Surely you can find a different forum where such posts would be welcome, like "aspiring fiction writers"?
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.
Will 4GB be enough for next 3 years of OS X updates?
- Thread starter mattdocs12345
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Surely you can find a different forum where such posts would be welcome, like "aspiring fiction writers"?
Try looking in utilities, then running activity monitor and see what it tells you... seems pretty factual to me, or are we saying apple have yet another bug and the app is reporting fiction?
The OS needs around 7.5GB, the RAM is not upgradable and we are talking about $100.. its a no brainer, 8GB all day every day. will it work on 4GB, yeah, i don't recall anyone saying it wouldn't.
The OS needs around 7.5GB, the RAM is not upgradable and we are talking about $100.. its a no brainer, 8GB all day every day. will it work on 4GB, yeah, i don't recall anyone saying it wouldn't.
Try looking in utilities, then running activity monitor and see what it tells you... seems pretty factual to me, or are we saying apple have yet another bug and the app is reporting fiction?
The OS needs around 7.5GB, the RAM is not upgradable and we are talking about $100.. its a no brainer, 8GB all day every day. will it work on 4GB, yeah, i don't recall anyone saying it wouldn't.
The OS might use 7.5GB but that doesn't mean it needs it.
On my Mac with 4GB RAM I'm running Yosemite and a bunch of applications, some of them pretty heavy-duty, like XCode and Photoshop, and I'm not using any swap. How do you explain that, if the OS "needs" 7.5GB?
Groan, if you are unable to understand what RAM is or how it's used I'm not going to explain it to you as i don't wish to get into a forum spat.. More RAM will allow the OP to run more apps and it will also increase the performance while prolonging the useful life of the device.
No one knows what the next version or any version will require going forward, but what we do know if you can't upgrade post purchase.
No one knows what the next version or any version will require going forward, but what we do know if you can't upgrade post purchase.
Did you miss the part where I said I run XCode? Which implies that I'm a software developer. Which I am. Which means that I obviously know what RAM is and what it's used for, since software developers are the people who choose what to put in RAM. So no need to groan at me, thanks.
Of course if you have more RAM you can do stuff that requires more RAM [performantly]. That's a tautology.
As for how much RAM software will require going forward, the idea that "no one knows" is ridiculous. Of course we know. People and companies won't all of a sudden start writing a bunch of software that runs like crap on machines that are brand new today. Obviously.
Double groan, I know what Xcode is and no i didn't miss that or the PS comment... but thanks for repeating.
Just because someone is reporting to be an SD doesn't mean he knows anything about RAM or how to use it, but no doubt in the next post you will mention MRR and ARC or how in Cocoa you use autorelease pool blocks to reduce the memory requirements to impress.
You really know how much memory will be needed for the next releases of OS X. The same way you really knew the jump from 10.5 to 10.6 would double the requirements to 1GB, same way you knew that apple would jump the requirements from 1GB to 2GB for 10.7 and then you also knew apple would recommend 4GB for 10.10..
Maybe we can agree on something, it does no harm to have additional memory or that it could be considered a wise move to add it now as upgrading is not possible.
And that was my last post on the subject, I'm not playing forum tag or brag .
Just because someone is reporting to be an SD doesn't mean he knows anything about RAM or how to use it, but no doubt in the next post you will mention MRR and ARC or how in Cocoa you use autorelease pool blocks to reduce the memory requirements to impress.
You really know how much memory will be needed for the next releases of OS X. The same way you really knew the jump from 10.5 to 10.6 would double the requirements to 1GB, same way you knew that apple would jump the requirements from 1GB to 2GB for 10.7 and then you also knew apple would recommend 4GB for 10.10..
Maybe we can agree on something, it does no harm to have additional memory or that it could be considered a wise move to add it now as upgrading is not possible.
And that was my last post on the subject, I'm not playing forum tag or brag .
Here is the page for Yosemite:
https://www.apple.com/osx/how-to-upgrade/
It requires 2GB. Nothing on this page indicates a 4GB recommendation.
Since 2GB have been good enough for the past 4 years, and are still good enough, what earthly reason do you have to believe that 4GB won't be enough for a similar amount of time?
This is a ridiculous justification that could be used to recommend almost any upgrade, regardless of what the user actually needs. Why not also tell the OP to get the i7 upgrade because that can't be upgraded later either? Do you also have the biggest possible engine and all the factory options for your car because those don't hurt and you can't upgrade later? etc.
Apple's in the business of selling us their newest stuff. It's expensive too. No surprises here, get out your wallet.
I'd just go with 8GB and be done with it. You'll get peace-of-mind, a snappier computer and one that will see you to three years and beyond.
This is the way I look at it, what will you use the machine for? Not what are you going to use it for when you get it, what will you use it for 2, 3, 4 years? You probably don't know yet. For instance, when I got my 13" 2010 MBP I didn't know I was going to be making YouTube videos so I just got the baseline model. The following year I sold that machine and got a 2011 15" for more speed.
Point being here, its better to get too good of a machine (especially now that nothing is upgradeable) then to get one that will not be enough. Whats nice is these newer machines have PCIe based SSDs meaning that when it needs to page to the disk, its going to be pretty fast unlike back when we had spinning disks.
If you see yourself only needed to email, browse, sync devices, manage content, etc, I'd stick to the 4GB as it will probably be plenty for you and OS X will run without a problem for quite a while. I have yet to hear that while doing basic tasks under OS X that 4GB was not enough. However, if you even think that you might be doing something more intensive on the machine in the near future then get the 8GB of RAM.
To put everything into perspective, my Mac Pro that I am on right now has 8GB of RAM installed (I usually have 16GB but the DIMMs had to go back to OWC since one was dead). Activity Monitor show that all 8GB is being held for the OS at this time, however after calculating all the processes that are actually in RAM right now, less then 1GB is being used. I have Safari open with only this post being typed, I have iTunes open in full screen mode playing music through my headphones, I have SMCFanControl bumping up the fans, I have iStats Menus running and Activity Monitor running. All together, they are using less then 1GB of RAM. I was exporting a video last night however and Final Cut took quite a bit of the RAM for itself (about 5GB).
EDIT: Also consider going refurbished. Apple's refurbished products are great; I have owned 2 refurbished iPads and 2 refurbished Macs, all of which looked new, worked like new, and came with the same warranty, but with hundreds of dollars off. Feel free to take a look around Apple's Refurbished page. They have some great machines on there.
Point being here, its better to get too good of a machine (especially now that nothing is upgradeable) then to get one that will not be enough. Whats nice is these newer machines have PCIe based SSDs meaning that when it needs to page to the disk, its going to be pretty fast unlike back when we had spinning disks.
If you see yourself only needed to email, browse, sync devices, manage content, etc, I'd stick to the 4GB as it will probably be plenty for you and OS X will run without a problem for quite a while. I have yet to hear that while doing basic tasks under OS X that 4GB was not enough. However, if you even think that you might be doing something more intensive on the machine in the near future then get the 8GB of RAM.
To put everything into perspective, my Mac Pro that I am on right now has 8GB of RAM installed (I usually have 16GB but the DIMMs had to go back to OWC since one was dead). Activity Monitor show that all 8GB is being held for the OS at this time, however after calculating all the processes that are actually in RAM right now, less then 1GB is being used. I have Safari open with only this post being typed, I have iTunes open in full screen mode playing music through my headphones, I have SMCFanControl bumping up the fans, I have iStats Menus running and Activity Monitor running. All together, they are using less then 1GB of RAM. I was exporting a video last night however and Final Cut took quite a bit of the RAM for itself (about 5GB).
EDIT: Also consider going refurbished. Apple's refurbished products are great; I have owned 2 refurbished iPads and 2 refurbished Macs, all of which looked new, worked like new, and came with the same warranty, but with hundreds of dollars off. Feel free to take a look around Apple's Refurbished page. They have some great machines on there.
Last edited:
The key is usage.
If you are very light user, using Macs primarily for browsing with just a handful of tabs or windows open, 4GB can provide very good experience.
But if you tend to run more resource intensive apps, such as photo management apps with thousands or more photos and running multiple productivity suites at once, your Mac will quickly start paging out.
Thanks to flash storage, paging out isn't necessarily detrimental to performance (on hard disk, paging out translates to beach balls). But due to limited write cycles on flash storage (3,000 to 5,000 writes per cell), it is something best avoided.
The bottom line is, for someone like my mom (mostly browser) or my professor brother-in-law (mostly browser, Excel, or Word), I wouldn't hesitate to recommend 4GB. But for anyone else planning on using the Mac for more than a couple of years, $100 for 8GB RAM upgrade seems money well spent.
If you are very light user, using Macs primarily for browsing with just a handful of tabs or windows open, 4GB can provide very good experience.
But if you tend to run more resource intensive apps, such as photo management apps with thousands or more photos and running multiple productivity suites at once, your Mac will quickly start paging out.
Thanks to flash storage, paging out isn't necessarily detrimental to performance (on hard disk, paging out translates to beach balls). But due to limited write cycles on flash storage (3,000 to 5,000 writes per cell), it is something best avoided.
The bottom line is, for someone like my mom (mostly browser) or my professor brother-in-law (mostly browser, Excel, or Word), I wouldn't hesitate to recommend 4GB. But for anyone else planning on using the Mac for more than a couple of years, $100 for 8GB RAM upgrade seems money well spent.
yup 4 gb should be fine for a while
Usage is the key. If what you really need is just web browsing and some multimedia then you should be fine on 4 gb for a long time.
If you were doing to be video editing or using some virtual machines then 8 gb.
Usage is the key. If what you really need is just web browsing and some multimedia then you should be fine on 4 gb for a long time.
If you were doing to be video editing or using some virtual machines then 8 gb.
Yeah that's truely what I am gonna use this for. But at the same time I really dont want a slow machine because all of the sudden some new OSX requires 4GB of RAM min but in reality needs more like 5GB...
Nonsense
----------
For your use even 2gb are fine and 4gb will not be outdated in the forseeable future.
I am a bit skeptical myself. I have found that 3 years of software crap that one piles on is what slows down a computer. A good audit and backup, and a new fresh install will fix most slow computer woes.
2 GB fine? Nonsense. 4 GB is the absolute minimum Yosemite users can run on without resorting to virtual memory doing basic tasks. Even with 4 GB I'd recommend keeping open tabs and programs at a minimum.
I don't know when this "foreseeable future" ends, but two years is all it may take to make 4 GB the new 2 GB.
Have you tried using Yosemite on a Mac with 2GB RAM? There are a bunch of people in these forums who posted that it works fine.
The
store (certified retailer) around the corner here still has the 2gb mba on display and they run all apps perfectly fine. In fact there is no noticable speed difference to my rmbp with 8gb. You statement is not connected to any real world user experience, but the interpretation of performance monitoring software.
Double groan, I know what Xcode is and no i didn't miss that or the PS comment... but thanks for repeating.
Just because someone is reporting to be an SD doesn't mean he knows anything about RAM or how to use it, but no doubt in the next post you will mention MRR and ARC or how in Cocoa you use autorelease pool blocks to reduce the memory requirements to impress.
You really know how much memory will be needed for the next releases of OS X. The same way you really knew the jump from 10.5 to 10.6 would double the requirements to 1GB, same way you knew that apple would jump the requirements from 1GB to 2GB for 10.7 and then you also knew apple would recommend 4GB for 10.10..
Maybe we can agree on something, it does no harm to have additional memory or that it could be considered a wise move to add it now as upgrading is not possible.
And that was my last post on the subject, I'm not playing forum tag or brag .
What are you even going on about?
4GB is more than enough for most users. 8GB is nicer, sure, but if someone's on a tight budget, then it's not that big of a deal.
Between RAM compression, SSD fast swap-time, and the fact that Apple sells machines with 4GB RAM, it's clear that 4GB will last someone just fine. Even as a programmer who sometimes runs VMs, I get by with 4GB just fine. Memory pressure stays in the green.
Now, specifically for OP, I recommend if you have the money, then spend the best you can on your laptop. But if you can't, then it's fine, go 4GB. It's not a deal breaker.
Though, between RAM and SSD, I would upgrade your SSD first. That will make the most usable and visible difference.
Every time I've ever bought a phone or a computer and skimped on something that can't be upgraded, 6 months or a year down the road I've wished I could just spend that $100 or whatever to upgrade it.
You're already skimping by deciding you're going to use one computer for four years. Just max out the RAM now.
You're already skimping by deciding you're going to use one computer for four years. Just max out the RAM now.
What computer(s) and phone do you have now? Did you get every possible upgrade for all of them?
I've not got an Air, but a Macbook Pro with 4gb of RAM. It's definitely slowed down with Yosemite. I'm not even running anything memory intensive. So I wouldn't invest in an Air with 4GB of RAM. Wait until the new Airs come out. Doesn't seem to be a good time to buy. Unless you're desperate, in which case go for one with 8GB.
No, but then again, I'm not going to go 4 years between upgrades. Last iPhone I had was 32GB and I was always trying to manage the space -- and next time I just went with the 64 (highest available on the 5S). The Macbook Air I had before had a 2GB RAM and a 64GB SSD which was just way too small, so I went with the 4GB and 256 this time. And if I was really anticipating going FOUR YEARS with it? I'd have definitely sprung for 8 gigs of ram and a 512 gig drive, no question. But I'm probably a year or less from upgrading both.
So much wrong with that, its hard to know where to start...
Don't buy ram, use swap on SSD :
So you understand the program has to write data to a device (this is not an SLC or EFD device, its a 20nm MLC device) that is in order of magnitudes slower than DDR RAM? Besides having a slower response time to read and write requests for data (lets say 500MB/s for 20nm MLC vs 12.5GB/s for DDR3 1600), the method in which SSDs are written to imposes a significant time penalty vs RAM. An SSD cannot simply overwrite a single bit of memory in virtual storage, it has to write the entire block. So to write one bit (thats correct a single BIT), the SSD must Copy everything from the block where that bit resides into a memory buffer, Change the bit in the buffer Write the entire block back to the Flash memory...oh and then it needs to perform an error check cycle against the block. While the sentiment of what you are saying when taken in the context of traditional spinning platters is kinda correct, but it's no where near the performance of RAM.
The memory compression function runs off a dictionary base WKdm algorithm that is multithread - the idea is to reduce impact on the CPU load, but the fact is you lose cycles to the compression/uncompression routines. that said, I've not seen any known issues around performance.
Following your logic, the fact apple don't sell machine (macs) with 2GB speaks volumes then does it not? Things move forward. Its 2 years since apple made the jump from 2GB to 4GB as the base memory.
Does a mac with 4GB work, yes.
So you're not running anything memory intensive, and to solve the slowness you're recommending extra memory?
How does that make any sense?
If my car's transmission broke, would you tell me to fix it by putting more gas in the tank?
----------
Calm down guy. Nobody said SSD was exactly as fast as RAM.
It is fast enough, however, that a machine that's doing some swapping is still pretty usable.
So Josh is correct, if you have to choose between more RAM and more SSD, then the latter is probably the better choice for most people. If you have a bigger SSD you can store more data on it like songs and photos and whatnot. The only thing more RAM is good for is to increase performance somewhat if you're doing stuff that requires a lot of memory, which doesn't happen to most people very often.