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

[AFK]

If you’re dealing with massive data sizes 10 GB and up such that, for the application, the data HAS to reside in RAM, you will see a performance improvement between a 32 and 16 GB system. If this isn’t the case, you may still see a performance benefit with a 32 GB system (just because macOS uses whatever RAM is available), but not likely one that’s worth $500.

For example if one process is 100% faster than the other… but the “slow” process takes 14 nanoseconds, is that speed worth it? If, on a long running process taking many hours, you’re only saving 21 minutes, is that worth it?

worth is relative. it's a game of semantics. sprinkle in some pop psychology too.

towards the higher end of the spectrum, it has diminishing returns. yes, i'll take that 21 minutes for $500 cad.

i cant tell the diff between my $100 and $200 bottle of wine but i'll still get drunk off the $200. call me a chump.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

worth is relative.

Yes, worth is relative. Thus, the reader can read the last two questions and answer for themselves. If processing a file for 12 hours and 21 minutes versus 12 hours is worth $500, get it! If not, don’t!

 

[AFK]

Yes, worth is relative. Thus, the reader can read the last two questions and answer for themselves. If processing a file for 12 hours and 21 minutes versus 12 hours is worth $500, get it! If not, don’t!

fair

 

[canpoyrazoglu]

I'd love to see a comparison using After Effects, which literally DRINKS all the RAM to cache frames for performance. With the current swap speeds I'd love to see whether it struggles with 16GB RAM or not.

 

[salvatore.p]

The question is why should we have to agonise over whether we can justify 32GB? It's 2021 and an upgrade from 16GB to 32GB of RAM shouldn't cost $400. Now, it's hard to find the cost of LPDDR5 RAM, since it's not really a consumer product, but if you go look at the Intel Mini or Intel iMac then Apple want exactly the same $200-per-8GB for bog standard SODIMMs that cost about $30 per 8GB retail (heaven knows what sort of wholesale deal a manufacturer the size of Apple gets). That's a ludicrous markup - so I'm not going to give Apple the benefit of the doubt and assume that the extra cost of LPDDR5 justifies the price. And, yes, other manufacturers gouge on BTO upgrades but Apple really are in the premiere league of gougers (Dell seem to charge about $150 for 16GB extra, smaller builders often just charge the retail cost of the DIMMs - again. forget LPDDR for the moment and remember that Apple charges $200-per-8GB even for DDR4 DIMMS).

Now, I don't think the base prices of the M1 Pro and Max MBPs are too bad - the $2700 16" with 16GB RAM and 1TB super-fast SSD is about what I paid for my 17" MBP with 4GB and spinning rust in 2011, even before inflation - but throwing in an extra 16GB of RAM shouldn't add $400.

This. If they had priced 200€ the upgrade from 16 to 32gb I bet that everyone would advice to absolutely buy more ram.
The base 16” here in Italy costs 2900€, a very high price for not having at least the 1 Tb ssd.

In my point of view I can justify more spending 3500€ for a machine with 32gb/1tb than 2900€ for a “limited” machine.

The SSD upgrade is a nobrainer, all the macs I own sooner or later had the ssd full (xcode alone is taking more than 70gb on my m1 mini).
I can live with 512gb but next year I will probably run out of storage and I will be forced to buy an external disk to free space.

For ram is more subdole. I haven’t any proof that more ram will benefit my actual workflow but I can afford the extra cost. Maybe in a couple of years it becomes very useful, maybe not.
Back in 2015 I took the base 13” rMBP (8/128) and I served me until november 2020 (5 long years). Fortunately the ssd was upgradable but every day I regretted not spending for at least 16gb of ram.

If this machine will last me for 5 years, the extra ram plus ssd would be about 100€ more per year which is very reasonable for a work machine..

 

[haruhiko]

They are only powerful in multi-core because of more cores. Single thread score is still on par with M1. Going by M1Pro or Max then you are only paying for multicore and GPU if that matters to you.

Fortunately, the chip is not the only thing that got updated in the new MacBook Pro’s.

 

[aevan]

This. If they had priced 200€ the upgrade from 16 to 32gb I bet that everyone would advice to absolutely buy more ram.
The base 16” here in Italy costs 2900€, a very high price for not having at least the 1 Tb ssd.

Of course. I mean, I would get it for 200 euros. But it's actually 530€ in my country, with a starting price of 3100€ for the 16" (yup, we're probably the worst in Europe)

And it's not even the price - I would perhaps consider it if the delay in shipping wasn't so insane. I still wouldn't need it, but I would consider it (if I ever decide to get into some seriously demanding 3D some day, like Substance stuff which I hear takes a lot of VRAM - though I can't possibly imagine something in my workflow that 16Gb would be a bottleneck)

As it is, I see little reason to get more. And, as I keep saying - getting more is fine, especially at US prices - but getting people to believe they need 32Gb for small improvements to most workflows (not all, as I said, some require 64 and beyond) - that's just spreading FUD. Ergo this thread

 

[salvatore.p]

Of course. I mean, I would get it for 200 euros. But it's actually 530€ in my country, with a starting price of 3100€ for the 16" (yup, we're probably the worst in Europe)

And it's not even the price - I would perhaps consider it if the delay in shipping wasn't so insane. I still wouldn't need it, but I would consider it (if I ever decide to get into some seriously demanding 3D some day, like Substance stuff which I hear takes a lot of VRAM - though I can't possibly imagine something in my workflow that 16Gb would be a bottleneck)

As it is, I see little reason to get more. And, as I keep saying - getting more is fine, especially at US prices - but getting people to believe they need 32Gb for small improvements to most workflows (not all, as I said, some require 64 and beyond) - that's just spreading FUD. Ergo this thread

US prices are without taxes.

If 32gb of ram over 16gb will give small improvements for the workload I can argue the same speaking the M1 Pro versus the basic M1.
That M1 is totally capable of handling day to day productivity: office work, browsing, video calls, even complex apps like photoshop and FPX are working very well.

Hence, why spend more than double the price for these machine to gain small improvements?
I'm generalizing here, of course.
But my impression is that most of the people who keep posting against getting extra ram simply don't need a professional machine.

They like the new design, or want a bigger screen or just want a "futureproof" machine.
I'm not saying that they shouldn't buy these new machines if they like. If they like is totally fine. Just like the example of the Sport Car.


Professional who needs raw performance to get the work done quickly will for sure benefit from extra ram. Most are debating because they would try to save money over a really expansive machine.
Hence, if that upgrade costs a bargain they will take without hesitation.


I can work with 16gb or ram, in the past 5 years I worked with a 2015 13" mbp with just 8Gb.
When I buyed were 8gb considered enough? Yes
I had the work done? Yes.
Working with that machine was pleasing? No

 

[EdT]

Late to this thread, but here’s my situation: since the architecture is new and different for memory usage and the processor is also different from anyone’s X86 and in the past having more memory made your computer work faster for longer AND you can’t upgrade just the memory in a year or two if you either initially didn’t buy enough or your requirements increased because your workload increased means people will still buy “too much” memory because there aren’t any hard and fast rules and all that they are seeing is “you probably don’t need that much”.

When DO you need that much, and how long will the combination of M1 whatever processor, unified memory access and software leave you with “enough” ? Software programs tend to expand to use all the resources available, whether it’s by adding features or just trying to squeeze a little more speed out of running that program.

If you buy a computer with “too much” memory and try to resell it within a couple of years you will get more money from selling that computer. If you buy a minimum configuration machine you may not get as much, proportionately, as the mid to maxed out model will.

 

[agent mac]

Title should be changed to

PSA: you probably don’t need any of the new M1 Pro/Max Macbooks unless you know you need it. The M1 Macbooks are probably enough for you.​

That’s absolutely my case. My ‘problem’ is that I really want a decent sized screen as I need three windows open.

 

[aevan]

Title should be changed to

PSA: you probably don’t need any of the new M1 Pro/Max Macbooks unless you know you need it. The M1 Macbooks are probably enough for you.​

That would be true, however, MacBook Pros do come with certain quality of life benefits that have nothing to do with performance - like the Mini LED screen, ProMotion, bigger screen sizes, better speakers, etc.

If you want the premium Mac laptop experience, you get the MacBook Pro. However, that doesn't mean you have to get a maxed out version.

 

[aevan]

worth is relative. it's a game of semantics. sprinkle in some pop psychology too.

towards the higher end of the spectrum, it has diminishing returns. yes, i'll take that 21 minutes for $500 cad.

i cant tell the diff between my $100 and $200 bottle of wine but i'll still get drunk off the $200. call me a chump.

Of course - that is perfectly fine. The problem would be if you took that "21 minute less" option and then advised everyone (regardless of their needs) to do the same, claiming that "you won't get a responsive machine in a few years if you don't get more RAM".

A lot of people here claimed that 16Gb is simply not enough for any serious work, which is just not true. Having 32 or 64Gb is *nice* for some work, *required* for other work and barely noticeable for most work. That's all. You spend your money however you like, and there are much worse ways to spend $500 CAD then getting more RAM for your computer.

 

[aevan]

Late to this thread, but here’s my situation: since the architecture is new and different for memory usage and the processor is also different from anyone’s X86 and in the past having more memory made your computer work faster for longer AND you can’t upgrade just the memory in a year or two if you either initially didn’t buy enough or your requirements increased because your workload increased means people will still buy “too much” memory because there aren’t any hard and fast rules and all that they are seeing is “you probably don’t need that much”.

When DO you need that much, and how long will the combination of M1 whatever processor, unified memory access and software leave you with “enough” ? Software programs tend to expand to use all the resources available, whether it’s by adding features or just trying to squeeze a little more speed out of running that program.

If you buy a computer with “too much” memory and try to resell it within a couple of years you will get more money from selling that computer. If you buy a minimum configuration machine you may not get as much, proportionately, as the mid to maxed out model will.

By this logic you should max out everything - why not get an 8Tb drive? You might need it at one point, and you'll be able to sell it for more.

The thing is - people can reasonably predict their needs, unless you're dramatically changing your line of work. People act as if suddenly there will be this big shift - omg, files are getting bigger, you will run out of memory, etc. This may happen - but that goes for anything - you really might realize that you need a faster CPU or a bigger drive, so why not buy that 8Tb drive? You never know! Of course, most people are not buying these 8Tb drives (even 4Tb ones) because they can reasonably predict their needs. Same with people buying M1 Pro CPUs instead of M1 Max CPUs because they don't need the GPU horsepower. But how do they know? GPUs are used for a lot of things - what if tomorrow they discover their work requires more GPU cores? Better make sure and buy it now! (In fact, as silly as it may sound, I actually find it more plausible that in the next 5 years some people might need extra GPU cores more than additional RAM, but that's a totally different topic).

It's just the RAM thing that is a complete mystery, where people keep thinking they need more for whatever reason. My guess - RAM amount used to be much more important for everyday things then it is today and it used to be this big limiting factor (if you run out of RAM, you don't get to use your app). So now we have a situation where even journalists like Joanna Stern tweeting something like "Write You can never have too much RAM on my tombstone" - which is kind of a bad advice to give. And when computers slow down, people immediately think RAM is the reason, not some background process or software issue.

The reality is - if you're ok with 16Gb today.... you'll be fine in next 5-6 years. There will be exceptions, but there are exceptions for everything. And in 5-6 years, when your tasks become more demanding and you could use more RAM, it won't be like your computer will stop working, just that you'll realize you need more. But you will also need more CPU power at that point, and maybe there will be a better screen that you can use, etc. So might as well get a new computer then.


P.S. Speaking of reselling, it really depends on the asking price - because usually you will ask for more if you payed more originally, and people buying used computers don't usually spend that much money. Cheaper used things sell more then expensive used things.

 

[EdT]

By this logic you should max out everything - why not get an 8Tb drive? You might need it at one point, and you'll be able to sell it for more.

The thing is - people can reasonably predict their needs, unless you're dramatically changing your line of work. People act as if suddenly there will be this big shift - omg, files are getting bigger, you will run out of memory, etc. This may happen - but that goes for anything - you really might realize that you need a faster CPU or a bigger drive, so why not buy that 8Tb drive? You never know! Of course, most people are not buying these 8Tb drives (even 4Tb ones) because they can reasonably predict their needs. Same with people buying M1 Pro CPUs instead of M1 Max CPUs because they don't need the GPU horsepower. But how do they know? GPUs are used for a lot of things - what if tomorrow they discover their work requires more GPU cores? Better make sure and buy it now! (In fact, as silly as it may sound, I actually find it more plausible that in the next 5 years some people might need extra GPU cores more than additional RAM, but that's a totally different topic).

It's just the RAM thing that is a complete mystery, where people keep thinking they need more for whatever reason. My guess - RAM amount used to be much more important for everyday things then it is today and it used to be this big limiting factor (if you run out of RAM, you don't get to use your app). So now we have a situation where even journalists like Joanna Stern tweeting something like "Write You can never have too much RAM on my tombstone" - which is kind of a bad advice to give. And when computers slow down, people immediately think RAM is the reason, not some background process or software issue.

The reality is - if you're ok with 16Gb today.... you'll be fine in next 5-6 years. There will be exceptions, but there are exceptions for everything. And in 5-6 years, when your tasks become more demanding and you could use more RAM, it won't be like your computer will stop working, just that you'll realize you need more. But you will also need more CPU power at that point, and maybe there will be a better screen that you can use, etc. So might as well get a new computer then.


P.S. Speaking of reselling, it really depends on the asking price - because usually you will ask for more if you payed more originally, and people buying used computers don't usually spend that much money. Cheaper used things sell more then expensive used things.

I don’t WANT to max out everything. I want to buy something that I won’t regret not maxing out. X86 computers I have an idea where to spend and where it’s ok to live with the stock configuration. I understand the basic concept behind System on a Chip but I also know it has a drawback: you’re not going to add memory or change the processor after the fact. Most of what I need power for is editing and fixing photos, with a little video mixed in. I DON’T make a living doing this, it’s a hobby. So not buying the correct model probably wouldn’t mean selling one computer and buying another, it means getting frustrated that I didn’t buy what I needed in the first place, but living with it.

 

[l0stl0rd]

I agree unless you run virtual machines or do for example Maxon redshift rendering you will not need more than 16 GB.

 

[EdT]

I agree unless you run virtual machines or do for example Maxon redshift rendering you will not need more than 16 GB.

VM’s are another thing, but probably better to have a dedicated thread rather than mix a bunch of subjects in this one. Especially for me, a VM would not be a necessity but a want because I now have decent internet access. But for that I may just buy a not too old used Windows machine.

 

[salvatore.p]

VM’s are another thing, but probably better to have a dedicated thread rather than mix a bunch of subjects in this one. Especially for me, a VM would not be a necessity but a want because I now have decent internet access. But for that I may just buy a not too old used Windows machine.

You can always buy another machine, that probably will cost around the same as adding extra 16gb of ram to this one.
Here in Italy, even very old and low spec machine costs at least 300-350€

 

[EdT]

You can always buy another machine, that probably will cost around the same as adding extra 16gb of ram to this one.
Here in Italy, even very old and low spec machine costs at least 300-350€

I have quit trying to go online with gaming. My real world speed was less than 10 Mbs (usually a LOT less) and my ping was up in the low hundreds, 100-300 ms. Once multi-player games became online only (or mostly) I couldn’t play. I ended up dead before I knew I had appeared in that game. I wouldn’t mind trying now because I have fairly reliable 100 Mbs at around 33 ms Ping. I have always thought Minecraft or Kerbal Space looked interesting.

 

[AFK]

Of course - that is perfectly fine. The problem would be if you took that "21 minute less" option and then advised everyone (regardless of their needs) to do the same, claiming that "you won't get a responsive machine in a few years if you don't get more RAM".

A lot of people here claimed that 16Gb is simply not enough for any serious work, which is just not true. Having 32 or 64Gb is *nice* for some work, *required* for other work and barely noticeable for most work. That's all. You spend your money however you like, and there are much worse ways to spend $500 CAD then getting more RAM for your computer.

it doesnt come across in my posts but i actually agree with everything you said in this thread. every single thing.

if you search my post history, what i reel against is people telling others how to spend their money or (in that "is it moral to buy multiple mbps" thread) some people forcing their moral views onto others and then playing word games when ppl call them out on it.

its less about tech. more about muh feelings. all good here.

 

[Macintosh IIcx]

OK, I know I want a M1 Max for the 32 GPU, so 32 GB of RAM is given, but I still can't let go of that 64GB RAM idea just yet. Capture One and InDesign does not need more than 32GB Ram for sure, but Photoshop is such a RAM hog. 😅

 

[ctjack]

I think we would have even stronger arguments for/against 16 vs 32 gb RAM.
We only need to know the trade-in values from Apple. Unluckily this information is not readily available. We need your input - copy paste serial number into Apple's trade-in calculator and help us out by giving the value:
1) Base MBP 16 2019 Intel. 16gb of RAM, 512 GB ssd. Getting trade-in value for this will help to determine the possible upgrade costs when buying base MBP 16 M1 Pro and trading-in in 1-2 years.
2) Base MBP 16 2019 Intel but with only upgraded RAM to 32GB with $400 at the time of purchase. This will help us to calculate how much of that additional $400 invested is going back to the user when trading-in the more specced version of the base.

 

[boss.king]

Amen. RAM is something that even somewhat techie people seem utterly confused by and rather than just learn they choose to instead spend insane amounts of money on something they’ll never need “just in case”.

There are absolutely people who need 32 or 64 or even higher, but the number of people who seem to get 32gb machines to watch YouTube and use Word is crazy.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Except, if you can afford it, why not get it. AND the fact is that you can't upgrade the memory, so what you buy is what you have for eternity, so I always advise people to 'Buy big! As big as you can afford. Your capabilities will change over time, and you might need that larger SSD, and you might need that much (or more) memory when you get a job, etc. Buy Big, Buy Big Now...'

 

[MacheadSK]

People should just ignore most so called “influencers” on Youtube.
they bashed iPhone 12 mini because of battery. Where you know what? I bought 13 mini and battery lasts me 3 DAYS of my usage. I use it as a tool when I need to, not staring into it all day for some stupid social network posts.
any regular person works for 8 hours, so has no time to watch into the phone every minute. Then goes home and either spends time with family, sporting or doing some hobby. So also, not much time (and reason) to stare to phone screen. Then cooking, laundry etc, and sleep.

I really can‘t understand why somebody can spend HOURS on a phone daily.

and same goes to maxed out laptops. Guys, those ****ers on youtube are not doing anything valuable and they usually get those products for free.

Ignore them.

and yep, great post.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

I think we would have even stronger arguments for/against 16 vs 32 gb RAM.
We only need to know the trade-in values from Apple. Unluckily this information is not readily available. We need your input - copy paste serial number into Apple's trade-in calculator and help us out by giving the value:
1) Base MBP 16 2019 Intel. 16gb of RAM, 512 GB ssd. Getting trade-in value for this will help to determine the possible upgrade costs when buying base MBP 16 M1 Pro and trading-in in 1-2 years.
2) Base MBP 16 2019 Intel but with only upgraded RAM to 32GB with $400 at the time of purchase. This will help us to calculate how much of that additional $400 invested is going back to the user when trading-in the more specced version of the base.

The difference in trade-in value between the two isn't going to be massive, so it comes down to what you can afford, and what you think you *might* need. As I said upstream: 'Buy big, buy big now, buy big and be happy'...