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
- Touchscreen: 14.4” PixelSense™ Flow DisplayFootnote3
- Resolution: 2400 x 1600 (200 PPI)
- Refresh rate: up to 120Hz
- Aspect ratio: 3:2
- Contrast ratio: 1500:1
- Color profile: sRGB and Vivid
- Individually color-calibrated display
- VESA DisplayHDR 400 certified
- Dolby Vision IQFootnote®11 support
- Touch: 10-point multi-touch
- CorningFootnote® GorillaFootnote® Glass 5 display
- 16″ WQXGA (2560 x 1600) IPS, 16:10, 240Hz, 5ms / 3ms response time with OD, 100% sRGB, 500 nits, up-to VESA DisplayHDR™ 400 certified, Dolby Vision®, NVIDIA® G-SYNC®, TÜV Rheinland® certified: hardware low blue light and high gaming performance, X-Rite calibration
- 16″ WQXGA (2560 x 1600) IPS, 16:10, (165Hz, 5ms / 3ms response time with OD, 100% sRGB, 350 nits, Dolby Vision®, G-SYNC®, TÜV Rheinland® certified: hardware low blue light and high gaming performance, X-Rite calibration
MacBook Pro
- 14.2-inch (diagonal) Liquid Retina XDR display;1 3024-by-1964 native resolution at 254 pixels per inch
- XDR (Extreme Dynamic Range)
- 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio
- XDR brightness: 1000 nits sustained full-screen, 1600 nits peak2 (HDR content only)
- SDR brightness: 600 nits
- Color
- 1 billion colors
- Wide color (P3)
- True Tone technology
- Refresh rates
- ProMotion technology for adaptive refresh rates up to 120Hz
- Fixed refresh rates: 47.95Hz, 48.00Hz, 50.00Hz, 59.94Hz, 60.00Hz
Apple doesn't has G Sync, limited to 120 Hz, no touch, no x rite calibration.
And Apple has ProMotion. They don’t need G Sync. 120HZ is plenty, and Apple’s pixel density and resolution are substantially higher. Touch interaction doesn’t really have anything to do with display quality, and is needless on a laptop with a great trackpad. And these aren’t the only examples either, my statement stands, PC manufacturers are making expensive PCs with lower quality displays…
So, basically, "I'm going to cherry-pick that Apple's better specs are the important ones and the worse ones aren't important, and summarize that as 'others' are lower-quality'". Gotcha.
On one hand: it could still be that Apple chose the important specs for most people. However, I remember how halving the speed on the base SSD of the M2 air/pro “did not matter in real-life use”, but before and after that the “ssd speed matters”. Let alone the memory bandwidth spec suddenly matters, while having only 8GB is less important (??). So yes, I agree, lots of cherry picking.
Yes, of course. But to argue that 1) an 38% lower refresh rate "is plenty", that 2) a 27% denser PPI is "substantially higher", and that ultimately, these are examples of "lower quality" is just wild.
Apple's display choices are quite good. Heck, I'm typing this on the 14-inch mini-LED display, and it's striking, especially with HDR. But at this point, in 2024, Microsoft's and Lenovo's, at similar price points, aren't "lower quality".
(I don't know why we're suddenly arguing displays on page 83. This is a thread over whether 8 GiB, in 2024, is an acceptable config in a $1,599 configuration.)
The memory bandwidth was a headline spec to brag about... until they decided maybe it wasn't so important after all, and dropped it down with a lot of the M3 series.
This has happened because it's the heart of the flaw in the argument of the "we don't need more than 8GB" crowd.
To sum up, they seem to think:
-We need a faster processor than is essential for average tasks.
-We need a more powerful GPU than most people will utilise.
-We need a higher resolution than the average person can even discern at regular distance.
-We need premium materials like aluminium even though it doesn't exactly alter the function of the device.
Meanwhile, we don't need:
-High refresh rate screens.
-More memory.
-More storage.
-More ports.
All the while, in 2021/2022 we needed super high memory bandwidth. Now we possibly don't. For a few years we didn't need good keyboards... but now we do. At one point the average person only needed a single port...! but that's also changed again, mercifully.
Essentially we need/don't need whatever Apple tell us we need/don't need, and it isn't for us to question the true faith. 👼 🍎
I do look forward to the day when the "8GB is enough" crowd start spending their afternoons defending Apple's decision to increase RAM sizes due to the coming utilisation of locally run LLM's. "It had to be done- the unforeseeable situation this week is entirely different to the situation last week. This week and last week cannot be compared." 🙄
Apple's always right, eh? Even when it's wrong for a while and changes its mind.
To quoteApple Tennyson:
"Theirs not to reason why,. Theirs but to do and die."
Apple's always right, eh? Even when it's wrong for a while and changes its mind.
To quote
"Theirs not to reason why,. Theirs but to do and die."
This is a straw man of my position at the very least. I think people should have high DPI displays on their Macs, since this is one of the most impactful specs when it comes to display image quality. High refresh rate isn’t a bad thing, but only really makes a difference for gaming, where display resolution will make an impact on everything you do on the computer and the perceived quality of the image when you’re browsing through your photos, photo editing, etc. If we were to believe your argument about “We need a higher resolution than the average person can even discern at regular distance”, then we wouldn’t need 4K or 2K either, these laptops should just use 1080P displays (some fairly expensive PCs still do use 1080P displays, btw). But since the display quality is the same on all of the MacBook Pro models, I’m glad that it’s a higher quality display, and not just a 2K display that the MacBook Air beats in basically every way except refresh rate…
And I never argued we needed high storage bandwidth, that’s another artificial scandal drummed up by clickbait content creators. The current ones have plenty of storage bandwidth. And I never said we didn’t need good keyboards either, that’s another straw man. And the average person probably does only need one port, but that doesn’t mean that every Mac model should be reduced to one port. That’s one of the benefits of the MacBook Pro for those who want more ports, the base spec MacBook Pro offers that…
You’re not going to convince me that Apple shouldn’t provide a cheaper option with less RAM for base spec users. This option brings down the price of entry for those who don’t need excessive amounts of RAM. And I also don’t believe that Apple is “price gouging” or that Apple should offer configurations cheaper than what they deem profitable enough to justify its existence as a product. Apple knows much better what they need to charge to make their product profitable than what I do with zero hard information on what costs are involved, etc. This is futile to argue over. If you are upset about the base spec, don’t buy it. Don’t buy a Mac for all I care, just move over to Windows. But going on and on about this on an Apple fan forum where none of us members can “fix” your grievances (and where many of us don’t share them either) is tiring and pointless…
Another straw man. I have never once argued that Apple is always right, I just don’t agree that Apple is supposedly wrong in this situation. There’s a very big difference, and by now you should know that, because people have already said they have other complaints about Apple. They just don’t believe this is the big issue you make it out to be. So maybe stop with the straw man arguments that everyone who disagrees with you just thinks that Apple is always right…
Can you provide some conclusive proof to back up this theory of yours, or agree never to say it again, please?
Just look at the website, the base spec 14” MacBook Pro is quite a bit cheaper now than it was in 2021 and 2022. Hence, “it brings the cost of entry down”.
Also, you seem to argue that resolution isn’t as important because it’s “not perceivable to many people” but the refresh rate is a major advantage over Apple’s display, this is true depending on your perspective and needs. If you really can’t perceive the difference between the two, or don’t care about that difference in resolution, then you may find the PCs display a better fit for you, and a great value. What you don’t realize is that you just made the exact same argument I am making, only about something else that seems to not be as much of a priority to you…
You say that the difference in display resolution isn’t perceivable to many people, and even if/when it is, is often not an important enough improvement for many people’s use case.
I say that the difference between 8GB and 16GB of RAM isn’t perceivable to many people (who don’t overload their 8GB RAM machine in the first place), and even if/when it is, is often not an important enough improvement for many people’s use case.
You say that higher refresh rate is a plus that factors into the overall display value and quality.
I say that higher speed Unified Memory is a plus that factors into the overall RAM value and quality.
At the end of the day, different people have different preferences in the computer specs they need/want. For some, one spec makes a bigger difference for their use case than for another. This is why this is pointless. What’s better or worse is largely subjective and depends heavily on the person’s use case. This is why I don’t argue against the existence of lower resolution displays on PCs, because everything has pros and cons, and some people’s pros are other people’s cons, and some cons are other people’s pros. Everyone is different, and has different needs/preferences.
Have another go. Take your time and think it through again. How do you prove it's the RAM that provided the supposed "price reduction" as opposed to the removal of a port? Or the removal of a fan? Or a substantially less capable SOC? How can you even "prove" it played a part?
I didn’t say it did. Another straw man. I said that the new cheaper MacBook Pro with less RAM entry model offers a lower cost of entry. And I find it hard to believe that RAM wouldn’t have a part at all in that price reduction. Most on your side of the argument have said it’s about a $30 difference. This is, of course, all speculation on that side of the argument’s part, because we don’t know what kind of a price difference it makes because we lack hard numbers. I’m simply pointing out the fact that the new base spec model offers a cheaper point of entry for the 14” MacBook Pro, and upping the base RAM spec would likely lead to a bit of a price hike if history is our guide.
And again, this is a pointless debate. None of us here can “fix” your grievance, and you aren’t changing my mind. These are largely subjective things based on user preferences and needs which differ by individual. Different people have different wants and needs out of their computer, and place value on different specs and are willing to pay differing prices for them.
You said: "Hence, “it brings the cost of entry down”." You literally said it. I quoted it. Look above. What a preposterous thing to say!
I said the new base model brings the cost of entry down. That’s what I was referring to by “it”. I was talking about the new cheaper base model. The new base spec model is the “cheaper option” that I was referring to.
Choosing prices is what brings prices of entry down. They could sell a $1,599 MBP with 12, 16, even 24 GiB RAM if they wanted to.
And $1,599 is not down from $1,299.
It’s down from $2000. I’m talking about the 14” MacBook Pro.
If only there were another MacBook Pro in 2021-22.
And the 13” MacBook Pro of that time didn’t offer much beyond what the MacBook Air offered. It had a fan, and Touch Bar, but the other specs were nearly identical to the MacBook Air. Even the display resolution was exactly the same. Back then, it wasn’t differentiated enough from the MacBook Air. You want one of my complaints about Apple, well there’s one of them. The new base spec MacBook Pro has several advantages over the MacBook Air such as more ports, better display, still a fan, no Touch Bar because lots of people didn’t like it and favored full-sized function keys instead, and a slightly larger display as well.
The M2 MacBook Air offers just about everything the old 13” MacBook Pro offered, plus it has MagSafe as well. And people can still buy a 13” MacBook Pro if they want to.
Again, this debate is basically pointless because these things are subjective. Individuals will decide whether or not a Mac at x price with x RAM is a good value for them. To you, it may not be, but to many others, it is. Value offered by a product is pretty dependent on the individual making that assessment and their wants and needs…
Y'all should also spare a thought for those overseas. Apple doesn't just sell these in a vacuum inside the US. In my market the base MacBook Pro is the equivalent of $2,100 USD. For a MacBook Air in drag with just enough RAM to run the OS and open an email without using swap. Or $2,350 USD with 16GB. Suddenly I bet that doesn't seem such good value to anyone...
Yeah, but also a $300 price increase. Which is fine per se, but then you end up with a $1,599 device that has 8 GiB RAM like it's 2012.
It's no longer available as new. And, you're right, it wasn't a very compelling product.