4GB vs. 8GB RAM Macbook Air

[Meister]

For the usage stated, we do know what the future will bring and 4 GB will be fine long into it. Text editing is one of the oldest uses of personal computing and still only requires kilobytes of RAM, maybe a few megabytes if you use a heavier text editor.

If 40 Chromium tabs only uses 2 GB (though it's less than that), it is safe to assume that 80 or so would exhaust 4 GB. Assume conservatively that my estimate is off and that 70 tabs would break the 4 GB barrier. Assuming you browse with 7 tabs open, that means that the average web page would have to consume about 10 times as much RAM as it does now for 4 GB to be a problem.

How long will it take for the size of an average web page to increase tenfold (if ever)? Longer than that computer will last. It just doesn't require ever increasing amounts of RAM in the orders of magnitude necessary to exhaust 4 GB to serve a web page in normal usage. Same goes for text editing and word processing.

And finally, none of this accounts for RAM compression on OS X, which can have a great effect on RAM usage. It also doesn't account for fast SSD storage, which greatly speeds up paging to swap files.

I don't remember the OP mentioning using Bootcamp/Parallels. Like I said, I have a MBA with 2GB of RAM and a MBA with 4GB of RAM. I also have an iMac with 8GB of RAM. They all run exactly the same for all of my use scenarios. They have for the last 4 years. 2GB of RAM will be fine for maybe another year, so you are right that RAM usage will go up over time. Based on my past experience, 4GB of RAM should be good for another 4-5 years. Just my opinion though based on 4 years of using 2GB of RAM.

shenan was asked by me to prove this claim he made:

Untrue. Every webpage you load goes into RAM. If you like surfing the web and using tabbed browsing, your comment is absolutely false, RAM is an absolute good use of money. We're not taking about a 50% cost increase on the Air, it's a TEN PERCENT increase in cost, for a huge step forward in future-proofing.

Try loading 2-3 pages containing flash in Safari tabs, and watch as your system performance drops.

He is now steering the discussing into a different direction to avoid providing facts that would back his claims.

 

[mwa]

The OP is comparing an old model BBY has on clearance to the current model. When comparing Apples to Apples (and Apple), it's usually quoted as price differences for the same computer when upgrading a component.

There's absolutely no such rule that requires anyone to post proof of said claims. Otherwise this would be macfacts.com not macrumors.com ... the point of a rumor site is to talk about non-confirmed information which has no "proof" ... I really hope you're joking when you're citing a policy of having to only post comments that are supported by proof. Because saying that discredits anything else you say. I'll throw it back to you, if "4GB is just fine" ... prove it. You can't prove anything that's not an absolute.

You: "4GB is just fine" is an OPINION

Me: "8GB is better than 4GB" is a FACT.


Get it?

Gee that's not condescending at all.

 

[BenTrovato]

Gee that's not condescending at all.

Haha well he does have a point. 8 is better than 4, 16 is better than 8, and so on and so forth right? Then again, if your usage is such that you never need more than 4, saying 4 is just fine is perfectly acceptable and in the same context one could say - 8 isn't better, it's a wasted resource.

 

[Meister]

Haha well he does have a point. 8 is better than 4, 16 is better than 8, and so on and so forth right? Then again, if your usage is such that you never need more than 4, saying 4 is just fine is perfectly acceptable and in the same context one could say - 8 isn't better, it's a wasted resource.

Again: that was not even the discussing here.
I am not saying that there is an advantage to have 4gb over 8gb ram. That's obvious nonsense.
But if you can safe $200 and you don't need 8gb ram, then what's the point?

The shenan dude made this claim:

Try loading 2-3 pages containing flash in Safari tabs, and watch as your system performance drops.

And he cannot prove this, because it's not true.

 

[mad3inch1na]

Haha well he does have a point. 8 is better than 4, 16 is better than 8, and so on and so forth right? Then again, if your usage is such that you never need more than 4, saying 4 is just fine is perfectly acceptable and in the same context one could say - 8 isn't better, it's a wasted resource.

It is still technically better if you don't need it. It may be better though to have $200 in your pocket

 

[mwa]

By that logic, an engine that does 600+ HP is better than one that does 220, but I'm not still not trading my Mazda for a McLaren or a Ferrari. Yeah, more horsepower = better, but by no means practical or necessary for the circumstances.

It's a matter of needs. If you're not doing anything that warrants the extra capacity, you simply don't need, nor will ever notice the difference of, having the extra RAM. Period. It's digital supply and demand.

It's like these clowns that say "Oooh I use Google Chrome because ooooh it's 0.017 seconds faster!"... yeah, right. You* just like prefer feeling better about yourself because your sense of self worth depends on what kind of equipment you have, and that hinges on your perceived value of that equipment.

*The collective, homogenized, impersonal "You" lest someone take that personally.

Try loading 2-3 pages containing flash in Safari tabs, and watch as your system performance drops.

Try loading anything Flash in any browser with any computer and watch system performance drop.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Hey guys, I'm trying to decide if I should get a 4GB or 8GB model. I can get the 4GB model at Bestbuy for $799 before tax, while the 8GB has to be ordered from Apple and it would run about about $1000 before tax.
I don't do anything like video editing on my laptop. Just need something to take notes, browse the web and run text editor software.
I don't know if 4GB is enough, since my friend has a 4GB Air and the RAM seems to be maxed out in Activity Monitor and swap file was used. Would that indicate that the computer doesn't have enough memory?
If anyone who's already been using the 4GB model for a while, I'd love to hear your opinions.

8GB. You can't upgrade it later, so you might as well do it now even though you won't notice the difference until later.

 

[capathy21]

Untrue. Every webpage you load goes into RAM. If you like surfing the web and using tabbed browsing, your comment is absolutely false, RAM is an absolute good use of money. We're not taking about a 50% cost increase on the Air, it's a TEN PERCENT increase in cost, for a huge step forward in future-proofing.

Try loading 2-3 pages containing flash in Safari tabs, and watch as your system performance drops.

You are way off base. I have a 4GB retina Pro and I am currently running Chrome with 6 tabs, Safari with 7 tabs, Mail, Spotify, Word, Excel, iMessage, calendar and app store all running and memory pressure is still green. I've pushed it much further but this is what I am doing now and it doesn't break a sweat.

With the OP's usage there is not, nor will there ever be a need for the OP to WASTE 200 dollars (that's 20 percent not 10) on an 8GB model. Of course 8GB is better than 4GB on paper but only if you need it.

If it was only 100 difference I could see a slight argument, but 200 bucks? No way.

 

[Rodrigo Yoshida]

I had the same doubt, but in my case going for the 8gb was not an option since someone offered me to trade his 2013 MBA for my 2012 MBP. After trading it and doing a lot of tests I think I can give my thoughts here.

My MBA has the standard settings, 4gb ram, 128gb ssd, Haswell Core i5. I am usually very careful about using my computer, I do not leave any apps opened that I am not using, but since it is a "stress test" I left many apps opened on purpose just to see how the MBA handles the memory.

I opened about 2 Safari windows with about 10 tabs each, all with different websites, Skype, Thunderbird, Spotify, Photoshop with 13 files opened, MAMP, Coda with about 5 files opened. I also did some normal work with Photoshop, browsed the web and listened to some music on Spotify. After that the memory pressure was still green and the system was very snappy.

One really interesting thing I noticed was with all those apps opened at the same time, when I switch between them I feel a very little lag, but just once, after that I can use that app normally without any slow down. I think it is the OS decompressing that app from the memory.

I was impressed about what I can do with 4gb ram, Mavericks and a pci-e ssd, I think that's more than enough for normal use. If money is not an issue I would definitely go for the 8gb version, but if you buy the standard one I am sure you will be fine too.

Here is a screenshot of Activity Monitor with all those apps listed opened:

 

[mortenandersen]

How about heat production?

What will create most heat, the 4GB or the 8GB RAM configuration? And how will this possible difference be with 1) a heavier work load than OP's (stressing the system) and 2) a light work load such as the one that OP is describing?

 

[RianT]

I had the same doubt, but in my case going for the 8gb was not an option since someone offered me to trade his 2013 MBA for my 2012 MBP. After trading it and doing a lot of tests I think I can give my thoughts here.

My MBA has the standard settings, 4gb ram, 128gb ssd, Haswell Core i5. I am usually very careful about using my computer, I do not leave any apps opened that I am not using, but since it is a "stress test" I left many apps opened on purpose just to see how the MBA handles the memory.

I opened about 2 Safari windows with about 10 tabs each, all with different websites, Skype, Thunderbird, Spotify, Photoshop with 13 files opened, MAMP, Coda with about 5 files opened. I also did some normal work with Photoshop, browsed the web and listened to some music on Spotify. After that the memory pressure was still green and the system was very snappy.

One really interesting thing I noticed was with all those apps opened at the same time, when I switch between them I feel a very little lag, but just once, after that I can use that app normally without any slow down. I think it is the OS decompressing that app from the memory.

I was impressed about what I can do with 4gb ram, Mavericks and a pci-e ssd, I think that's more than enough for normal use. If money is not an issue I would definitely go for the 8gb version, but if you buy the standard one I am sure you will be fine too.

Here is a screenshot of Activity Monitor with all those apps listed opened:

Image

Thanks, exactly what I want to see. If you open that many apps and it's still green, my regular Firefox-Word-TextMate combo shouldn't be an issue.

Thank you everyone for giving me their opinions. I decided to go for the 4GB. I guess that $200 is better spent on my next textbook lol

 

[maflynn]

I don't do anything like video editing on my laptop. Just need something to take notes, browse the web and run text editor software. [/quote\
4GB is fine for your stated needs

[quote
I don't know if 4GB is enough, since my friend has a 4GB Air and the RAM seems to be maxed out in Activity Monitor and swap file was used.

What is his ram pressure, just because there's swap file usage means there's an issue. Even with 16GB of ram, there is some usage going on for OS X to manage the resources.

 

[RianT]

What is his ram pressure, just because there's swap file usage means there's an issue. Even with 16GB of ram, there is some usage going on for OS X to manage the resources.

It was green... I'm a noob when it comes to OS X. I was under the impression that if the RAM usage is near maxed out and swap is used, the system needs more RAM. Maybe it's not exactly so...

 

[Meister]

What is his ram pressure, just because there's swap file usage means there's an issue.

my rmbp mavericks seems to use swapfiles even when their is no apps running.
On the support page they claim that if your swap is >100mb then you are running low on memory.
My swap goes up to 1gb quite frequently and memory pressure is always very low.

I am not quite sure what to make of this or if swap is even an indicator for anything.

----------

It was green... I'm a noob when it comes to OS X. I was under the impression that if the RAM usage is near maxed out and swap is used, the system needs more RAM. Maybe it's not exactly so...

i can tell you from experience that you should be alerted once memory pressure becomes yellow. (You shouldve gotten more RAM ) If thats the case often, you need more RAM. Once it goes red your system will lag quite severely.

So the lesson is: test this out before you buy a macbook and if in doubt get 8gb ram. But Office and webbrowsing and media consumption never causes this.

 

[scaredpoet]

I have posted a screenshot of 4 instances of Chromium with 40 tabs open and only using 1.9 GB of RAM in total. If you have proof that normal web browsing, note taking, and text editing would benefit from or require 8 GB, post a screenshot.

FWIW: You do not appear to be running OS X in that screenshot, but rather what appears to be a linux distro. Memory management is not the same in linux as it is from OS X, and can even vary from one linux distro to the next. Linux also lacks a number of layers and services that OS X has, and Chromium for linux is a substantially different build from Chrome for OS X.

In short: as much as you're demanding proof from others, your own evidence is insufficient.

On the other hand, I can show you a screenshot on OSX where, if you give the environment 32GB of RAM, it will use ALL of it, even with just Safari, Mail, and TextWrangler running. Does it NEED 32GB? Certainly not. But Mavericks does use any spare RAM for caching and file access optimization, among other things. So, the extra RAM, while not absolutely necessary with current versions of the OS, will still not go to waste.

 

[Meister]

FWIW: You do not appear to be running OS X in that screenshot, but rather what appears to be a linux distro. Memory management is not the same in linux as it is from OS X, and can even vary from one linux distro to the next. Linux also lacks a number of layers and services that OS X has, and Chromium for linux is a substantially different build from Chrome for OS X.

In short: as much as you're demanding proof from others, your own evidence is insufficient.

I was the one asking proof from the shenan dude for a claim he made.
Joe didn't claim anything.

I have made a wiki thread and posted various videos and screenshots to document the capabilities as well as limitations of ram configurations. (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1756865/) Shenan made a claim and his "proof" was citing the system requirments for windows (2gb ram), which was completely unrelated to his claim, that 2 flash safari tabs will cause a memory shortage. At least Joe posted a screenshot from his Linux OS.

 

[TechZeke]

I honestly can't believe we are having a drawn out 4 vs 8GB RAM discussion about the OP doing:

take notes, browse the web and run text editor software.

This is as bad as the people on here saying you need 16GB RAM to run Chrome.

The topic of RAM on this forum is out of control. Some folks on this forum would tell the OP to get 32GB of RAM if there was an option.

 

[joshlalonde]

Rather than competing with people who are vocal and make claims that are false but claim that they're right, I shall provide proof that 4GB RAM is sufficient for your needs.

Yes, actual tested and verifiable proof.
That involved me opening every single app on my dock and running a somewhat intensive game (which should eat up most of the 1GB or so allotted GPU shared RAM) meaning I had about 3GB left to work with minus all the open tabs (about 40) and all the programs. I can open up more, but here are some screenshots.

I don't think you'll need to open this much at one time, but here we are.
Screenshot one: https://www.dropbox.com/s/1z2tgrvaqmelqp6/Screenshot 2014-09-04 16.30.09.png?dl=0
Screenshot two:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w88eyudv3a8mpe8/Screenshot 2014-09-04 16.30.13.png?dl=0

I'll be happy to open even more apps (I have quite a few to test) but tell me all the software you'd have open and I'll be glad to test it for you.

 

[Meister]

Rather than competing with people who are vocal and make claims that are false but claim that they're right, I shall provide proof that 4GB RAM is sufficient for your needs.

Yes, actual tested and verifiable proof.
That involved me opening every single app on my dock and running a somewhat intensive game (which should eat up most of the 1GB or so allotted GPU shared RAM) meaning I had about 3GB left to work with minus all the open tabs (about 40) and all the programs. I can open up more, but here are some screenshots.

I don't think you'll need to open this much at one time, but here we are.
Screenshot one: https://www.dropbox.com/s/1z2tgrvaqmelqp6/Screenshot 2014-09-04 16.30.09.png?dl=0
Screenshot two:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/w88eyudv3a8mpe8/Screenshot 2014-09-04 16.30.13.png?dl=0

I'll be happy to open even more apps (I have quite a few to test) but tell me all the software you'd have open and I'll be glad to test it for you.

thank you.
also look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6oaUJPZKNc
Quite impressive.

 

[2984839]

FWIW: You do not appear to be running OS X in that screenshot, but rather what appears to be a linux distro. Memory management is not the same in linux as it is from OS X, and can even vary from one linux distro to the next. Linux also lacks a number of layers and services that OS X has, and Chromium for linux is a substantially different build from Chrome for OS X.

In short: as much as you're demanding proof from others, your own evidence is insufficient.

On the other hand, I can show you a screenshot on OSX where, if you give the environment 32GB of RAM, it will use ALL of it, even with just Safari, Mail, and TextWrangler running. Does it NEED 32GB? Certainly not. But Mavericks does use any spare RAM for caching and file access optimization, among other things. So, the extra RAM, while not absolutely necessary with current versions of the OS, will still not go to waste.

Correct, it's Arch Linux with a custom kernel so it's not going to be a 1:1 comparison. However, memory management on OS X would be even better for someone with 4 GB than my Arch install because of RAM compression.

 

[capathy21]

I honestly can't believe we are having a drawn out 4 vs 8GB RAM discussion about the OP doing:


This is as bad as the people on here saying you need 16GB RAM to run Chrome.

The topic of RAM on this forum is out of control. Some folks on this forum would tell the OP to get 32GB of RAM if there was an option.

Woah! Let's not start making sense here

I am going to be using Safari and the calculator app, should I wait for a 32GB option just to be on the safe side?

 

[RianT]

Thanks everyone! I already went out this afternoon and got myself one. $847 after tax, not too bad
The computer is blazing fast, I have no complaint so far

 

[scaredpoet]

However, memory management on OS X would be even better for someone with 4 GB than my Arch install because of RAM compression.

Following the rules already set down: proof of this, please. Can't make a statement without backing it up, remember?

 

[quackers82]

I have a 2013 rMacbook Pro with 8GB RAM, and a 2013 Macbook Air with 4GB RAM and for the tasks the person said they are doing, i.e. web browsing and word processing i cannot find any noticeable difference even with there being a big processor jump as well as double the RAM.

 

[Meister]

Thanks everyone! I already went out this afternoon and got myself one. $847 after tax, not too bad
The computer is blazing fast, I have no complaint so far

Congratulations! Enjoy