RAM Limits ME

[dgdosen]

I wonder how long it'll take for something like a Raspberry Pi to ship with 8GB of memory and 256GB of storage... for < $100.

Whats the bigger likelihood, RAM manufacturers minimal offering > 8GB or SSD manufacturers minimal offering > 25GB?

 

[JuicyGoomba]

I wonder how long it'll take for something like a Raspberry Pi to ship with 8GB of memory and 256GB of storage... for < $100.

Whats the bigger likelihood, RAM manufacturers minimal offering > 8GB or SSD manufacturers minimal offering > 25GB?

Not really relevant for the Rasp, since the storage is whatever you want it to be. It's currently $80 for an 8GB RAM Pi 5, and SSDs are dirt cheap now.

The only reason Apple can get away with scamming their customers into believing that AS is some magic voodoo chip is down to most consumers not having a clue that they're using swap memory.

So many are quick to simply slam intel Macs for being worse with the same RAM, when in reality AS is only performing better due to everything being embedded on the chip and it's immediate vicinity. It's non upgradeable, soldered, planned obsolescence chip.

When you have everything so close, the latency for swap memory is extremely low. Unless you're doing something demanding, which someone using an 8GB Air is not, then you won't ever notice it. Swap memory is more than capable for quick iMovie edits while scrolling Insta and watching YouTube at the same time.

The reason any normal PC or non AS Mac suffer when they use swap memory is due to how far everything is from the CPU. There's a lot more latency and the storage is more variable too. BUT.... You can literally upgrade your 8GB of RAM in a PC to 32GB for like $40-50 these days. You'll never need to use swap. You somehow utilise that 32GB, and if you were smart by getting 2x 16GB sticks... you simply add another 32GB for $40-50.

I know a lot of people who've upgraded or bought new PCs lately that add 64GB of RAM for no reason other than it costs so little they don't care if all they actually need is 16GB. I wish we lived in a world where Apple weren't the way they are, but they know that many professionals (even if they don't strictly need MacOS) will continue to stump up the $$$ for a measly extra 8GB or 24GB of RAM.

I completely understand that most people don't want to spend the small amount of time needed to learn and understand hardware, and subsequently software especially if that involves Windows and Linux. I just wish that for a single generation people would stop throwing money at Apple based on the false pretence of "futureproofing" with more RAM. Let their bank balance hurt and they might stop being horrible.

 

[thebart]

. I just wish that for a single generation people would stop throwing money at Apple based on the false pretence of "futureproofing" with more RAM. Let their bank balance hurt and they might stop being horrible.

I'm doing my small part by buying it on the used market. Yes, that does help keep the resale value up and Apple benefits indirectly, but what's you gonna do

 

[Populus]

Going back to the topic about RAM, I think I’ve previously talked about it on the forum, but let me share my experience here. I’m not gonna disclose my usage in detail because on this comparison the workflow is pretty much the same: different apps including office, media players, Spotify, Safari with lots of tabs (sometimes more than 50), and probably a second Safari window with private browsing, occasionally apps like Handbrake, and sometimes audio apps like Audacity. I also play using GeForce Now, and maybe I’m missing something else.

My current old 2014 Haswell Mac mini has 8GB of RAM, and it behaves pretty well on the latest Monterey version. Really, the RAM pressure rarely hits the yellow zone.

However, during this years I’ve been able to test both late Intel (2017) and early Apple Silicon (2020) Macs, both of them with 8GB, and with the same workflow they quickly hit the yellow zone. On the 2017 Intel MacBook Pro it took more time, but with the M1 MacBook Air it got to the yellow zone really fast with the same use, and it wasn’t rare to hit the red compression zone. As you can guess, while the SWAP on my old Haswell is not noticeable, on Apple Silicon Macs it is almost guaranteed, and not small amounts. Fortunately the faster storage makes it unnoticeable but the SSD health would worry me.

I can understand that the Unified Memory on Apple Silicon makes it more useful for both the CPU, the GPU and maybe even the neural engine. But that means that more memory is actively being used.

I’d say my use case it’s not a very RAM intensive use, but I like to future-proof as I tend to keep my devices a long long time and maybe my needs change. And, based on my experience, newer machines tend to use more RAM. That’s why my next Mac is going to have between 24 and 32GB of RAM, although I think 24GB will be more than enough.

 

[Basic75]

When you have everything so close, the latency for swap memory is extremely low.

Are there any benchmarks that show how the flash controller being part of the SoC improves SSD access latency by a remotely noteworthy amount?

 

[ChrisA]

So far all the folks who "need more RAM" can only know they do if they measure the swap usage. I claim that if you need a special tool to measure the effect of small RAM size then you don't need more RAM.

I'd be convinced more is needed by hearing stories where someone's boss asked for some kind of analysis and you had to tell him "I can't do that in a timely manner without buying a new computer. Mine does not have enough RAM"

That said, I have heard of one real use case where the project was scientific computing, a simulation. The person said that while he could technically use much less RAM, the effort to learn how to do that was more painful than the cost of more RAM. In other words, he'd rather pay Apple a few thousand dollars than modify his algorithm. If you are running your own software, many times you can simplify the algorithm at the expense of more RAM usage.

I'd also be interested in hearing stories where someone with an 8GB Mac was able to significantly reduce the wall-clock time to do a job by getting a Mac with more RAM. For example, "It used to take me four hours to prepare this presentation but now with more RAM I am finished in two hours."

 

[pshufd]

So far all the folks who "need more RAM" can only know they do if they measure the swap usage. I claim that if you need a special tool to measure the effect of small RAM size then you don't need more RAM.

I'd be convinced more is needed by hearing stories where someone's boss asked for some kind of analysis and you had to tell him "I can't do that in a timely manner without buying a new computer. Mine does not have enough RAM"

That said, I have heard of one real use case where the project was scientific computing, a simulation. The person said that while he could technically use much less RAM, the effort to learn how to do that was more painful than the cost of more RAM. In other words, he'd rather pay Apple a few thousand dollars than modify his algorithm. If you are running your own software, many times you can simplify the algorithm at the expense of more RAM usage.

I'd also be interested in hearing stories where someone with an 8GB Mac was able to significantly reduce the wall-clock time to do a job by getting a Mac with more RAM. For example, "It used to take me four hours to prepare this presentation but now with more RAM I am finished in two hours."

Our son runs an oncogenomics development workload and he was running it on a 2015 MacBook Pro 15 from his office and my 2014 MacBook Pro 15 which he's borrowed for the past several years. He was using both of them for work. He works in a macOS/Windows/Linux environment and was running virtual machines. The 2015 had a swollen battery problem so they asked him what he wanted and he went with 32 GB of RAM. He's still using the 2014 MacBook Pro so I assume that he runs Windows and Linux on that one.

My current setup is an M1 Max Studio + the 2015 iMac with 32 GB of RAM. The iMac only uses about 12 GB of RAM with a bunch of RAM used for cache but the whole computer was only $200 so I don't really care. I'm looking to upgrade to a 2019 or 2020 but I'm not in a hurry.