will the base price remain the same or will that go up too?
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 of RAM Could Be the New Minimum in Apple's Upcoming M4 Macs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My 2011 MBP had 16GB even my 2010 white plastic MacBook had 16GB. At least I could easily upgrade those for cheap.
good. 8gb is a joke. 16gb needs to be the minimum.
10 years ago average people could buy a MBP if they didn't like the small screen size of the Air like me. The 2017 15" had been already much too expensive and even worse had been the 16" M2Pro. But I had no alternative from Apple.
It will go up as much as the update costs now plus the standard yearly price hike.
I don't understand why people are happy the minimum is 16GB. The system needs resources over time. Which means the 8GB slow performance you all know, is now carried over to 16GB. In other words 16GB is the 8GB you know now.
It should have been 24 GB, not to forget the AI needing 8GB.
It should have been 24 GB, not to forget the AI needing 8GB.
I had 8GB in my 2008 MacBook back when apple let you upgrade things yourself.
"16GB is not enough."
"24GB should be minimum."
"I don't buy anything below 32GB."
Yup, here we go again...
For me, I'm just happy to be able to pickup 16GB/512GB configuration from the store during sale.
"24GB should be minimum."
"I don't buy anything below 32GB."
Yup, here we go again...
For me, I'm just happy to be able to pickup 16GB/512GB configuration from the store during sale.
Last edited:
time moves on and things become more demanding. what do you expect?
This make sense since Apple’s SLM (on-board small language model that doesn’t go to the cloud servers) takes up at least 4GB of RAM, so there is actually a reason to upgrade the RAM amount. Prior to AI becoming the hot new thing, the vast majority of people could easily get by on 8GB. If you’re not staring at the Activity Monitor app, most people can’t tell the difference between an 8GB or 16GB Mac. If Apple’s raising the minimum to 16GB, then that means their testing is telling them that will no longer be the case and that things just don’t perform well with only 8GB for AI features they have planned in the near future.
But don’t necessarily celebrate this alleged move. Apple has a history of bumping the price of base units when upping base specs in terms of RAM or SSD size. Expect the base cost of a MBA or MBP to rise by at least $100. Often Apple bumps base specs to justify price increases they’d do for other reasons. In this current economic environment, everyone’s raising prices.
But don’t necessarily celebrate this alleged move. Apple has a history of bumping the price of base units when upping base specs in terms of RAM or SSD size. Expect the base cost of a MBA or MBP to rise by at least $100. Often Apple bumps base specs to justify price increases they’d do for other reasons. In this current economic environment, everyone’s raising prices.
As long as people buy in the quantity Apple wants to move, Apple isn't overcharging. Just because you can get a WinBox for less is largely irrelevant to what Apple can and should charge for Macs.
Given Apple's revenue numbers, I'd say Apple isn't creating "anger & hated of you amongst your customers/users."
Hard to say. If I were doing the pricing, I'd look at what percentage of buyers opt to upgrade as an indicator of the demand for 16gb. Then you look at the revenue from the upgrades, divide it by the expected sales volume and raise the price around that amount. That way, you don't lose the extra revenue from upgrades but don't have as large a jump from 8 to 16 GB. Depending on the numbers, Apple may actually make more marginal revenue from the upgrade.
That CPU only came out a month ago so there's not more than a few samples out there. I also don't believe it for a moment. And it's Asus. Have you ever dealt with Asus? Urgh.
No not even slightly. I work for a large company that buys a hell of a lot of high end PC laptops and they are universally garbage across the board. The failure rate is off the scale and the things are heavy, unreliable, run burning hot and have poor battery life.
We actually lose staff because they don't want to use Windows on laptops as well. Fine on a desktop but not a laptop. (I have a 14500 desktop as well)
Until recently I had a cupboard full of workstation class Dells which have all blown up (precision 5550, 7670 and a recently failed 7680)
Totally makes sense, especially on the marginal revenue. Focusing on a reduced list of SKUs will allow to reduce per unit costs.
This is the bit that would explain away a price increase - 16Gb base RAM (currently worth a $200 uplift over 8Gb) is a very visible way of masking a price increase, one that would appease consumers and reviewers alike I'd guess while investors will like the higher average selling price. Apple could further mitigate this in some SKUs by introduce a cut price binned M4 CPU SKU (worth a $100 discount).
And if they wanted to Apple could retain M2 models at the old price points as entry level machines if they wanted to keep a certain starting price in the range. If they didn't want to do it officially on their website they could keep providing these machines to third party retailers.
I wonder if 8GB RAM will still be equal to 16GB after Apple shifts it's Apple Intelligence marketing into high gear.
Good thing we all have more RAM than we could ever need. /s
People are happy because its an improvement on something that was artificially low for no real discernable reason than increased profits for a very long time. The bigger issue that people have been talking about is that now that 16 will be the minimum, we will start to see real issues with 8 GB machines most likely.
Either way, this is likely only occurring because of the backlash when they released a "pro" line with 8 GB of RAM, then started talking about how amazing they were for getting AI to run on low RAM iPhones...with 8 GB of RAM. We know how they treat RAM is different, but its a bad look.
Why don't you get warranty repairs on them?
What Apple wants: make customers pay for AI (monthly subscription, yum; health benefits: bingo!)
What they need: quickly develop addictive AI features before the competition gives them for free and ruins the party for all vendors (like Google with Youtube). Start with free photo gadgets, search improvements, whatever.
What we get: More RAM to run AI (Europe too, of course), hence more battery, hence more screen estate
What Green Mother Nature gets: more heating despite "power efficiency gains", because it's so cold outside, y'know.
What they need: quickly develop addictive AI features before the competition gives them for free and ruins the party for all vendors (like Google with Youtube). Start with free photo gadgets, search improvements, whatever.
What we get: More RAM to run AI (Europe too, of course), hence more battery, hence more screen estate
What Green Mother Nature gets: more heating despite "power efficiency gains", because it's so cold outside, y'know.
I think there'll be a bunch of upgrades on most hardware specs leading to a significant price increase, more than $200.
So it's not necessarily like Apple is just going to add $200 to all new Macs for the extra RAM and call it a day.
Although, about $200 actually might be around the price increase we'll see for the entry-level configurations of the low-end Macs with the non-Pro M4 chips, like the next MacBooks Air and Macs mini.
I think it all comes down to whether Apple is still shaky on AI or not, and exactly what M4 Macs are going to be able to do with AI that M3 and older don't get to do.
The first iMac released with 8GB in its base config was in 2012.
We're 12 years later and it's increasing to 16.
In 2036, it's going to be 32. 🫠
We're 12 years later and it's increasing to 16.
In 2036, it's going to be 32. 🫠
I really don't have a problem with 8GB of RAM as an entry-level offering. I have an M3 MBA with 8GB and for my everyday use it is perfectly acceptable.
However, where I do have an issue with Apple is the cost of RAM they charge when you want to upgrade. Anyone who has ever built a PC knows that you can get the same RAM as a component for significantly less money. Plus with no ability to swap out the RAM as an end-user is also a terrible thing.
I upgraded my TrueNAS Scale server this past Spring and put 64GB of RAM inside for $130. I checked Amazon where I bought it just now and that same RAM is on sale for $103.
RAM is the one certain area where the Apple Tax hits the hardest.
However, where I do have an issue with Apple is the cost of RAM they charge when you want to upgrade. Anyone who has ever built a PC knows that you can get the same RAM as a component for significantly less money. Plus with no ability to swap out the RAM as an end-user is also a terrible thing.
I upgraded my TrueNAS Scale server this past Spring and put 64GB of RAM inside for $130. I checked Amazon where I bought it just now and that same RAM is on sale for $103.
RAM is the one certain area where the Apple Tax hits the hardest.
1. It brings them on par with the PC world.
2. People are saving $200 USD to go from 8 to 16. It's a lot for something so necessary when you think about it.
3. You can still buy an upgrade if you want.