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.
64GB RAM is not a wise buy, and here's why
- Thread starter CM_1986
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Feh. I work with large map files and PDFs that are poster sized, they can gobble up 16 GB even with only one file open. Now as to whether 64 GB would resolve that, that’s unclear, it could very well be that 128 would be necessary to avoid excessive swapping, but I suspect even for just that use case, never mind final cut and illustrator, 64 would help. At the end of the day, I’ll wait a couple years with my 16gb 2015 model, and hope for the best.
When I was configuring my new computer I decided that I needed 32GB or 64GB of RAM.
I have a mid-2010 i7 MBP, 8GB RAM and 240GB SSD. This machine has been excellent as a workhorse during all these years. It works like new after 9 years of daily use. I remember that the Apple tax that I paid when I bought this MBP 9 years ago was a 30% approximately.
When I was considering a new laptop to complement/replace this 2010 15" MBP I discover that, unfortunately, the Apple tax is currently much higher than in 2011 for all the Mac. In the case of the MBP 16 now it is a whopping 400% in the the case of the configuration I wanted: top CPU, top GPU, 64GB RAM, 4TB SSD, 16" screen, possibility to connect up to 4 additional monitors, etc. This configuration in my country costs €5,600. So I decided that I would try a different approach. As all the apps that I use in the studio are cross platform I considered the possibility of trying a Windows 10 laptop with the same software that I use on OSX.
For a fraction of the cost of the new MBP 16 (€1,400) with the mentioned specs I now have and use a Windows 10 laptop 17.3" mate FHD IPS screen. In many performance aspects the cheaper laptop is superior to the MBP 16. My PC laptop is totally upgradeable, except the GPU. And Windows 10 Pro is much better than the Windows XP that I used 10 years ago (my transition from OSX is going very well). In the benchmarks my Windows 10 laptop is at the level of the new Mac Pro 2019 base model. And it is very silent with a proper cooling system ready for a desktop CPU (in my case the i7 9700) and a GPU like the ni vida GTX 1660 ti, that in various benchmarks performs similarly to the Vega 64 of the iMac Pro. I produce music, so the GPU is not so relevant for me.
The 64GB of 2666 Samsung RAM that came installed are good to load huge sample libraries on the road, with its 4TB SSD nvme of storage.
I have a mid-2010 i7 MBP, 8GB RAM and 240GB SSD. This machine has been excellent as a workhorse during all these years. It works like new after 9 years of daily use. I remember that the Apple tax that I paid when I bought this MBP 9 years ago was a 30% approximately.
When I was considering a new laptop to complement/replace this 2010 15" MBP I discover that, unfortunately, the Apple tax is currently much higher than in 2011 for all the Mac. In the case of the MBP 16 now it is a whopping 400% in the the case of the configuration I wanted: top CPU, top GPU, 64GB RAM, 4TB SSD, 16" screen, possibility to connect up to 4 additional monitors, etc. This configuration in my country costs €5,600. So I decided that I would try a different approach. As all the apps that I use in the studio are cross platform I considered the possibility of trying a Windows 10 laptop with the same software that I use on OSX.
For a fraction of the cost of the new MBP 16 (€1,400) with the mentioned specs I now have and use a Windows 10 laptop 17.3" mate FHD IPS screen. In many performance aspects the cheaper laptop is superior to the MBP 16. My PC laptop is totally upgradeable, except the GPU. And Windows 10 Pro is much better than the Windows XP that I used 10 years ago (my transition from OSX is going very well). In the benchmarks my Windows 10 laptop is at the level of the new Mac Pro 2019 base model. And it is very silent with a proper cooling system ready for a desktop CPU (in my case the i7 9700) and a GPU like the ni vida GTX 1660 ti, that in various benchmarks performs similarly to the Vega 64 of the iMac Pro. I produce music, so the GPU is not so relevant for me.
The 64GB of 2666 Samsung RAM that came installed are good to load huge sample libraries on the road, with its 4TB SSD nvme of storage.
3/4GB per each. I do some testing and work with databases it works fine really
[automerge]1578640925[/automerge]
Yeah.. Especially us in Europe suffer much with this problems
What a bizarre and pointless thread. If someone needs or wants 64GB of RAM then they can spec it. Who cares what someone else does with their money?
Yeah, in my case I needed 64GB of RAM to load big Kontakt sample libraries for my music productions. The problem, in my personal case, is that in Europe Apple charges €960 for this amount of RAM installed in the new MBP, almost the same full price that can buy you an entire non-Apple laptop with similar specs , only for the RAM, and I could install OSX Catalina on it if I wanted, or Linux o W10 Pro.
It all depends on what you are actually doing with your device.
I am a software developer running backend and frontend code on the same machine, plus using windows or linux on parallels. I use windows when I need to work with .NET (full framework), Visual Studio and SQL Server with at least 16-20 GB and use Centos linux to test my code on an environment similar to our production server. Even without any VM running I quite easily go to 25-30GB (part of this is also cache, but that implies a faster experience for me anyway and also no swap file at all). Attached my current use without any VM. Taking into account the cost of this machine, I will want to use it for at least 4 years, and the more RAM the better it is for the future as well. I was coming from a Dell XPS with 32GB of RAM, and on that no way I could run both VMs, so for me 64GB is totally worth it, more than the storage (in fact I got the base 1tb).
I am a software developer running backend and frontend code on the same machine, plus using windows or linux on parallels. I use windows when I need to work with .NET (full framework), Visual Studio and SQL Server with at least 16-20 GB and use Centos linux to test my code on an environment similar to our production server. Even without any VM running I quite easily go to 25-30GB (part of this is also cache, but that implies a faster experience for me anyway and also no swap file at all). Attached my current use without any VM. Taking into account the cost of this machine, I will want to use it for at least 4 years, and the more RAM the better it is for the future as well. I was coming from a Dell XPS with 32GB of RAM, and on that no way I could run both VMs, so for me 64GB is totally worth it, more than the storage (in fact I got the base 1tb).
Attachments
Depends. Today I'm doing very little on my laptop and it's happily chugging along using a few % of CPU and around 14GB RAM. Other days 64GB is barely enough. It depends how many VMs I'm running and what I'm testing that day. I'm considering replacing my current laptop (Lenovo P51) with the new P53 so I can have 128GB. So it doesn't matter what platform you are running on, it's the tasks you are running that dictate the requirements, and some of us need 64GB+ quite often.
So your vm memory usage ranges from 12GB to 20GB and you have 16GB of physical RAM but insist “it works fine”.
I’m not suggesting what you say isn’t true but I’m definitely saying you and I have different definitions of “works fine”.
Even the fastest SSD in a new MBP is an order of magnitude slower than its memory.
This is a click bait threat.
I ordered (and now own) a 16" mbp with 64GB ram and 8TB SSD. I actually use mine for work and it is nice to have enough space to do everything I need. Some sites I go to do not allow internet connectivity and now I can have VMs of all my projects on my laptop.
My last laptop was a 2018 mbp with 32GB ram and 4TB SSD... It is nice to have the extra room.
For the home users, 16GB is probably lots... But this says PRO right in the name, so it better be suitable for pro users.
For those that need it, 64GB is a very wise buy.
I ordered (and now own) a 16" mbp with 64GB ram and 8TB SSD. I actually use mine for work and it is nice to have enough space to do everything I need. Some sites I go to do not allow internet connectivity and now I can have VMs of all my projects on my laptop.
My last laptop was a 2018 mbp with 32GB ram and 4TB SSD... It is nice to have the extra room.
For the home users, 16GB is probably lots... But this says PRO right in the name, so it better be suitable for pro users.
For those that need it, 64GB is a very wise buy.
I am currently using iMovie to combine some videos of my children into a montage. Some other apps are open like chrome and apple tv. Not a crazy scenario for an amateur mac user. I have used 25.40Gb of memory. I still have a decent margin of free memory but one way you can look at this is I only have 21% memory remaining. How much time can pass before that margin closes? I agree that 64GB not critical in January 2020 but it might be necessary for non-power users sooner than we think.
I got 64GB as I run a lot of VMs side by side for demo and test environments. I probably could have gone for 32GB but work was paying anyway..
You are barely using any memory in that screen shot. You have 10GB cache that can be purged, 3GB additional for safari. You are using around 12GB in that screen shot and that before it starts to compress the memory you aren't actually "using", as in data loaded but isn't actually used for what you are doing, a.k.a active "Dead memory" .
64gb was the best decision I've made. now my Logic Pro runs smoothly. way less waiting for the beach ball. I can happily open other apps and multitask seamlessly. Sometimes it's not the processor that is slowing your app, it can be the lack of RAM
I'm not too sure, I keep my computers for years. My laptop is now 6 years and counting, and the only thing really lacking performace-wise is probably the 16 GB of RAM, i often need way more than that in just normal usage, let alone specialised work. In fact, I have the same problem with my 64 GB iMac Pro (albeit much less).
I bought myself a new desktop in 2012, spec'ing it at 16GB RAM when that was still considered crazy. Never regretted it - it's still usable like the very first day. Yeah, the processor and GPU could be better but not bad at all for an 8 year old system.
I got my 13" MBP early 2014, so it's 6 years old. Not bad for a laptop, but with hindsight, I should've gotten the 16GB RAM upgrade and a larger SSD. I started doing things I never expected: software development and VMs. And I now work for a media company where Avid, Premiere and so on are our daily bread. In my world, I never know where I'll end up. So you betcha that I'm going for at least 32GB in my next system. Here's hoping they'll provide it in a 13". Otherwise, the 16" and possibly 64GB.
I got my 13" MBP early 2014, so it's 6 years old. Not bad for a laptop, but with hindsight, I should've gotten the 16GB RAM upgrade and a larger SSD. I started doing things I never expected: software development and VMs. And I now work for a media company where Avid, Premiere and so on are our daily bread. In my world, I never know where I'll end up. So you betcha that I'm going for at least 32GB in my next system. Here's hoping they'll provide it in a 13". Otherwise, the 16" and possibly 64GB.
lol @ gatekeeping other people's ram usage. why do you care how much ram he uses?
You might be running things on your host that takes more than 8 GB. Maybe see if you can give less memory to the VM. I wonder what are you running on the VM for it to require 8 GB.
The more RAM you assign to the VM the slower it will get. If you assign 8 GB to the VM the OS in that VM will try to make use of this, and you will only have 8GB for your macOS and VMware. VMware recommends to assign 2 GB RAM for the VM. See Set the Amount of Virtual Memory.