8GB RAM in M3 MacBook Pro Proves the Bottleneck in Real-World Tests

[ArkSingularity]

I’m not “stacking the deck” by not comparing the MacBook Pro to other windows laptops with lesser specs on nearly every point. That wouldn’t be a fair comparison. I’m trying to find Windows laptops that have mostly equal specs to the MacBook Pro, such as close or equal CPU performance, close or equal graphics performance, close or equal display quality, close or equal build-quality, etc. That’s not “ignoring” the other options, I’ve said several times now that they exist, they’re just not very comparable because they’re not even close to equal on most of the specs. Again, that doesn’t mean that they aren’t good options, it just means that they’re not comparable enough to the same specs to offer a fair alternative for people who want all or even most of the benefits of a MacBook Pro. I’ve looked at lots of Windows laptops at this point, none of which I’m actually interested in buying, and every one of them I’ve been able to find that’s mostly comparable specs-wise is also charging about the same, the same, or more for RAM upgrades. And as I explained before, I think that’s because typically the high-performance models seem to use soldered RAM just like Apple does, and so they charge more for upgrades. Laptops with user-upgradeable RAM cards don’t tend to charge as much for RAM upgrades, but also don’t tend to be close to the MacBook Pros specs in many key areas such as display quality, CPU performance, graphics performance, etc. Again, I’m looking for Windows laptops that are as close as possible in specs to the MacBook Pro I’m comparing them to, not just any Windows laptop.

Equal CPU performance and equal graphics performance? You mentioned a Microsoft surface, these don't even come close in terms of CPU and graphics performance (and the thermals are nowhere near as good either, so they wouldn't support the same performance that a MacBook Pro could, the Surface simply isn't designed for the same kind of use case). If we're talking about displays, yes someone who wants a really nice display isn't going to get a thinkpad, and yet millions and millions of thinkpads are sold to professionals anyway. Not everyone has the same criteria, and that's the point that I've been trying to make.

You can't artificially narrow down the criteria such that only a small selection of computers passes that criteria, imply that these are the computers that are "equivalent in these areas" - then use that to support the claim that the PC market at large is charging more for RAM than Apple is. You've ignored countless examples of computers that aren't charging these same prices.

 

[chetzar]

And they’re still business laptops, high quality or not, they’re not really geared toward video editing, 3D, heavy gaming, and that kind of stuff. The MacBook Pro is. So they’re in different categories. That doesn’t mean the Thinkpad is bad quality or anything, that isn’t the point, the point is that the Thinkpad is intended to be a business laptop. The MacBook Pro is a premium, high-performance laptop perfect for video editing, 3D, gaming, etc. To me, the comparison is like comparing a Chrysler 300 against a Ferrari, they’re not really in the same league.

Now you’re moving the goal posts. Businesses are Pro users, despite the type of work.
And Lenovo does in fact build laptops and desktops targeted towards CAD, 3D Modeling, etc., just a different software suite than you’re associating with “3D work”.

 

[Kal Madda]

Finding a small selection of a few computers that have high RAM prices doesn't support the conclusion that "the premium PC market is charging more than Apple is for RAM" (which is what you're trying to imply). You're artificially narrowing the premium down to a very small selection of computers that is much narrower than the market of computers from which professionals actually buy.

I’m only one person, so any selection of computers I can possibly analyze (especially when sites purpose to make it difficult to compare RAM pricing) is going to be “small”. I’ve found many examples from popular Windows PC manufacturers, with mostly similar features and specs. And by that argument, I could use the MacBook Air to say “you’re narrowing the Mac market from which professionals buy”. That’s completely beside the point. Some professionals might buy an all plastic bargain-bin wonder for their work, but does that mean that’s now comparable to a MacBook Pro? (Extreme example to illustrate my point that what professionals buy isn’t what we’re comparing, but models that actually have equal or close to equal specs).

 

[ArkSingularity]

I’m only one person, so any selection of computers I can possibly analyze (especially when sites purpose to make it difficult to compare RAM pricing) is going to be “small”. I’ve found many examples from popular Windows PC manufacturers, with mostly similar features and specs. And by that argument, I could use the MacBook Air to say “you’re narrowing the Mac market from which professionals buy”. That’s completely beside the point. Some professionals might buy an all plastic bargain-bin wonder for their work, but does that mean that’s now comparable to a MacBook Pro? (Extreme example to illustrate my point that what professionals buy isn’t what we’re comparing, but models that actually have equal or close to equal specs).

The point isn't to say that you have the wrong criteria for what you look for. It's to say that your criteria doesn't represent the market at large. You couldn't say that my criteria for what I personally look for matches the market at large either, because I'm just one person. Neither of us represent the market.

The point is that you can't take such a narrow criteria, limit your selection to just a handful of computers, and then use that to try to imply that the premium PC market (at large) charges more than Apple. This is where your premise doesn't support your conclusion.

 

[Kal Madda]

Now you’re moving the goal posts. Businesses are Pro users, despite the type of work.
And Lenovo does in fact build laptops and desktops targeted towards CAD, 3D Modeling, etc., just a different software suite than you’re associating with “3D work”.

The goal post is comparable specs that can support comparable workloads. A MacBook Air can be used for business pro users, but does that make it comparable to the MacBook Pro? I don’t think so, it has lesser specs, so comparing the pricing of the two won’t really yield a useful result.

 

[ArkSingularity]

The goal post is comparable specs that can support comparable workloads. A MacBook Air can be used for business pro users, but does that make it comparable to the MacBook Pro? I don’t think so, it has lesser specs, so comparing the pricing of the two won’t really yield a useful result.

By that metric, neither will the Surface.

 

[Kal Madda]

The point isn't to say that you have the wrong criteria for what you look for. It's to say that your criteria doesn't represent the market at large. You couldn't say that my criteria for what I personally look for matches the market at large either, because I'm just one person. Neither of us represent the market.

The point is that you can't take such a narrow criteria, limit your selection to just a handful of computers, and then use that to try to imply that the premium PC market (at large) charges more than Apple. This is where your premise doesn't support your conclusion.

My conclusion is Windows laptops with comparable specs to the MacBook Pro charge similar, the same, or more than Apple does, at least from every example I’ve been able to find.

The point isn’t about my or your buying criteria. If I were shopping for a laptop, a MacBook Air could probably fit my needs quite well. The point is about comparing computers with similar specs to the MacBook Pro.

 

[ArkSingularity]

My conclusion is Windows laptops with comparable specs to the MacBook Pro charge similar, the same, or more than Apple does, at least from every example I’ve been able to find.

The point isn’t about my or your buying criteria. If I were shopping for a laptop, a MacBook Air could probably fit my needs quite well. The point is about comparing computers with similar specs to the MacBook Pro.

The criteria you've used to try to narrow the market of computers with "comparable specs" has ignored a whole plethora of computers that actually meet these specs better than the examples you've provided can.

 

[Kal Madda]

By that metric, neither will the Surface.

The Surface actually does offer comparable specs to the MacBook Pro. It depends on which Surface you’re talking about since it’s a pretty big range. And the Surface lineup is a premium PC lineup. Of course it isn’t the only one, but the other premium Windows laptops I’ve looked at have given similar results.

 

[Kal Madda]

The criteria you've used to try to narrow the market of computers with "comparable specs" has ignored a whole plethora of computers that actually meet these specs better than the examples you've provided can.

Do you have any examples from this “whole plethora” I’m supposedly ignoring? I’ve looked hard to try to find comparable laptops, and I’ve gone to many PC manufacturers websites, spent a bunch of my time looking into laptops I’ll never buy and am not that terribly interested in, just to find that in about every case so far, they charge the same or more for RAM.

 

[ArkSingularity]

The Surface actually does offer comparable specs to the MacBook Pro. It depends on which Surface you’re talking about since it’s a pretty big range. And the Surface lineup is a premium PC lineup. Of course it isn’t the only one, but the other premium Windows laptops I’ve looked at have given similar results.

Thermals alone are far inferior on the Microsoft Surface than they are on the MacBook Pro. The Surface is a 2-in-1, it's not designed for the same workloads that MacBook Pros are. The market for high performance systems isn't going to limit itself solely to a small selection of similar computers, the market is much more diverse than this.

Do you have any examples from this “whole plethora” I’m supposedly ignoring? I’ve looked hard to try to find comparable laptops, and I’ve gone to many PC manufacturers websites, spent a bunch of my time looking into laptops I’ll never buy and am not that terribly interested in, just to find that in about every case so far, they charge the same or more for RAM.

I've provided examples. You threw them out because the displays weren't as good and because "thinkpads weren't very premium".

 

[chetzar]

Sure seems to me, that after 63 pages of debate, this problem could be solved by Apple spending the extra $1 or $2 to bump the base memory to 16GB for the MacBook PRO.
🤷‍♂️

 

[Kal Madda]

Thermals alone are far inferior on the Microsoft Surface than they are on the MacBook Pro. The Surface is a 2-in-1, it's not designed for the same workloads that MacBook Pros are. The market for high performance systems isn't going to limit itself solely to a small selection of similar computers, the market is much more diverse than this.

I've provided examples. You threw them out because the displays weren't as good and because "thinkpads weren't very premium".

I’m not talking about just the Surface Pro, the Surface Laptop, and Surface Studio Laptops both charge the same or higher for RAM upgrades as well. And of course I’m not going to compare a Windows laptop with a display that is worse than the MacBook Air’s to the MacBook Pro, that wouldn’t be a fair comparison. Again, I’m looking for more alike than dis-alike. Most comparable on all of the specs. And I did compare a ThinkPad with a far worse quality display they were asking a higher price for than the MacBook Pro, and the results were they were charging more for their RAM upgrade.

 

[ArkSingularity]

I’m not talking about just the Surface Pro, the Surface Laptop, and Surface Studio Laptops both charge the same or higher for RAM upgrades as well. And of course I’m not going to compare a Windows laptop with a display that is worse than the MacBook Air’s to the MacBook Pro, that wouldn’t be a fair comparison.

We're talking about RAM prices, not about displays. You're narrowing the criteria such that it ignores countless examples of professional-grade systems that don't charge the same prices, then including a small handful that do and using that to support your conclusion. (I could do the same thing with the Surface and try to look for reasons to throw it out, but you'll notice that I haven't done this. I've only said "it's not representative of the whole market" - and the market share numbers among professionals tell that story.)

At this point, I think we're talking in circles.

 

[Kal Madda]

We're talking about RAM prices, not about displays. You're narrowing the criteria such that it ignores countless examples of professional-grade systems that don't charge the same prices, then including a small handful that do and using that to support your conclusion.

At this point, I think we're talking in circles.

I’m comparing laptops that are…, wait for it…, actually comparable on most specs. Budget systems that don’t use LPDDR RAM, and have low-quality displays aren’t in the same league as the MacBook Pro. The pricing on these models will be different, they’re not in the same price bracket or category, again, comparing ordinary sedans against luxury cars.

 

[ArkSingularity]

I’m comparing laptops that are…, wait for it…, actually comparable on most specs. Budget systems that don’t use LPDDR RAM, and have low-quality displays aren’t in the same league as the MacBook Pro.

By that criteria, the Microsoft Surface is? And the Thinkpad is a "budget system"?

Look man, I think we're talking in circles. The market share numbers among professionals don't lie, but I'm not really interested in getting into an argument over it.

 

[Kal Madda]

And the Microsoft Surface is? The Thinkpad is a "budget system"?

Look man, I think we're talking in circles. The market share numbers among professionals don't lie, but I'm not really interested in getting into an argument over it.

I didn’t say the ThinkPad was a budget system, and I appeased you by comparing it, even though it falls woefully short on most specs, and the RAM pricing is higher. Not to mention the higher starting price point, which would allow me to spec out a MacBook Pro quite nicely.

And yes, we probably are talking in circles at this point. I’ve spent my time to do lots of research, shared my findings, and you just don’t seem to understand I’m trying to compare systems that have as similar specs as possible. And even when I’ve compared laptops with specs that fall woefully short of the MacBook Pro, such as the ThinkPad, they’re still charging close to, the same, or more for RAM.

 

[ArkSingularity]

I didn’t say the ThinkPad was a budget system, and I appeased you by comparing it, even though it falls woefully short on most specs, and the RAM pricing is higher. Not to mention the higher starting price point, which would allow me to spec out a MacBook Pro quite nicely.

And yes, we probably are talking in circles at this point. I’ve spent my time to do lots of research, shared my findings, and you just don’t seem to understand I’m trying to compare systems that have as similar specs as possible. And even when I’ve compared laptops with specs that fall woefully short of the MacBook Pro, such as the ThinkPad, they’re still charging close to, the same, or more for RAM.

I still fail to see how your comparisons really support the conclusion you're trying to imply, but I think we can agree to disagree at this point.

 

[ric22]

Sure seems to me, that after 63 pages of debate, this problem could be solved by Apple spending the extra $1 or $2 to bump the base memory to 16GB for the MacBook PRO.
🤷‍♂️

Basically. For what probably costs Apple an extra $35 or so, their base laptops could all start at 16GB RAM with 1TB SSDs. However, a tiny group of individuals seemingly dislike their fellow humans, don't want them to have any more of anything than is deemed by them as absolutely essential and would rather Apple charge us all $600 for the privilege.


"oooh, but skimping on the specs and charging an extortionate amount for upgrades is what makes that $1600* laptop wonderfully and sensationally cheap" 😍😍😍

"Ooooh, look sir, that boy over there overcharges people for lemonade too, so it MUST be ok"


*$2,200 in many places globally.

 

[Kal Madda]

Basically. For what probably costs Apple an extra $35 or so, their base laptops could all start at 16GB RAM with 1TB SSDs. However, a tiny group of individuals seemingly dislike their fellow humans, don't want them to have any more of anything than is deemed by them as absolutely essential and would rather Apple charge us all $600 for the privilege.


"oooh, but skimping on the specs and charging an extortionate amount for upgrades is what makes that $1600* laptop wonderfully and sensationally cheap" 😍😍😍

"Ooooh, look sir, that boy over there overcharges people for lemonade too, so it MUST be ok"


*$2,200 in many places globally.

Yes, I dislike my fellow humans for thinking a $200 RAM upgrade is reasonable, and thinking there’s a place for a cheaper 8GB RAM configuration, even if it were yet cheaper than it currently is… 😂🤣. And for the record, I haven’t seen anyone say “you shouldn’t get 16GB of RAM because it’s more than what I deem essential”, I’ve seen people recommend you buy the 16GB RAM version, which is still cheaper than last years base spec model…

 

[ric22]

I didn’t say the ThinkPad was a budget system, and I appeased you by comparing it, even though it falls woefully short on most specs, and the RAM pricing is higher.

What a weird lie to post. The base 15" ThinkPad costs £499, and already comes with 16GB RAM. The base 14" MacBook Pro requires you pay an additional £200 excess if you want 16GB RAM.

 

[ric22]

Let's take a deeper dive into that claim that ThinkPad RAM pricing is higher than Apple's RAM pricing. I'll leave it up for everyone to make their own mind up on whether porkie-pies have been told to the group.

 

[Kal Madda]

Let's take a deeper dive into that claim that ThinkPad RAM pricing is higher than Apple's RAM pricing. I'll leave it up for everyone to make their own mind up on whether porkie-pies have been told to the group.

View attachment 2314982
View attachment 2314983

That’s a different model than the one I compared RAM prices for. The ThinkPad X1 Carbon costs $240 to upgrade from 16GB to 32GB. No lies, just fact. $240 is higher than the $200 people have spent 60+ pages whining about…

 

[Kal Madda]

What a weird lie to post. The base 15" ThinkPad costs £499, and already comes with 16GB RAM. The base 14" MacBook Pro requires you pay an additional £200 excess if you want 16GB RAM.

No lies, just fact. I compared the prices on the ThinkPad X1 Carbon, and the 16GB model with everything else identical is $240 cheaper than the 32GB model with everything else identical. So it’s a $240 difference. Not to mention the fact that the display is atrocious compared to the MacBook Pro’s, and its starting price is far higher. I could spec out a really nice MacBook Pro for what Lenovo wants for the 16GB RAM model, I think, if I remember correctly, that I could get a M3 Pro, 64GB RAM, ITB configuration MacBook Pro and still be cheaper than the 16GB X1 Carbon.

 

[AJB1971]

That’s a different model than the one I compared RAM prices for. The ThinkPad X1 Carbon costs $240 to upgrade from 16GB to 32GB. No lies, just fact. $240 is higher than the $200 people have spent 60+ pages whining about…

So, Apple charges $200 for an extra 8GB of RAM, and Lenovo charges $240 for an extra 16GB. I'm struggling to see your point. Surely you can see the flaw in this comparison.