Not a misprint. The M3 Pro uses 3x 6GB RAM chips for that configuration.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
8GB RAM in M3 MacBook Pro Proves the Bottleneck in Real-World Tests
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple once pushed the computer industry forward, but decisions like this keep them languishing in the past. It really does seem that Apple enjoys punishing their customers and themselves. Making 16GB RAM standard would probably cost them about $15/unit, their customers would be thrilled, and they'd be rockstars for finally doing it. Meanwhile they decided they'd rather take a humiliating beating from Mac bloggers, p*ss off early adopters, and anger their long-time customers -- all to save 1% on a $1500 sale.
If 8GB of RAM is fine, get the $799 MacBook Air M1. The fact that this machine costs twice as much is inexcusable.
There is no workload in which 8GB of RAM is acceptable but the M1 isn't.
Last edited:
Actually they partially are. They push the base models into the retail chains where often you can't even get an upgraded model.
Sure, but all RAM variants of the base M3 have the same memory bandwidth so it doesn’t make a difference if the package has 8GB or 24GB.
It's no different from all other corporations. Apple's primary concern is its shareholders.
Tim Crook. All this nickeling and diming started with him and seems to get worst every year.
Put this in preceptive, I can do 99% of what I do on my laptop on iphone 14 pro, does it have 16gb of ram. NO does it need 16gb of ram to be functional, NO.. 90% of people over buy ram and never use it.
That's not how it works...
You can turn off a CPU or GPU core that doesn't work. If the memory or storage controllers are broken then you just can't use that chip.
Cant believe i scrolled down so far to find the right comment.
I have the pro with 8gb of ram, and i dont need more, i like the nice display, i like the enough for me speed, and all that with 8GB.
Lets just say apple makes the 16gb the base model, now you got yourself a base model, whats to stop apple from just making the base model cost $1799 instead of 1599.
A lot of people would not want the pro now, but would go with the cheaper air that is not as nice as the pro.
Give the people the option to get whatever they want to get with their money. Or go get yourself a chromebook.
Because they get away with it. Not only do people buy it, but countless others defend it and basically do a PR campaign for them.
Let’s be real: they won’t do that until 16 GB of RAM renders the machine barely usable (like 8 now) so they can upsell you on 32 GB for an extra $300.
Apple needs to stop lying to itself and to consumers.
Tim Crooks <-- like what you did there. Is a financial guy, he was CFO when Steve was still around.. All he cares about is $$$$$$$$$$ this is clear as you see senior designers leave the company.
Not just that, the 8GB machines will be replaced earlier! $$$
Right. It feels like a decision made for artificial diversification of the lineup. Packaging costs are probably higher for unified memory, but 8 vs 16 GB would still be the same number of chips. It isn’t like stepping up above the M3 where memory chip count changes for more bandwidth.
Why are they testing these kind of software on this machine?
If you even know the names of these software and what they do, then you also know this is not the machine to do that work with.
This is clearly a machine aimed squarely at students, writers, office workers, etc. So test it with Chrome, Page, Excel, Keynote (or the M$ equivalents), Zoom, playing Youtube/Netflix, etc.
Not everyone is a YouTube content creator.
on the mid tier max yes, on the top end it has 4 channels totaling 128gb of memory
Because it is a MacBook PRO that costs $1600. It should be able to run those applications without much of an issue.
Putting 8GB in a relatively inexpensive MacBook Air is alright.
It is ludicrous to pay 1600 bucks for a "pro" laptop and not be able to do much with it.
I really admire your relentless defense of the 8GB model, but I have to say, the price (or cost) isn’t a separate issue – it's the main issue. Why not start at 16 or 32 then? Like I said before, Apple could flip it and start with 16 or 32GB. For users who don't need that much memory, they could choose to 'reduce' it. Oh, but sorry, this game might be tough to play because, in Apple's world, 8GB is actually bigger than a WinPC's 16GB – I mean, in terms of price.
BUT...BUT...marketing people from Apple and some fanboys claim that physics work differently with Apple RAM because reasons! Copium anyone?
No.
1. Keep starting price at $1599, upgrade all 8 GB to 16 GB: Apple loses potential profit of $185/unit.
2. Raise starting price to $1799, remove 8 GB models: Apple loses potential sale due to higher starting price.
Apple has done the market research and knows that starting at 8 GB is the sweet spot. Moving in either direction leads to loss of potential revenue.
I fault Apple for not showing the customers the truth about 8 Gig but, if you want an upgraded model, order it and don't waste your time at retail chains.
8 Apples = 16 oranges