99.9% of Retina buyers will never use five gigs of RAM, but hundreds - possibly thousands - of forum readers here are being mislead to collectively waste thousands of dollars on RAM they will never use.
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.
8Gb vs 16Gb of ram
- Thread starter topscorer17
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
99.9% of Retina buyers will never use five gigs of RAM, but hundreds - possibly thousands - of forum readers here are being mislead to collectively waste thousands of dollars on RAM they will never use.
Moneymiike420
macrumors regular
I couldn't agree More my friend. As another poster posted on page 3 or so said,if u have the money and u feel the need to splurge for the 16 go for it.Your already shelling out over 2 g's for the retina....I myself am looking at a 13" and wondering if 4gigs is gknna be enough. And I'm stumped on getting an air or pro I'm not a computer gamer so I'm thinking 4 will be fine
thekev
macrumors 604
Bleh.. make the car references more interesting. Don't buy Pirelli tires. Good Years are cheaper😛.
You'll take a significantly larger hit than that. Apple discounts more than $200 on refurbished units, and those come with a full warranty. When a new model hits in a year or whatever, those will come down too. They are probably trying to clear old refurbished inventory at the moment.
I'm sorry but this is ********. Open safari with 10 random websites open, open a couple of large images or PDF documents in Preview, Mail, and iPhoto or Aperture with an average size library, and you'll see page outs as soon as you start using that library. I'm not saying that this means you should upgrade to 16 gb, as these machines handle swapping really well, but you don't have a very strict definition of "never use". I claim 90% of RMBP users will have page outs within the first week of use.
I claim 90% of RMBP users will have page outs within the first week of use.[/
My graphic designers create and edit comercials for CNN, NBC, CBS for Petes sake with various pages and apps open and hardly go over 8gb of ram, if ever. They most likely are doing more taxing work than 98% of users. And they have 64 gb to work with. Yes if you try to use all your apps all at the same time and open 10 windows along with it you will use more ram. Is this a mystery? 😕
Close a few apps, a few windows. How hard is that? Who opens every app imagineable at the same time? I got news for you. 8gb is alot of ram. 90 percent of users will never need it. Stop with the nonsense already.
If you dont know if you need it or not, you probably dont. If you do by all means get it. But most people dont. Those who do are the minority, not the majority.
My graphic designers create and edit comercials for CNN, NBC, CBS for Petes sake with various pages and apps open and hardly go over 8gb of ram, if ever. They most likely are doing more taxing work than 98% of users. And they have 64 gb to work with. Yes if you try to use all your apps all at the same time and open 10 windows along with it you will use more ram. Is this a mystery? 😕
Close a few apps, a few windows. How hard is that? Who opens every app imagineable at the same time? I got news for you. 8gb is alot of ram. 90 percent of users will never need it. Stop with the nonsense already.
If you dont know if you need it or not, you probably dont. If you do by all means get it. But most people dont. Those who do are the minority, not the majority.
Last edited:
SDAVE
macrumors 601
I love your attitude. And what's the point of getting the lastest and fastest computer if you can't be sensible with only few apps and pages due to ram. Oh right.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_art#section_2
Design and edit comercials. CGI based since most comercials do contain or have CGI in them or are entirely comprised of CGI. I have video editors and for post production.
Last edited:
Few Apps? You can open more than a few with 8 gb of ram. Has nothing to do with sensible. I highly doubt most people need 16gb of ram. If you want to get it to make yourself feel better or future proof, go ahead. If you really need it and use more than 8, go ahead. Do most people need it, no they dont.
Need and wanting something is two different things. Editing CGI for comercials and having heavy duty ram intensive apps running as well as web pages open is more than a 'few apps running' And then not hitting 8GB of ram even then, is not being 'sensible'.
16GB of ram is like having a ferrari to deliver a pizza a mile down the street. Its simply not needed or over kill for most people. Yes that car will ride your a$$ and try to pass you but in the end its still stuck at the same red light as you. 😉
Last edited:
i dont do image work and i was using 12gb of ram consistently yesterday running itunes, safari, a netflix movie, and background mail/ical/activity monitor/ichat.
everyone NEEDS 16gb ram if they can afford it! save yourself the future headache of page outs especially once your ssd gets full of files
everyone NEEDS 16gb ram if they can afford it! save yourself the future headache of page outs especially once your ssd gets full of files
You might have something wrong with your machine. i do more than that and barely use 5gb, and i have 16 on my late 2011 15. Get what you need. 90 percent of people dont NEED it.
Queen6
macrumors G5
One of the more accurate statements on this thread, some are simply generating hysteria over the rMBP and the need for 16Gb of RAM, for the vast majority 8Gb is more than enough, even heavy users. The upgrade is intended for those at the extreme end of the usage scale, and those that like their big numbers 😉
As the individual you must filter the content of the internet very carefully; everyone is a "Pro", everyone is the "expert", for the most part they are neither, a few are well informed, the majority are not. If you need help to make a significant purchase, or qualification on hardware, wait for a recognised source, not the kid with 10 minutes hands on in Best Buy 😉
You are right on the money, and have not been misleading nor have you said anything inaccurate this entire thread.
Also, your comment on insurance reinforced my belief that you have the mental capactiy necessary to be trusted with such a messy subject.
If anyone is still concerned/confused/inquisitive, listen to Elmo.
Just because you occasionally go over 8 GB's of RAM doesn't mean you need 16 GB of RAM.
However I still claim that the majority of users will go over 8 GB on at least a weekly basis. It's quite easy to reach the point where your RMBP will start purging inactive memory. I get it all the time with just a couple documents, Mail, and Safari open. You don't need many apps open. If I open Aperture in addition to the above and start editing photos and videos, in addition to purging inactive memory I'll get the occasional page out of a GB or two. I can easily see myself wanting to use more than the few apps mentioned above at the same time, at which point I might start swapping so much that I will actually notice the lack of RAM.
I'm simply critiquing the statements that most people will never use more than 8 GB of RAM on this machine. I find this extremely unlikely. The real question to me at least is if the amount of page outs is excessive enough for people to notice the lack of RAM. I'm inclined to say that most people probably will not notice the amount of page outs they get, even though they happen on a weekly, possibly daily, basis.
However I still claim that the majority of users will go over 8 GB on at least a weekly basis. It's quite easy to reach the point where your RMBP will start purging inactive memory. I get it all the time with just a couple documents, Mail, and Safari open. You don't need many apps open. If I open Aperture in addition to the above and start editing photos and videos, in addition to purging inactive memory I'll get the occasional page out of a GB or two. I can easily see myself wanting to use more than the few apps mentioned above at the same time, at which point I might start swapping so much that I will actually notice the lack of RAM.
I'm simply critiquing the statements that most people will never use more than 8 GB of RAM on this machine. I find this extremely unlikely. The real question to me at least is if the amount of page outs is excessive enough for people to notice the lack of RAM. I'm inclined to say that most people probably will not notice the amount of page outs they get, even though they happen on a weekly, possibly daily, basis.
I have been running the rMBP almost non stop for weeks now. And I got 0 bytes cumulative page outs over the last couple of weeks. Also I have not seen my FREE RAM drop below 3 gigs.
But I am only running itunes, mail, chromium, terminal and once in a while some random app or movie. The RMBP (or Lion) does some to need more RAM than my old SL mac which ran fine with only 4gigs of RAM and still has plenty to spare for a VM.
This discussion is going on and on. But I'd rather save 2 benjamins, adapt and use lightweight apps. A perfect example is probably vim and google docs vs MS Office or iWorks. Rather that then throw money at the problem. Mind you that I am still able to run every app that 16 gigger can if I wanted to.
But I am only running itunes, mail, chromium, terminal and once in a while some random app or movie. The RMBP (or Lion) does some to need more RAM than my old SL mac which ran fine with only 4gigs of RAM and still has plenty to spare for a VM.
This discussion is going on and on. But I'd rather save 2 benjamins, adapt and use lightweight apps. A perfect example is probably vim and google docs vs MS Office or iWorks. Rather that then throw money at the problem. Mind you that I am still able to run every app that 16 gigger can if I wanted to.
Jbgloss
macrumors member
OK it really depends -
It depends on what you are doing I have a base rMPB with 8GB's of RAM and a 6 Core 3.33 with 16GB's. I do video and creative work with photoshop etc... I have SSD's in my MacPro too.
I have not seen much difference in rendering time between the 2 for what I do. My videos are 5 - 15 minutes shot with my Cannon XF100. I was thinking about upgrading, as I use my rMPB for travel, but since I have not seen a HUGE difference I decided to keep my base as it is working FINE for me. I just did not want to wait 3 weeks.
It really depends on what you are doing. I guess if you are doing HEAVY video then go with the 16GB'S you can't add more 🙂.
For me the base rMPB rocks, but I have the MP as my heavy lifter.
Good luck with your decision, I am very happy at 8GB's...
It depends on what you are doing I have a base rMPB with 8GB's of RAM and a 6 Core 3.33 with 16GB's. I do video and creative work with photoshop etc... I have SSD's in my MacPro too.
I have not seen much difference in rendering time between the 2 for what I do. My videos are 5 - 15 minutes shot with my Cannon XF100. I was thinking about upgrading, as I use my rMPB for travel, but since I have not seen a HUGE difference I decided to keep my base as it is working FINE for me. I just did not want to wait 3 weeks.
It really depends on what you are doing. I guess if you are doing HEAVY video then go with the 16GB'S you can't add more 🙂.
For me the base rMPB rocks, but I have the MP as my heavy lifter.
Good luck with your decision, I am very happy at 8GB's...
jbg232
macrumors 65816
I think it really depends on what you are doing. Yes, it is difficult to use >8GB with today's programs running in the background 90% of the time. The time when it DOES become an issue is when you are doing something very memory intensive like editing a photo, scrolling through huge RAW files in Aperture/Photoshop, running a virtual machine at full gear. Tasks like these will tip the RAM useage over the edge and you will get pageouts and massive system slowdown. Most people don't run activity monitor at those times but that's what is causing the slowdown. My advice (as mentioned earlier in the thread) is if you WILL be either a) viewing/editing large RAW files in Aperture/Photoshop or b) want to run a virtual machine for more than just microsoft office or c) not sure, but have a likely chance of doing those two things, the extra RAM is worth it given that you can't update it later. If not, don't worry and be happy, 99% of the time you'll be fine. Personally I run my machine with 8GB and get pageouts ALL THE TIME and can't wait to upgrade my machine to 16GB (or more) when I upgrade next year.
...and yes, I do know what I'm doing given that I've been building my own computers for 20 years, and no, there isn't a memory leak in the programs I run.
...and yes, I do know what I'm doing given that I've been building my own computers for 20 years, and no, there isn't a memory leak in the programs I run.
look... for me it was more of a question of, you can't upgrade it, and i don't want to worry about it. also, i've got the means. do i need 16gb of ram? hell no. but i'm bothered by the fact that i can't upgrade later and i don't want any buyers remorse. for me, 108£ or whatever it was to upgrade via student discount was nothing for me, I'm doing an MBA and i don't want to worry about page outs. base + 16gb was my play and it came out to a sweet deal (1660£, 1590£ if you consider the 70£ gift card as cash).
So i've got the cash, 100£ is a night out in london, might as well make my macbook pro's stats look sweet especially for the stuff i can't upgrade. not bothered about 2.3 vs 2.7ghz processor, but the 16gb of ram gives it a nice round number and peace of mind that i will never run out of ram or have to worry about upgrading.
If you've got the means and don't want to worry about it, whats the problem? why is this such a debate? i think the 512/2.6 is a far more foolish upgrade as you can generally upgrade the SSD (its the only upgradeable part) and the proc upgrade makes nearly no difference also.
So i've got the cash, 100£ is a night out in london, might as well make my macbook pro's stats look sweet especially for the stuff i can't upgrade. not bothered about 2.3 vs 2.7ghz processor, but the 16gb of ram gives it a nice round number and peace of mind that i will never run out of ram or have to worry about upgrading.
If you've got the means and don't want to worry about it, whats the problem? why is this such a debate? i think the 512/2.6 is a far more foolish upgrade as you can generally upgrade the SSD (its the only upgradeable part) and the proc upgrade makes nearly no difference also.
I've got the 8gb and i can say that I'm still very happy. but I have to admit; I hope that in the future they might find a (third party) way to get this 8gb extra on there. But let's see what happens, so far so good. 🙂
Can't change it anyway now, returning it after two months saying; i would like the 16gb they will probably disagree.
Can't change it anyway now, returning it after two months saying; i would like the 16gb they will probably disagree.
4GB is enough for running a Windows XP virtual machine on my Late-2009 iMac. Maybe you will need 16GB if you want to work on a Windows XP and Windows 7 and Photoshop together at the same time.
Woodcrest64
macrumors 65816
Completely agree. I got the 16gb because I run virtual machines and use Final Cut Pro. However in 5 years when I probably will need to replace my machine 32GB may be the norm and 64gb will be the higher end choice. In addition my GPU and CPU will be pretty out of date 🙂
jbg232
macrumors 65816
Windows XP was great while it lasted (I had it on my computer for the last 4 years), but it really is time to move on if you're running windows applications. In April 2014 it will be end-of-life'd without security patches.
BTW, just for a historical perspective, Windows XP was released in April 2001 and Mac OS 10.0 "Cheetah" was released at almost the same time in March 2001. It is really gutsy to be rely on an operating system that is 11 years old and expect it to last another 3-4 years (the life of the rMBP) after the EOL.
At least under windows, 8gb is probably okay. My desktop at home has only 6GB ram. I havent run into issues, and my page file is disabled. But I can always upgrade to 12 or even 24GB if necessary.
Since the rmbp isn't upgradable, I opted for 16.
Since the rmbp isn't upgradable, I opted for 16.
I agree Windows XP is a very old system, which is not as capable as latest versions of Windows. But after all Mac handles a lot of things already, we just need Windows to run a few apps and I think speed is the first priority.