The ONLY problem with Macs are price SSD/RAM

[TechnoMonk]

When I started reading your post this is what I thought of, then read it and laughed. Good old Oz tax, still in effect today as good as ever. I remember writing to Adobe about this and getting rubbish as an answer. They had the last laugh though when they introduced software as a service to the world. Look where we are now. Honestly surprised a 8tb kit is $4000 and not $499/month….. until you hand it back. Don’t laugh, it’s coming. Then we’ll be here in this forum going, remember when ssd upgrades were $4k once off… those were the days. Ha!

I rather pay cloud subscription, than pay subscription for my own hardware.

 

[TechnoMonk]

That is the question at the heart of this.

When you drop $1-2k on a laptop, it's easy to think that 'just a couple hundred more' for more RAM or storage will translate to a longer life for the device. This isn't true a lot of the time, but because we can't upgrade specs after buying, there's a psychology which makes us think, for example that for just $200 extra on my $1k+ laptop I can get 24GB vs 16GB which will mean I get a year or two more before I need to upgrade.

This may or may not be true, but Apple structures the upgrades such as $200 more gets you 24GB, but then 256GB looks small, so $200 more gets you 512GB SSD, but then $200 more gets you and M4 Pro, or a MacBook Pro or an M4Max, etc... It never ends!!

For me it’s simple, anything that makes me money and helps my business, I get it, with maxed out RAM as needed. I paid 4 K for M1 MBP with 64 GB RAM, maxed out CPU/GPU and 1 TB storage. My work station with that kind of GPU memory will cost me 10-20 K easily. For generic use, I don’t see the need for more than base model.
Like you said there is no end for wanting to upgrade to higher capacity.

 

[TechnoMonk]

Yup. I need extra RAM to run LLMs locally. They run fine, if somewhat slower, with a less powerful CPU/GPU. But the ones I want to use won’t run at all with <64GB. It’s not cool to also pay for the CPU upgrade just to get the RAM I need.

That’s true for all CPU/GPU. Processors should have enough bandwidth and bus lanes to support RAM. Try building a work station with 256 GB or even 128 GB with a basic CPU.

 

[splitpea]

That’s true for all CPU/GPU. Processors should have enough bandwidth and bus lanes to support RAM. Try building a work station with 256 GB or even 128 GB with a basic CPU.

And yet. The M4 Pro is available in the Mac Mini with 64GB. So its unavailability in the MBP with 64GB doesn't sound to me like a technical limitation.

 

[TechnoMonk]

And yet. The M4 Pro is available in the Mac Mini with 64GB. So its unavailability in the MBP with 64GB doesn't sound to me like a technical limitation.

By your logic the 4090 in my work station has 24 GB RAM but it maxes out at 16 GB on Linux/windows laptop. Same with Intel chips, they support higher memory on desktops, but lesser on laptops for same chipsets.

 

[theorist9]

That’s true for all CPU/GPU. Processors should have enough bandwidth and bus lanes to support RAM. Try building a work station with 256 GB or even 128 GB with a basic CPU.

It's actually not.

I effectively did just what you described. My 2019 i9 iMac has 128 GB RAM with just 8 CPU cores. And I need that 128 GB RAM purely for single-core operations (calculations in Mathematica).

Needing lots of RAM for single-core operations is not uncommon in scientific work.

Hell, even a 4-core 14000-series i3 can support 192 GB RAM:

Intel® Core™ i3 processor 14100 (12M Cache, up to 4.70 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Core™ i3 processor 14100 (12M Cache, up to 4.70 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

www.intel.com

So if you're someone who needs lots of RAM but not lots of cores, if you want to work in MacOS you need to significantly overbuy on the CPU.

Fortunately, things are improving. With the M1, you had to buy an Ultra if you needed 128 GB RAM. Now you can get that with the Max.

 

[vladi]

Decked out PC workstations are the same. Try going to Boxx.com, and configuring a Xeon workstation. If I choose the top CPU and RAM options, and add dual-RTX 6000 and a 4 TB SSD, it's $49,966. I could increase the price further by adding more GPUs and more SSDs.

Most Windows Workstation vendors are rip-offs for what they offer because most of them don't offer any kind of improved custom components such as custom motherboard or RAM sticks. You can make one yourself for less money but with better OEM products inside.

 

[TechnoMonk]

It's actually not.

I effectively did just what you described. My 2019 i9 iMac has 128 GB RAM with just 8 CPU cores. And I need that 128 GB RAM purely for single-core operations (calculations in Mathematica).

Hell, even a 4-core 14000-series i3 can support 192 GB RAM:

Intel® Core™ i3 processor 14100 (12M Cache, up to 4.70 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Core™ i3 processor 14100 (12M Cache, up to 4.70 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

www.intel.com

I never mentioned cores. A 8 core AMD processor can support 128 GB. But for me it’s useless with out good memory bandwidth. That’s advantage of building, you can use it for specific purpose but if it is not good for other users, there will be pitchforks.
Try finding a laptop with more memory on i3, most of them don’t support 64 GB, and max out at 32 GB. May be the latest models are better.

 

[theorist9]

I never mentioned cores. A 8 core AMD processor can support 128 GB. But for me it’s useless with out good memory bandwidth. That’s advantage of building, you can use it for specific purpose but if it is not good for other users, there will be pitchforks.
Try finding a laptop with more memory on i3, most of them don’t support 64 GB, and max out at 32 GB. May be the latest models are better.

True, you didn't specify core count, but still I think you're dodging what you said:

Try building a work station with 256 GB or even 128 GB with a basic CPU.

Since the i3 certainly qualifies as a basic CPU, and takes 192 GB RAM, your position that you can't build a 128 GB workstation with a "basic CPU" is incorrect. Let's settle that one statement before we move onto other issues.

 

[TechnoMonk]

True, you didn't specify core count, but still I think you're dodging what you said:

Since the i3 certainly qualifies as a basic CPU, your position that you can't build a 128 GB or 256 GB workstation with a "basic CPU" is incorrect. Let's settle that one statement before we move onto other issues.

Further, Boxx.com, a well-known builder of workstations, actually offers an i7 workstation with 192 GB RAM. The i7 is also a pretty basic CPU, since it's found in sub-$1k desktops

Sure but it will totally be a dud for me. Outside an edge case for single core mathametica. I don’t see many uses for building one. Splurging thousands of dollars.

 

[TechnoMonk]

It's actually not.

I effectively did just what you described. My 2019 i9 iMac has 128 GB RAM with just 8 CPU cores. And I need that 128 GB RAM purely for single-core operations (calculations in Mathematica).

Needing lots of RAM for single-core operations is not uncommon in scientific work.

Hell, even a 4-core 14000-series i3 can support 192 GB RAM:

Intel® Core™ i3 processor 14100 (12M Cache, up to 4.70 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Core™ i3 processor 14100 (12M Cache, up to 4.70 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

www.intel.com

So if you're someone who needs lots of RAM but not lots of cores, if you want to work in MacOS you need to significantly overbuy on the CPU.

Fortunately, things are improving. With the M1, you had to buy an Ultra if you needed 128 GB RAM. Now you can get that with the Max.

Ultra is likely to support more RAM than Max for a long time. M2 Ultra is only option if you want 192 GB. M2 Max supported 96 GB. M4 max is at 128 GB, and M4 ultra will probably be at 256 GB.

 

[theorist9]

Sure but it will totally be a dud for me. Outside an edge case for single core mathametica. I don’t see many uses for building one. Splurging thousands of dollars.

Right, but you weren't making the statement for you, you were making it generally ("That’s true for all CPU/GPU").

And it's not just a Mathematica edge case. There are many people who need a lot of RAM but don't need a lot of cores. As I mentioned, a lot of scientific calculations require high RAM and just a single core. And I'm sure there are many such use cases outside of the sciences.

 

[theorist9]

Ultra is likely to support more RAM than Max for a long time. M2 Ultra is only option if you want 192 GB. M2 Max supported 96 GB. M4 max is at 128 GB, and M4 ultra will probably be at 256 GB.

Yes, but not sure why thought you needed to tell me that, because this just falls into the category of "water is wet". Of course the Ultra is likely to continue to support more RAM than the Max.

As you know, the two gens of Ultra thus far have both been 2x Max, so in both cases the max RAM was likewise 2x Max. If they continue this, that should continue as well. If not, the Ultra will still have more, but the multiplier may be different.

 

[theorist9]

Most Windows Workstation vendors are rip-offs for what they offer because most of them don't offer any kind of improved custom components such as custom motherboard or RAM sticks. You can make one yourself for less money but with better OEM products inside.

But if you're buying a Mac, you're buing a prebuilt machine. So an apples-to-Apple comparison would be to a prebuild.

Having said that, show us what you've got! Send us a screeenshot of your build, showing what price you come up with for what's shown here. Be sure to at least meet the CPU, GPU's, RAM, and SSD, since those make up most of the cost. To meet what they offer, you'll also need at least a 1600W PS, a US-made case, and multiple drive bays and expansion slots. Genuinely curious to see how your build compares.

Also make sure you use legitmate vendors (e.g.: NewEgg yes, AliExpress or EBay no).