PSA: you probably don’t need 32 or 64Gb RAM unless you know you need it.

[alandor]

I just wanted to chime in and say I really appreciated this post. I logged in to mac forums specifically to see if there was information here on the video OP linked to which compares 16GB and 32GB MBPs. I am one of those guys for whom money is very much an issue but who wants to invest in a computer that will work out fine for me in the long run. I was certain I needed at least 32 GB, perhaps even 64, based on some things people have said and my own outdated assumptions. It is reassuring to hear that 16GB will very likely be enough for me.

 

[Phil77354]

One important distinction that may not always be recognized is that there is a difference between software that makes use of your computer RAM (and will use quite a bit of RAM if it is available), and software that needs a lot of RAM.

When I occasionally open Activity Monitor to observe how RAM is being utilized in my iMac, I generally see that a large percentage of the memory used is for browser tabs, and I've noticed that others here often mention having many browser tabs open as well.

I have 32 GB of RAM and it is not unusual for ~ 25 GB to be in use, but I also know that if most of that use is for browser tabs then it does not mean that Safari requires, say, 12 GB of RAM in order to work properly. If I had a more reasonable 16 GB of RAM installed, less memory would be assigned to Safari tabs but I doubt I would notice much of a difference.

On the other hand, someone who uses software that does need a great deal of RAM to work effectively - I'm guessing video or high resolution photo editing software would be an example - would know this and will spec their computers accordingly.

Which is why the OP statement 'unless you know you need it' is perfectly understandable. Those are users who do rely on those programs which do require significant RAM to operate well, and they surely do know it.

 

[IllIllIll]

Anyway, buy as you want, but stop spreading false information.

The people who are most vocal about justifying their "need" for gobs of RAM are most likely the ones who have overstretched their budget and are simply grabbing at straws to validate their decision to spend so much on something they don't need.

 

[beethovengirl]

Your 2016 MBP had pretty bad single core scores and it was a dual core. Todays 14" is 8 core CPU with double-triple of your single core performance.
I managed to open 100 tabs(well not 100 but 80 tabs regularly) on my 13" 2012 retina MBP and had no problems at all. But that thing was sitting on Sierra not even High one.

What is the significance of the cores in terms of browser tabs? I thought having lots of browser tabs open was a RAM issue.

I'm running Sierra on my late 2016 13" MBP / 16GB RAM.

 

[salvatore.p]

I just wanted to chime in and say I really appreciated this post. I logged in to mac forums specifically to see if there was information here on the video OP linked to which compares 16GB and 32GB MBPs. I am one of those guys for whom money is very much an issue but who wants to invest in a computer that will work out fine for me in the long run. I was certain I needed at least 32 GB, perhaps even 64, based on some things people have said and my own outdated assumptions. It is reassuring to hear that 16GB will very likely be enough for me.

Do you want to make a wise investment?
Take an M1 Air with 16/512 and save your money.
It will work for very long, and eventually, you can trade for an M3 Air in future spending less for both.


I can give this kind of advices to people who knows that they don’t need nor 32gb ram nor a professional machine.

 

[waquzy]

Do you want to make a wise investment?
Take an M1 Air with 16/512 and save your money.
It will work for very long, and eventually, you can trade for an M3 Air in future spending less for both.


I can give this kind of advices to people who knows that they don’t need nor 32gb ram nor a professional machine.

And what about people who don’t need 32GB, yet want more ports, better display, better speakers, MagSafe, better webcam?!

 

[salvatore.p]

And what about people who don’t need 32GB, yet want more ports, better display, better speakers, MagSafe, better webcam?!

What I mean is that instead of advising less ram I would advice a less expansive machine.

Moreover since even the base Air has a great display and very good speakers. An external usb hub costs 30€ and a 1080p webcam 50€.
In my country the base 14” Pro is listed exactly at double the price of the base Air. Is worth?

Is the same as saying that 16gb is enough.
If you can do all the job without more ram, you can do the job with a slightly less great display.

 

[newbmacuser2021]

Compressor could hypothetically benefit from 64GB of RAM.

If each frame is 8K, and you have 32 cores, and you run 32 instances concurrently, on separate threads, then each compression task allocates 2GB of RAM for frame storage.

For most people, you probably don’t need 64GB of RAM.

 

[macintoshmac]

Yes, browsing is becoming more and more demanding. Today, you need around 4Gb of RAM to browse comfortably on an iOS device, maybe 8 on a Mac. In 10 years from now, you'll might need 16Gb to browse comfortably on a Mac.

So - I don't really get the point you're trying to make. Yes, things are getting more and more resource intensive. No, that doesn't mean you need 32Gb to browse the Internet today and you won't need it in the next 10 years, either. One day these MBPs will be outdated, and it won't be because of RAM, it will be because of everything. But even a base MBP model should be enough for the majority of users for a long time.

I thought I made my point amply clear - let people spend whatever they want to spend and get whatever they want. Let them buy their 32GB for whatever they want to do. Your pocket won’t be lighter from that expense. They will learn from their experiences and make their choices accordingly next time. This borderline RAM policing is fruitless, both for self and for others. It’s a wasteful operation and expense of our time.

 

[ASX]

200 (in case of a cheaper retailer) - 400 US (msrp) Dollar are making no real difference in terms of a such expensive product. I would always buy 32 gb ram. This devices are too expensive for getting rid of it after a short period.

If this is no Apple product you would think a manufacturer is looting you if he is offering 16 gb ram for a 2200 - 3000 Euro laptop. I would expect 64 gb ram for 3000 Euros. And at least of course minimum 2 tb pcie gen 4 ssd . The advantage of most other laptops is, you can upgrade ram and always the ssd by yourself. For Apple soc's you can't.

 

[svenmany]

I thought I made my point amply clear - let people spend whatever they want to spend and get whatever they want. Let them buy their 32GB for whatever they want to do. Your pocket won’t be lighter from that expense. They will learn from their experiences and make their choices accordingly next time. This borderline RAM policing is fruitless, both for self and for others. It’s a wasteful operation and expense of our time.

I agree. Too many posts in this thread are worded in a way that try to force the posters opinion on the reader and make them succumb.

I guess, a generous view of this thread is that it's trying to advise people on what to do, even if they don't have sufficient knowledge to make an informed decision. The general conclusion of the post is that most people don't need 32 GB. That's probably true and is certainly the conclusion of the transitive closure of opinionators (opinionators who influence opinionators, who influence opinionators, who influence...). Most of the reasoning presented is unsubstantiated hand waving. Many sentences use nebulous modifiers (like "most" and "probably"). One assertion could be debated in a philosophy class - you only need 32 GB if you "know" you need it. I suspect there's no truth value to that since no one actually knows they need it. Even the notion of "need" is defined differently by everyone.

You could say "If you're using a computer for browsing the web you don't need 32 GB". If you did, you would be misleading some people. You certainly would be misleading the people who leave 100 tabs open and are browsing resource intensive web pages. A web page is not a static thing these days. Usually they execute some code delivered by the web server. Sometimes that code continues running while the web page is open. And, sometimes that code takes a ton of memory if it's written inefficiently. The doesn't mean the user has the luxury of just not using such web pages.

You could say that the people who use resource intensive web pages are the exception. Then present the data. What percentage of people do that?

Apple is letting the ball drop. They have the data and knowledge. We need some serious information from them in order to make the right decision. They could provide some online tool to help the user figure out what they should order. I'd prefer a tool that runs on my own machine and over a period of time gathers information based on my usage. It's actually irresponsible that Apple does nothing to help the users since they are locked in to a memory configurations on very expensive machine.

 

[ASX]

16 gb soldered ram are barely justifiable for laptops below 1000 Euros. I ordered a Vivobook 14 Pro because of this new 90 hz oled screen. It costs 999 Euros, it has only 16 gb soldered ram and i thought about it many times, because i know how many ram browser tabs are consuming. My conclusion is, this price has space for some drawbacks, even because i wont use the laptop on a bigger screen. So many tabs will not fit well on 14 inch screen. But for a macbook pro for 2 - 3 times the price it would be just crazy to apply the same thinking. It's a premium price tag, why should i give browser tabs up, in order to dodge a slow down? This is not matching the price. Huge compromises for basic use cases aren't wanted.

 

[antst]

So, about "16GB is enough". Just 5 min ago I got yet another warning about low application memory with suggestion to kill something. On Mac Mini M1 16GB. And I have those warning regularly. And this is without use of anything specific in terms of workload (I also have those, memory intensive, but this is whole different story).

Practically, all I had is a bunch of browser tabs in safari and chrome, few VSCode windows (all of them with remote sessions to some linux boxes, which is important, as memory use is much lower than with local), bunch of messengers (telegram, whatsapp, messages, signal), discord, teams, spotify, mail, calendar, contacts, bank app, preview, 1password, and maybe few services running like nextcloud, one drive, Logitech camera app, bettertouchtool, AutoMounter). That's practically it. And this set regularly ends up with system asking me to kill the app.
In 1-2 years this will be setup which is unusable at all. (I never aimed to have this mac mini m1 for long as desktop, just to bridge from death of my Intel MBP at summer till release of MBP 16 M1x, so I knew that 16GB will give me chance to survive half year)

 

[IllIllIll]

16 gb soldered ram are barely justifiable for laptops below 1000 Euros. I ordered a Vivobook 14 Pro because of this new 90 hz oled screen. It costs 999 Euros, it has only 16 gb soldered ram and i thought about it many times, because i know how many ram browser tabs are consuming. My conclusion is, this price has space for some drawbacks, even because i wont use the laptop on a bigger screen. So many tabs will not fit well on 14 inch screen. But for a macbook pro for 2 - 3 times the price it would be just crazy to apply the same thinking. It's a premium price tag, why should i give browser tabs up, in order to dodge a slow down? This is not matching the price. Huge compromises for basic use cases aren't wanted.

Stop lying. You haven't bought anything. You're just trolling.

 

[ngrai]

A very thoughtful, helpful, and constructive article. Fortunately it came too late for me -- my maxed-out 16" Pro Max is on the loading ramp in Shanghai, or maybe already in the hold of a UPS plane on its way to the US. But here's the thing: I do believe Zuckerberg's Metaverse, or someone else's competitive VR environment, or a vastly advanced Second Life, ultimately involving holography and haptics, will be here within a few years, and I am not nearly tech savvy enough to know what that will mean in terms of drain on memory, number of files open, etc., but I do know that I want to be able to see this stuff as it develops (though, God knows, I would never use anything from Facebook, including Facebook itself--an abomination that should have been strangled at birth.) So I am buying to the max because I think we ain't seen nothing yet in terms of demand on our machines for bandwidth, processing power, and memory.

With the new MBPs, this question is super-popular on these forums, and I see multiple posts spreading misinformation and FUD about 16Gb models, causing a bunch of people to most likely overspend of panic about their purchases.

There is a lot of misunderstanding how RAM and swap files work and, honestly, it is confusing. You’re not stupid if you take a look at your RAM usage in the Activity Monitor and think you need more because your 32Gb computer is using 25Gb RAM. Because it is complex and confusing and depends on so many factors - and it’s (probably) not your job to know these things.

We also live in the age of bloggers and YouTubers that buy insanely maxed out specs and talk about them. So you see people that even call themselves as “your average consumer” running maxed out $5000 laptops. We live in a max-out culture. And sure, if you have money to spend - why not? I mean, people buy sports cars - so why not computers? I don’t judge. But I don’t think anyone bought a Lamborghini “because they want to get to work faster” (at least I hope not).

Also, remember that with “pro” devices, a lot of people actually use them for some expensive productions where a $1000 or $2000 or $5000 difference is nothing. So if you can cut off 30 seconds of your render - why not?

There’s an old saying that “You can’t have too much RAM”. It’s not really wrong - but it’s also not really true because it implies there is no limit to how much you need. Because while having more than you need is not bad, it doesn’t mean you can’t have enough RAM.



There is a really good reason to get more RAM on your computer and there are some very real and valid scenarios where even 64Gb is not enough. It’s not a conspiracy to get you to spend more - RAM is important. But times have changed from 15 years ago. From super-fast SSDs to the fact that RAM usage isn’t raising so fast like it used to (I swear I use practically the same amount today as I did 7 years ago).

In the ancient days, when you ran out of RAM, you just couldn’t launch apps. Then came a time where you could launch them, but your system became very slow and unresponsive. These days - mostly - your system will work just as fast even when your swap is tens of gigabytes, with bunch of tabs open in your browser and files open in your app, etc.

Of course, people will be: but, but, futreproofing. Because apps require more and more RAM! My Snow Leopard Mac used 4Gb RAM and now this is not enough!

The reality is, things have changed and RAM requirements are not rising as they used to and files are not growing like they used to. The reason is that we’ve reached the limits of our own perception and the hardware is matching our needs much better than it used to - file sizes and memory requirements are growing, but not as nearly as they used to. 8 years ago you needed 8Gb RAM for all but the most demanding Photoshop work, these days you need 8Gb RAM for all but the most demanding Photoshop work. 8 years ago you needed 64 or 128Gb RAM to run a bunch of VMs or render a complex scene with thousands of multimillion 3D objects, today you also need 64 or 128Gb RAM for that.

As disk speeds become insane, the reason for having a bunch of RAM is changing. It’s not to have a responsive computer, it’s to allow workflows that require insane files to be loaded into memory at once.

You don’t need 32Gb RAM for lots of browser tabs. Swap is very efficient and you can open tons of tabs with 8Gb too.

You don’t need to keep your swap file at 0.

You don’t need 32Gb RAM because ”it’s shared memory” - shared memory doesn’t work that way.

You don’t need to buy 32 or 64Gb RAM because you intend to keep your computer for 6-7 years, because your GPU or CPU or other parts of the computer will be way more of a bottleneck than RAM after that time (assuming anything is a bottleneck for your workflow in that time). Your 16Gb RAM MBP will be just fine in 6 years, and nice and fast and if it won’t - it probably won’t be because of RAM.

There are valid, realistic reasons to need 32 or 64Gb RAM. If you have them - you know it. And you most likely already have it in your previous computer because you can’t do your work without it. And you know the reason you need it is not futureproofing or browsing or documents.

Or you have money to throw around and just like big numbers. Perfectly good reason. It’s fine to get 32Gb or 64Gb if you can. Guess what - 64 is better than 32 and 32 is better than 16.


So, if you know you need more than 16Gb RAM…. You know and most likely - you already have it. But, to be honest, you probably don’t. You probably don‘t need an M1 MAX either - but that’s another topic. Now, do you want it? That’s a different thing. Go ahead and get it if you want it. But don’t justify it with any other reason - because some people might panic and seriously overspend on already expensive computers (and just for the record, not that it’s important but before someone assumes I’m trying to comfort myself: I could afford more and if I needed it, I wouldn’t think twice about getting it).

Anyway, here’s a nice video, if you doubt me:

 

[slpslee1]

So, if you know you need more than 16Gb RAM…. You know and most likely - you already have it. But, to be honest, you probably don’t. You probably don‘t need an M1 MAX either - but that’s another topic.

I know all that, but I'm old, so this time around, I went for the configuration I wanted rather than just getting by. Somebody is going to spend my money. At this point in time, I might as well share in the fun.

 

[ASX]

@IllIllIll​

Extra for you 😘:



I know what you can expect from only 16 gb ram .

@antst

That's the point. And you should have the 200 - 400 Bucks also, when you buy such an expensive notebook. Some users like IllIllIll obviously haven't enough money for this. It's really sad. I bought the 16 gb model only, because i trusted the Apple users on forums (had no experience with mac os before) and the 32 gb was initially not available in Germany.

 

[Blowback]

I remember there was this one guy who once said we'd never need more than 640KB of RAM. People laugh about that now.

Relative of the CEO of IBM who famously stated that the world might only need a few dozen computers/mainframes?😏

 

[ctjack]

I ordered a Vivobook 14 Pro

Do you still keep it? While having M1 Air thinking that i could buy a decent Win Laptop to heat my apartment and have some RAM. M1 Air -> MBP 16 will cost me $1700. I can definitely find good enough win 17" laptop for $1200-$1300.

 

[mciarlo]

So, about "16GB is enough". Just 5 min ago I got yet another warning about low application memory with suggestion to kill something. On Mac Mini M1 16GB. And I have those warning regularly. And this is without use of anything specific in terms of workload (I also have those, memory intensive, but this is whole different story).

Practically, all I had is a bunch of browser tabs in safari and chrome, few VSCode windows (all of them with remote sessions to some linux boxes, which is important, as memory use is much lower than with local), bunch of messengers (telegram, whatsapp, messages, signal), discord, teams, spotify, mail, calendar, contacts, bank app, preview, 1password, and maybe few services running like nextcloud, one drive, Logitech camera app, bettertouchtool, AutoMounter). That's practically it. And this set regularly ends up with system asking me to kill the app.
In 1-2 years this will be setup which is unusable at all. (I never aimed to have this mac mini m1 for long as desktop, just to bridge from death of my Intel MBP at summer till release of MBP 16 M1x, so I knew that 16GB will give me chance to survive half year)

Worth pointing out you say "All I had is..." and then proceed to list multiple browsers, multiple messengers (no doubt some written with Electron), a bunch of random stuff like bank apps, camera apps, etc. I think you're way past "All I had is...". That's a lot haha!

 

[ucfgrad93]

It all depends on what you are trying to do. Facebook, web surfing, watching videos, email, MS office, etc. are probably good with 16 GB.

 

[tdbrown75]

I thought I made my point amply clear - let people spend whatever they want to spend and get whatever they want. Let them buy their 32GB for whatever they want to do. Your pocket won’t be lighter from that expense. They will learn from their experiences and make their choices accordingly next time. This borderline RAM policing is fruitless, both for self and for others. It’s a wasteful operation and expense of our time.

Agree 100% - the ONLY people who should care about this are those living in Socialist countries, because they are afraid to run out of someone else’s money.

Tim

 

[metapunk2077fail]

I open a ton of content in Adobe Bridge and with 32GB RAM it flies. 16GB is not enough, whether I use Apple Silicon, Intel Mac or Intel PC.

 

[antst]

Worth pointing out you say "All I had is..." and then proceed to list multiple browsers, multiple messengers (no doubt some written with Electron), a bunch of random stuff like bank apps, camera apps, etc. I think you're way past "All I had is...". That's a lot haha!

I think exactly in this thread I said that thanks to JavaScript, nodejs and electron, 16GB, even if it is enough now, very quickly will not be enough.
Nodejs developers has no shame!!!
But what is wrong with multiple browsers? One browser with all the same tabs will be no different. Camera app and bank app are negligible it not even camera app, but Logitech settings app, menubar thingy. Problem is browsers, vscode, discord and teams. Those 4 will put any 16GB to knees easily.

And, for record, this is really “all I had is” list, including tiny things. I could have another list with quite serious memorie use. But for now, I moved all that activity to the Linux workstation I have, with 256gb. 16GB is barely enough for simple things like browsing, messengers and text editing.

 

[BayouTiger]

I bought a maxxed out 14 on release day and it is so much more than I need, but I do not do the CTO thing so it’s base or maxxed. Historically I run large VM’s and the extra horsepower was used, but since the difference now is all about graphics core, the difference is just not there. Takes me back to my trash can where Apple was betting the farm on GPU processing and the apps outside of video and very few others took that plunge. So while I really like having the 2TB andso far Win11 in Parallels has been solid, the 64GB is wasted. I used to throw a bunch of Ram and cores at Windows VMs in Fusion, but Parallels just doesn’t seem to scale as well.

As the cost is not an issue for me as it’s a tool for work, I have overbought for years, but I think this time before my window closes next week I’ll be returning and getting the 10 core base. Even that is not likely to be much better than my M1 but the hardware is so nice and my wife’s 12” is getting overdue.