this is a $1,500 brand new computer being marketed for professional / prosumer usage.
And again, 8GB on an M-series Mac performs a lot different from 8GB on your 2013 iMac. And the 8GB models are offered for cheaper, so people who don’t need higher specs can get one cheaper. And it’s good enough for a lot more than basics. I use my 8GB M1 Mac for graphic design work, I’m running Blender for 3D modeling and sculpting, and I’ve also done video editing, and it runs smoothly, performance has never been an issue at all. I’d say it even performs better than 16GB Intel systems that I’ve used.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: polaris20
Pretty much anyone who actually needs a MacBook Pro (as opposed to an Air) can benefit somehow from 16 GB, even if they can 'make do' with 8 GB and the performance penalties incurred with disk swap. This is especially true for the long-term use which any computer in this price range should be able to provide. Why not just make it standard?

Performance penalties or 'it's good enough for the basics' is fine when we're talking about my 2013 iMac kitchen computer with 8 GB, but this is a $1,500 brand new computer being marketed for professional / prosumer usage.
Sadly it's barely worth posting in this thread as you'll just get trolled with downvotes by half a handful of the regular Apple-defenders. 😅
 
Sadly it's barely worth posting in this thread as you'll just get trolled with downvotes by half a handful of the regular Apple-defenders. 😅
Indeed. Tiring. Funny how now performance of the ram seems to matter to the defenders. But when Apple crippled the ssds on base m2 MacBooks: “you do not notice it.”
 
Pretty much anyone who actually needs a MacBook Pro (as opposed to an Air) can benefit somehow from 16 GB, even if they can 'make do' with 8 GB and the performance penalties incurred with disk swap. This is especially true for the long-term use which any computer in this price range should be able to provide. Why not just make it standard?

Performance penalties or 'it's good enough for the basics' is fine when we're talking about my 2013 iMac kitchen computer with 8 GB, but this is a $1,500 brand new computer being marketed for professional / prosumer usage.
Would you be fine with the M3 MBP coming with 16gb ram as default if the base model also cost $200 more?

The only argument I can see which remotely makes sense is that this enables 16gb models to make its way to 3rd party retailers. Otherwise, the argument still stands - nothing is stopping people from simply speccing out the model they want online and getting it delivered to them.
 
Indeed. Tiring. Funny how now performance of the ram seems to matter to the defenders. But when Apple crippled the ssds on base m2 MacBooks: “you do not notice it.”
Performance is only a part of the discussion since people in your camp keep claiming 8GB of RAM isn’t enough, and supposedly only supports really basic things like word processing and web surfing. Never mind that I use an 8GB M1 Mac for graphic design work, 3D modeling/sculpting, video editing, etc., all without the Mac breaking a sweat… 🙄. But anyways, people in your camp are arguing 8GB doesn’t perform well, so those of us who have actually used 8GB M-series Macs are setting the record straight and pointing out that you can, in fact, do “pro” work on 8GB MacBooks. And BTW, I’m also very tired of the “pro workflow” gatekeeping, people who do word processing and use web apps are pros as well. There are many kinds of pro workflow, not just the ones you perceive to be more “pro” and not just the ones that are more taxing on a computer…

And ya, the SSDs on the base M2 MacBooks are not crippled, they run super snappy. Not a difference one would notice in real-world application. Funny you mention that since that was last year’s made up artificial Mac scandal. The content creators need to push an artificial scandal every Mac release to keep clicks up. And this supposed RAM “scandal” is just this year’s artificial clickbait scandal…
 
  • Haha
Reactions: polaris20
I think it depens on whatever you need but for me the most important thing is the stroge and it should be at least 512 gb because others is not enough.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.