Is 8GB of RAM Enough for MacBook Pro?

[Kal Madda]

1. I have:

• photos of the chip, including its markings
• the vendor (SK Hynix)
• SK Hynix products with similar markings
• basic knowledge of LPDDR5

What do you have? Idle speculation that somehow invalidates most of the above.

2. Yes, maybe. But they wouldn't do that if it would significantly impact the price. Instead, they'd simply change the package to fit the RAM.

3. It's not like they designed the SoC, then realized, "aw crap, we forgot the RAM!". No, they knew from the start that they wanted to fit LPDDR5 modules on there. They even knew how many, not just because the package design mandates it, but because the amount of memory controllers inside the SoC does, too.

"Tim! No!! We forgot the RAM!"

What?

4. I mean, I love how you keep bringing things up, then say "it doesn't really matter". Good stuff.

5. OK, so your defense here is that an upgrade from 8 to 16 for $200 is "actually cheaper than many competing products"? Fascinating.

6. Nobody is disputing any of this. Nobody has said Apple should change BTO prices to $20 instead of $200.

7. Yeah, except, no, because my argument isn't "the base RAM should be way higher" but "the base RAM should've been increased after more than a decade". That's it. As I've said many times, if it were 12 instead of 8, that would already be quite an improvement.

Yes, arguments ad absurdum are ridiculous. So why did you make one only to defeat it?

8. To a point, sure.

9. They're very educated. If we can't have a discussion based on this much information, why even have MacRumors Forums at all?

10. It does not.

11. This is off topic.

1. You have prices of other RAM chips, not the specific RAM chips that Apple uses. You can say “I think that it costs $20”, but making this claim as if it’s a hard fact is out of place. It’s speculation, whether “well educated” or not, it’s still merely speculation, not hard evidence. This is all I have pointed out, and this is why I even said “the cost could be low or it could be high”. I think you incorrectly believe that I’m arguing it’s actually more expensive or something, but that is not what I’m saying. I’m not making any assumptions in either direction, and am open to either possibility. I am not open to treating speculation as fact though…

2. Perhaps, or perhaps not. We can speculate about it, but we don’t know anything for sure.

3. I was talking about the possibility of the assembly line having to stop in order to load the next RAM chip size in and retool in that sense. I was not talking about they forgot to add the RAM…🤦🏼‍♂️. And again, I’m putting that forth as a possible example of something that could effect production costs, and also like I said earlier, this all is entirely speculation and is meaningless because we don’t have any hard facts on how the production process works or any of the costs involved. It could be very cheap, or it could also be more expensive than we realize…

4. I didn’t bring it up. Other people kept claiming as a matter of fact that it only costs Apple $20 more to use 16GB RAM cards, I merely pointed out that that is merely speculation, not fact, regardless of how well informed of speculation you may believe it to be. You could be correct, but you also could be incorrect, because we lack hard evidence to prove either way definitively. And from the beginning when I first addressed it I’ve been saying it’s irrelevant to the larger discussion and debate. I am not arguing that your opinion about how much 16GB RAM cards cost is necessarily even wrong. I’m just pointing out that it is not fact but speculation.

5. Yes, it is. And that is a fact, because I have screenshots of the prices several other companies are charging for RAM upgrades that we can compare against what Apple is charging, and it’s higher. In some cases, competitors are charging nearly double…

6. Some are arguing that Apple is overcharging for RAM, and need to charge closer to their hypothetical number for what they believe Apple pays for RAM.

7. People are arguing that Apple should increase the base spec RAM because it doesn’t cost that much more than the current spec. But if we were to make that argument every year, we would be at absurdly high numbers for base-spec RAM storage. Perhaps you in particular are not making this argument, but others in this debate are and have made this argument. And I think a scheduled increase every decade is about as arbitrary. I think it makes more sense to just increase the spec as there’s need for it. And with the high sales of base spec Macs with 8GB of RAM, I don’t believe the data supports the idea that there’s a big need for that increase now. Most base-spec customers still seem plenty happy with 8GB of RAM.

8. Yes, it shouldn’t be based merely off of that.

9. And they’re still speculation, not fact. Again, I am not saying your speculation isn’t possibly correct, but there’s also a possibility that it’s incorrect. Because it’s only speculation. That is all that I have pointed out, that it is not a fact that it costs Apple $20 to increase to 16GB, it’s only a guess, and people claiming it as a fact are out of line…

10. It does, it reduces the base price from $2,000 to $1,600. That’s a $400 price reduction vs what Apple sold the base spec 14” MacBook Pro for in 2021 and 2022. And even increasing the spec to 16GB of RAM, you still save $200.

11. It’s not off topic, because it demonstrates that you’re getting the same thing just with an M3 chip and less RAM for cheaper…

 

[ric22]

I think I'd be fine if all Macs start at 12 for the next ~four years. Then, 2028, start at 16.

8 seems a bit low. Not critically so that I'd yell "no! don't buy this!!", but enough that I'd advise people think about "how long do I plan to keep this for?", which I expect is generally long enough that they'll eventually find 8 a bit annoying. All it takes is an OS that takes more resources (which is almost inevitable), another Electron app they have to regularly use that loves to gobble up RAM, or heck, even anything that uses the GPU more. Cause it's the same RAM. Cause it's unified.

I agree. 12GB would suffice to keep from delving into swap too often. I have an 8GB M1 Air that I don't do anything intensive with (I have a work 16" Pro for that), and it's always using swap doing little more than browsing/streaming/running Microsoft Office. It's certainly not as nippy as when it was new, but it's still great in general. Sky Go is enough to slow it down single handedly.

For the sake of ~$6 I'd rather have 16GB than 12GB, to give some headroom for the next 5 years, and allow people to play modernish games if they wish without having to pointlessly sacrifice graphics. We can only speculate if 8/12/16/18 is ideal 5 years from now.

 

[chucker23n1]

It does, it reduces the base price from $2,000 to $1,600.

Except that this is disingenuous. The $1,600 MBP replaces the $1,300 MBP, and offers a lower entry point to the chassis that previously started at $2,000. It's both cheaper and more expensive. You could previously get a MacBook Pro with M2 for $1,300. You can now get a MacBook Pro with M3 for $1,600.

 

[Kal Madda]

Except that this is disingenuous. The $1,600 MBP replaces the $1,300 MBP, and offers a lower entry point to the chassis that previously started at $2,000. It's both cheaper and more expensive. You could previously get a MacBook Pro with M2 for $1,300. You can now get a MacBook Pro with M3 for $1,600.

Except, there’s nothing disingenuous about this, it’s a fact. I’m not talking about the 13” model that got discontinued and had about the same port selection and hardware as the MacBook Air. That model didn’t really offer much that the MacBook Air doesn’t offer. We’re talking about the 14” MacBook Pro, and now you can get a 14” MacBook Pro for $400 cheaper than you previously could. There’s nothing disingenuous about that, it’s just a fact…

 

[dandeco]

If you do any digital audiovisual work, then no, 8 GB is not enough. Heck, even an M1 MacBook Air with 16 GB of RAM edits audio and video pretty smoothly compared to if the same computer had 8 GB of RAM.

 

[Kal Madda]

If you do any digital audiovisual work, then no, 8 GB is not enough. Heck, even an M1 MacBook Air with 16 GB of RAM edits audio and video pretty smoothly compared to if the same computer had 8 GB of RAM.

And if people don’t think 8GB is enough for their workflow, they can buy 16GB…

 

[chucker23n1]

Except, there’s nothing disingenuous about this, it’s a fact. I’m not talking about the 13” model that got discontinued and had about the same port selection and hardware as the MacBook Air. That model didn’t really offer much that the MacBook Air doesn’t offer. We’re talking about the 14” MacBook Pro, and now you can get a 14” MacBook Pro for $400 cheaper than you previously could. There’s nothing disingenuous about that, it’s just a fact…

I mean, you just doubled down on being disingenuous. 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

[Kal Madda]

I mean, you just doubled down on being disingenuous. 🤷🏻‍♂️

What’s disingenuous about pointing out you can now buy a 14” MacBook Pro for $400 cheaper? That’s a fact…

 

[Agincourt]

Can any of the 'pro 8 GB' crowd here agree that Apple cannot defend their practices? Either Apple decided to go with an extremely expensive solution to installing RAM and cannot justify paying $200 USD extra for a meager 8 GB upgrade, or they're price gouging. Either one makes Apple look bad.

Nothing that we type here is going to get them to change their practices, so why not simply call a spade a spade?

What's more is that Apple's products are exceptionally expensive to begin with, thus being forced to add $200 USD on top of a $1600 MacBook Pro to make it competitive with rival models skews any pricing arguments. That plus the fact there are no upgrade options later on means you have to plan for the computer you're going to want five years down the line. 8 GB is very much good enough for today's lowest-end users but this was the gold standard for Apple a decade ago. Everyone else has been advancing while Apple stubbornly refuses to increase its base stats + bake everything into the logic board.

Why did they stop at 8 GB? Is this some magical figure calculated two decades ago when 1 GB was the norm and they figured they'd keep up the trend until they reached 8 GB? And I can't imagine programers are any more happy having to design the software to function with this artificial bottleneck. An over inflated operating system isn't necessarily bad if you have the hardware to support it, hence why Windows 11 needs more RAM than Apple 14. The argument 'it's good enough'

 

[Kal Madda]

Can any of the 'pro 8 GB' crowd here agree that Apple cannot defend their practices? Either Apple decided to go with an extremely expensive solution to installing RAM and cannot justify paying $200 USD extra for a meager 8 GB upgrade, or they're price gouging. Either one makes Apple look bad.

Nothing that we type here is going to get them to change their practices, so why not simply call a spade a spade?

What's more is that Apple's products are exceptionally expensive to begin with, thus being forced to add $200 USD on top of a $1600 MacBook Pro to make it competitive with rival models skews any pricing arguments. That plus the fact there are no upgrade options later on means you have to plan for the computer you're going to want five years down the line. 8 GB is very much good enough for today's lowest-end users but this was the gold standard for Apple a decade ago. Everyone else has been advancing while Apple stubbornly refuses to increase its base stats + bake everything into the logic board.

Why did they stop at 8 GB? Is this some magical figure calculated two decades ago when 1 GB was the norm and they figured they'd keep up the trend until they reached 8 GB? And I can't imagine programers are any more happy having to design the software to function with this artificial bottleneck. An over inflated operating system isn't necessarily bad if you have the hardware to support it, hence why Windows 11 needs more RAM than Apple 14. The argument 'it's good enough'

Their practices are fine. They’re competing with other companies that in some cases even charge double what they do for RAM upgrades, and when they’re not nearly double, they’re still often the same or higher. Their prices are in line with competitors.

You’re not calling a spade a spade. You’re making subjective claims and accusations about motives and other things and presenting them as if they’re facts when they’re not. You have zero hard evidence for your accusations and many of your claims.

Apple’s products are priced very well for what they offer. Sure, you can find cheap plastic Windows garbage cheaper, but it isn’t really in the same league at all. Macs offer much better quality, and macOS, which is much better than Windows for many people. If you expect most people in this forum are going to think that Macs are a bad value proposition, this forum is literally called MacRumors…

I for one like that macOS isn’t loaded down with overinflated bloatware. It leads to much snappier performance, and more headroom for apps to make use of…

 

[webkit]

Can any of the 'pro 8 GB' crowd here agree that Apple cannot defend their practices? Either Apple decided to go with an extremely expensive solution to installing RAM and cannot justify paying $200 USD extra for a meager 8 GB upgrade, or they're price gouging. Either one makes Apple look bad.

Apple products may be higher priced on average than others but let's not get into calling it price gouging. I find that term is way overused in these types of discussions. About the only way Apple would be price gouging in this scenario would be if there was a sudden, desperate need for laptops and Apple in response decided to double, triple (or more) the regular retail prices of their laptops. That isn't what is happening here.

Besides, other companies also charge $200 retail for 8GB RAM upgrades. For example (image below), to go from 8GB to 16GB RAM on a 13.5" MS Surface Laptop 5 can also cost $200 (regular retail) more.

 

[Agincourt]

Apple products may be higher priced on average than others but let's not get into calling it price gouging. I find that term is way overused in these types of discussions. About the only way Apple would be price gouging in this scenario would be if there was a sudden, desperate need for laptops and Apple in response decided to double, triple (or more) the regular retail prices of their laptops. That isn't what is happening here.

Besides, other companies also charge $200 retail for 8GB RAM upgrades. For example (image below), to go from 8GB to 16GB RAM on a 13.5" MS Surface Laptop 5 can also cost $200 (regular retail) more.

View attachment 2341410

That too is price gouging. It doesn't cost them anywhere near $200 USD to perform same operation.

Can you get to your point please?

Also where did you get this outrageous ~$1300 starting price? I found one with 16 GB RAM and 256GB storage for less than $800 on Amazon.

This tablet right here comes with higher RAM and comparable storage to the 14 MBP in 2024. Costs half the price and yet offers comparable RAM specs. If you're going to present this to prove RAM is indeed super expensive... I'm kinda not seeing where your argument is heading.

 

[chucker23n1]

I have never argued Apple is paying $200 to upgrade the RAM, nor does my argument rely on that claim.

And the figures you showed demonstrate that it costs some other manufacturers $20 to buy other RAM chips. I’m not saying that that isn’t fact. But we have no figures for what Apple pays for their RAM chips. This doesn’t mean it isn’t necessarily close to that, and you can make an argument that you think it’s likely close to that $20 figure. But you cannot say it as a matter of fact, because you literally have no exact numbers on what Apple pays for their RAM chips. This is where you either misunderstand or misrepresent my position. All I’ve said in relation to your $20 figure is that we don’t actually know beyond a shadow of a doubt how much Apple pays. It could be $20 like you think it is, it could be $30, $40 or higher. We just don’t know.

OK. So your presumption here is that Apple pays more than $20, and less than $200.

But you still haven't made the case for why they would make such an odd choice.

 

[Kal Madda]

OK. So your presumption here is that Apple pays more than $20, and less than $200.

But you still haven't made the case for why they would make such an odd choice.

I don’t even make that presumption. They could pay $20 or even less. My point is just that we don’t know, so making a matter of fact “it only costs Apple x” statement is not something we can claim as a statement of fact.

 

[webkit]

That too is price gouging. It doesn't cost them anywhere near $200 USD to perform same operation.

Can you get to your point please?

Obviously, my point was that you are inappropriately using the term “price gouging.”

Also where did you get this outrageous ~$1300 starting price? I found one with 16 GB RAM and 256GB storage for less than $800 on Amazon.

This tablet right here comes with higher RAM and comparable storage to the 14 MBP in 2024. Costs half the price and yet offers comparable RAM specs. If you're going to present this to prove RAM is indeed super expensive... I'm kinda not seeing where your argument is heading.

The image I used was a screen shot directly from the Microsoft website. I also specifically said “regular retail” since you seemed to be focusing on what Apple charges (regular retail) not necessarily what third party retailers may charge. Sure, Microsoft products can be found at discount (from regular retail) prices, just as Apple products can also be found at discount (from regular retail) prices. There are many potential places to buy laptops, and prices can vary.

 

[nick42983]

There should be a separate question "Is Apple's 8->16GB RAM upgrade price immoral?" As for the actual question at hand, no, 8GB is not enough for a MacBook Pro, you should either stick with a MacBook Air if all you do is light tasks (probably upgrading the RAM anyway) or buy a Pro that comes with 16GB standard. I believe only the "new" 14 in. MBP (basically a hobbled M1/M2 base model) is the only one that comes with 8GB.

In this case I'd advise just buying either a M1 or M2 model for the right price, especially since they've removed 1 of the 3 USB-C ports in that 'ultra-base' model. Having that extra port is arguably as important for me as the extra RAM. After using my 14" M1 Pro for over a year and not using the HDMI port at all and the SD slot 2-3 times, I wish there was an extra USB-C port for 4 total.

 

[Heat_Fan89]

There should be a separate question "Is Apple's 8->16GB RAM upgrade price immoral?" As for the actual question at hand, no, 8GB is not enough for a MacBook Pro, you should either stick with a MacBook Air if all you do is light tasks (probably upgrading the RAM anyway) or buy a Pro that comes with 16GB standard. I believe only the "new" 14 in. MBP (basically a hobbled M1/M2 base model) is the only one that comes with 8GB.

The better question would be, is the upgrade price, justified? Some would still probably say yes and others will still say no. I certainly wouldn't pay that much but there are others who have no objection to the price with the base specs.

 

[Kal Madda]

There should be a separate question "Is Apple's 8->16GB RAM upgrade price immoral?" As for the actual question at hand, no, 8GB is not enough for a MacBook Pro, you should either stick with a MacBook Air if all you do is light tasks (probably upgrading the RAM anyway) or buy a Pro that comes with 16GB standard. I believe only the "new" 14 in. MBP (basically a hobbled M1/M2 base model) is the only one that comes with 8GB.

In this case I'd advise just buying either a M1 or M2 model for the right price, especially since they've removed 1 of the 3 USB-C ports in that 'ultra-base' model. Having that extra port is arguably as important for me as the extra RAM. After using my 14" M1 Pro for over a year and not using the HDMI port at all and the SD slot 2-3 times, I wish there was an extra USB-C port for 4 total.

And you don’t have to buy an 8GB MacBook Pro if you don’t want to. But 8GB works great, even for 3D sculpting/modeling, graphic design work, and 4K video editing. I’ve done all of the above on an M1 Mac without touching swap memory, and swap memory isn’t anything really to be scared of. And a MacBook Air doesn’t offer many of the benefits of the 14” MacBook Pro. For one, the MacBook Pro obviously has a larger and higher quality display. It also offers more ports, a newer M3 processor that offers greater performance, a higher quality sound system, and longer battery runtime. It’s nice that people on a budget who don’t need a more expensive M3 Pro processor and excessive amounts of RAM now have a cheaper option to benefit from that wonderful hardware.

 

[Kal Madda]

The better question would be, is the upgrade price, justified? Some would still probably say yes and others will still say no. I certainly wouldn't pay that much but there are others who have no objection to the price with the base specs.

I would say that it is justified. 👍🏻

 

[Chuckeee]

The price of RAM (or SSD) does not matter. Unless it is super expensive, the price Apple charges is all about maximizing their profits. If RAM grew on trees and cost nothing, then Apple’s price would still be the same. Apple sells basic 8GB/256GB machines since people (or sheep or lemmings) continue to buy them. Apple prices BTO options to make the most profit possible and is structured to encourage buyers to purchase even higher level machines beyond the basic offerings (which yet incurs yet higher profits).

Apple will only raise base level specs when people stop buying base level machines. People will keep on using these base level machines as long as they keep on working “good enough”. Apple will lower prices only when people stop making purchases at their current price.

Call it the market place, capitalism, greed, or price gouging. That is the way it is.

Only choice is to either hold our nose and pay the price or don’t buy Apple’s product. If enough people keep on paying these prices, the prices will stay where they are or get even higher. If people stop buying it, then the prices will probably come down.

Yes, owner replaceable RAM and SSDs has gone away. And while there might be some technical advantages for solder in place. Removing the abilities of owners to update these products by themselves has resulted in greater profit for Apple. And because Apple is receiving greater profit from this, it’s gonna stay this way. And once again, it’s only gonna change if people stop buying it.

Saying that it’s $1600 and for that amount of money I should get XYZ is nonsense. If you really want that XYZ then the price is $2400. Your choice is pay the $2400, settle for something less than XYZ and pay the $1600, or just don’t buy it.

For me, yes, it means it stinks but I can afford it so I hold my nose and I pay for it.

 

[ric22]

https://medium.com/@mrvincentvega/m3-vs-m3-pro-the-ultimate-mac-showdown-12fb0c941533 I'll just leave this here. A lot of it is relevant to what we've talked about in this thread, plus it shows how inferior the base MacBook Pro 14 is compared to the M3 Pro model, in terms of the fans/heat/noise/ports/slower storage/processor/graphics/RAM etc...

 

[Kal Madda]

The price of RAM (or SSD) does not matter. Unless it is super expensive, the price Apple charges is all about maximizing their profits. If RAM grew on trees and cost nothing, then Apple’s price would still be the same. Apple sells basic 8GB/256GB machines since people (or sheep or lemmings) continue to buy them. Apple prices BTO options to make the most profit possible and is structured to encourage buyers to purchase even higher level machines beyond the basic offerings (which yet incurs yet higher profits).

Apple will only raise base level specs when people stop buying base level machines. People will keep on using these base level machines as long as they keep on working “good enough”. Apple will lower prices only when people stop making purchases at their current price.

Call it the market place, capitalism, greed, or price gouging. That is the way it is.

Only choice is to either hold our nose and pay the price or don’t buy Apple’s product. If enough people keep on paying these prices, the prices will stay where they are or get even higher. If people stop buying it, then the prices will probably come down.

Yes, owner replaceable RAM and SSDs has gone away. And while there might be some technical advantages for solder in place. Removing the abilities of owners to update these products by themselves has resulted in greater profit for Apple. And because Apple is receiving greater profit from this, it’s gonna stay this way. And once again, it’s only gonna change if people stop buying it.

Saying that it’s $1600 and for that amount of money I should get XYZ is nonsense. If you really want that XYZ then the price is $2400. Your choice is pay the $2400, settle for something less than XYZ and pay the $1600, or just don’t buy it.

For me, yes, it means it stinks but I can afford it so I hold my nose and I pay for it.

I don’t think it’s right to call satisfied base customers “sheep” or “lemmings”. It’s disrespectful to average customers who know their individual wants and needs better than anyone else does. I agree that “people saying that it’s $1600 and for that amount of money I should get XYZ is nonsense”. And I think that the removal of user upgradable parts in favor of faster and more efficient ones is a better option considering that the vast majority of users aren’t interested in cracking open their computers to swap out fragile parts. The better performance and efficiency benefit are worth more to most users than upgradability they will never use. 👍🏻

 

[Chuckeee]

https://medium.com/@mrvincentvega/m3-vs-m3-pro-the-ultimate-mac-showdown-12fb0c941533 I'll just leave this here. A lot of it is relevant to what we've talked about in this thread, plus it shows how inferior the base MacBook Pro 14 is compared to the M3 Pro model, in terms of the fans/heat/noise/ports/slower storage/processor/graphics/RAM etc...

And a refurbished M2 Pro MacBook could be an interesting alternative to either of those and at competitive cost .Newer is not necessarily superior.

 

[Jorbanead]

I created a video on this exact question, but TL;DW just upgrade to at least 16GB.

 

[Kal Madda]

I created a video on this exact question, but TL;DW just upgrade to at least 16GB.

8GB of RAM on the M-Series Macs is perfectly fine for base spec users. And it outperforms 16GB Intel Macs and other 16GB Intel systems I’ve used.