I’m looking to get an used Macbook (doesn’t matter Air or Pro). I usually have hundreds of tabs open as well as several excel spreadsheets - which my 2015 MBP has been handling - but I want a faster processor. I’m unsure how the processor would affect the RAM usable. Would the 8gb M1 MBP be able to handle it, or should I just get the 16gb Intel version?
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.
16gb Intel vs 8gb M1?
- Thread starter lionsatdoor
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would absolutely not get an intel mac nowadays, the general performance difference and running cooler is just too big, 8gb might be enough, but the tabs might cause a fair bit of swapping, but it'll probably still perform 'ok' ( and overall better than intel ), for that that kind of usage. But I would definitely try and stretch to finding one with a ram upgrade.
Can you tell me which Excel documents you have open and what tabs and what browser? I could test it out on MacBook Air m1 8gb.
I’d suggest to get M1 with 16gb, especially you plan to have hundreds of tabs open. Can’t imagine this is real use case though, to be honest.
People have jobs where they need to have hundreds of tabs open sometimes. You need communication centre, line. carrier, service-now and many other apps running all the time via browser tabs.
I work in IT Support and I also have like 100 tabs open on my work laptop that has 8GB of RAM and windows on it. It works just fine. It occasionally freezes but it doesn't bother me.
I wouldn't get either. 8GB of RAM isn't enough on an M1 if you're going to have that many tabs open. And an Intel Mac with 16GB of RAM is generally a bad idea all around, even for the use cases where an Intel Mac is a must. I'd honestly, peruse Apple's "Apple Certified Refurbished Mac" section of their online store for either a MacBook Air or 13-inch MacBook Pro with the M1 and 16GB of RAM. I know it will cost more, but given that it's the difference between good and viable for the long haul and...well...not, then it's an easy call to make.
It's REALLY important to note that one's mileage will totally vary on tabs. You could have 50 tabs that each don't eat up that much memory, or 10 tabs open, 2 of which eat up 2GB.
That's why I asked the OP which sites he has opened up and which tabs he needs to stay active 24/7 without going to sleep at all, so I could test for him and help him out in his purchase.
I have an old intel 27“ iMac with 16Gb an 2018 MBP with 32GB and 16GB M1 pro.
Get a M1. Safari is so much snappier
Get a M1. Safari is so much snappier
You have not mentioned your intended life cycle of the new used box, which is essential to any purchase decision. The OS and apps always increase their demands on RAM as time goes on, even with zero change in workflow. Plus of course workflow usually does change as the world gets populated with more and ever-larger images, websites become more demanding, etc.
IMO any 2023 purchase of any box with only 8 GB RAM will probably immediately be operating sub-optimally as the Mac OS jumps through hoops making it work (but thanks to Mac OS it will mostly work). That to me usually represents unwise purchase decision making, but buyers make their own decisions.
This is 2023 and moving forward the 16 GB of RAM is a little, not a lot. MBPs starting at 16 GB minimum and available up to 96 GB RAM suggests where Apple thinks RAM demands will be going. Since Apple makes the OS and many apps, IMO buyers should pay attention.
Yes it costs money to buy computer performance. Think about intended life cycle: 6 months? 6 years? RAM matters.
Edit: Personally I consider Intel Macs to be history now that Apple SoC has proven itself to be so excellent and I will not put another Intel box into my life. I guess a very short intended life cycle would be OK for some folks, but for me I want all the tools in my Apple ecosystem to be optimized toward maximum compatibility and smooth operation moving forward.
Last edited:
I would invest some time in setting up tab groups, if it was me. I manage multiple projects at my job, and each one requires anywhere from 5-10 tabs open for various things. In Safari, I just use tab groups and it's brilliant. Switch over to "project A" in the menu and the window switches to all those tabs, just as they were. And so forth with all the different projects. I generally have a single window full of tabs open, and just switch as needed. The even more brilliant part is, those tab groups are synced between my work and home office Macs, so if I add a new tab to a project in one place, it shows up in the other.
I don't use Chrome much if I can avoid it, but it must have a similar feature, either natively or through an extension.
Thanks for that, it is brilliant! We love elegant solutions to real problems.
More RAM is always better. But I'm assuming you'd manage with 8GB as well.
I just tested the same 30 tabs with the same websites. Edge uses more RAM than Safari and Chrome? Edge started to use my swap memory. I didn't expect that.
Last edited: