Thanx for the response - yes your right - a M1 Mac mini would suffice…keep thinking I need an M4 mini when I don’t…
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.
Apple Testing Four New M4 Macs Ahead of Fall Launch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
First job after starting up: go through and turn off/disable/uninstall/replace all of the LLM/Diffusion (please stop dignifying it with the name "AI") -infected stuff. Or, if that fails, just don't use it.
If it can't be adequately disabled, then - 8GB or 16GB, thin or fat, it's bye-bye MacOS, Hello Linux time.
8CPU X 8 GPU models, could it possibly be an X-box/PS killer and Apl gets serious about gaming and wants a piece of the gaming $$.
how would anyone get hurt by having more ram? No one is going “crap, I only wanted 8 and this comes with 16? No! I want less for the same money! I wont buy!”
No it wont. For one, it's not a console hooked to a tv. Second, it cost A LOT more than a PS/x-box/switch, and third, the games suck.
Apple isn't going to get serious about gaming, ever, because hardware has never been the issue!
Last edited:
Apple can easily move everything to 16GB, without charging us more for it. Apple doesn’t pay anywhere near what they charge for memory. That is purely a greedy money grab on their part.
macOS’s uses around 5-6GB on its own. If they want to keep 8GB on the Airs, and maybe even the base M4 MBP (not the M4 Pro and Max versions), it’s purely a business decision based on their bottomline, not customer experience.
Yeah, Apple has always been passively serious about gaming. As in, they will tell you they’re serious about gaming, and sometimes even develop tools for game developers (though I have a feeling every time we get gaming tools, it’s probably the result of a pet project by a few people within Apple that actually do you care about gaming), but it’s usually just marketing rhetoric, and they sit back and wait for developers to put out most of the effort, barely helping they to gearing their products for gaming.
...but that has very little to do with 8GB vs. 16GB RAM, and everything to do with whether Apple wants to raise prices anyway. Apple's current $200-per-8GB-increment price for RAM has no credible basis in the cost of components - it's "artificial scarcity" that forms part of Apple's strategies for setting prices and distinguishing models.
Even when they were using bog-standard DDR4 modules, Apple were charging several times over retail price (i.e. what other companies were charging - and making a profit on - for one-off modules), and LPDDR5x isn't that much much more expensive, esp. if you're Apple and can book up entire production runs...
If Apple move t6 16GB for their base specs it will be down to some combination of:
- 8GB is getting too small for the sort of data throughput that M4 series processors can manage - especially for the LLM/Diffusion services they want to push (...or MS/Google services that Mac users still want to use).
- Windows PCs are rapidly moving to 16GB base spec for "premium" laptops and it looks bad
- Smaller LPDDR5x/6 dies are becoming disproportionately expensive due to falling industry-wide demand
If Apple decided to charge BOM cost + reasonable margin for their RAM increments, I doubt that selling 8GB models would be worth the logistical costs of manufacturing, stocking and distributing two different models.
In any case, Apple's important entry level model is the $999 MacBook Air. (The Mini may be cheaper but Mac desktops have become a niche market these days) - and for the last couple of product cycles, that has been last year's model with a price cut. So, on past performance, when the M4 Air launches, the new entry-level MBA will either be the current base M3 8/256 or even remain as the current M2 MBA (if the whole M3 line is going to be dropped as a busted flush).
Apple have a major gaming platform: It's called the iPhone.
"The Mac is not for serious gaming" is engraved in 10' high letters on the wall of public perception - and it doesn't really matter whether or not it is true any more, it would be a massive PR effort to change.
I know right all they need to do with all that money they have is to make deals with games companies to port games over but it just has not happened. Id love to play Elden ring and starfield etc on my ipad pro m4 when away from my ps5/xbox series s, but nope i cant and probably never will.
The A14 was 17 months old when the M1 Ultra (which derives from it) launched.
I'll let you draw your own conclusions, but here are the facts on the product identifiers for the M2 and M3 generations of Apple silicon. My own guess is Mac16,1 and Mac16,2 are the iMac (Two-port and Four-port); Mac16,3 is the base 14" MacBook Pro; and Mac16,10 is the base Mac mini.
M2
Mac14,2 :: M2 MacBook Air 13"
Mac14,3 :: M2 Mac mini
Mac14,5 :: M2 Pro MacBook Pro 14"
Mac14,6 :: M2 Pro MacBook Pro 16"
Mac14,7 :: M2 MacBook Pro 13"
Mac14,8 :: M2 Ultra Mac Pro
Mac14,9 :: M2 Max MacBook Pro 14"
Mac14,10 :: M2 Max MacBook Pro 16"
Mac14,12 :: M2 Pro Mac mini
Mac14,13 :: M2 Max Mac Studio
Mac14,14 :: M2 Ultra Mac Studio
Mac14,15 :: M2 MacBook Air 15"
M3
Mac15,3 :: M3 (8/10) MacBook Pro 14"
Mac15,4 :: M3 (8/8) iMac (Two ports)
Mac15,5 :: M3 (8/10) iMac (Four ports)
Mac15,6 :: M3 Pro (11/14) MacBook Pro 14"
Mac15,7 :: M3 Pro (12/18) MacBook Pro 16"
Mac15,8 :: M3 Pro (12/18) MacBook Pro 14"
Mac15,9 :: M3 Max (14/30) MacBook Pro 16"
Mac15,10 :: M3 Max (14/30) MacBook Pro 14"
Mac15,11 :: M3 Max (16/40) MacBook Pro 16"
Mac15,12 :: M3 MacBook Air 13"
Mac15,13 :: M3 MacBook Air 15"
M2
Mac14,2 :: M2 MacBook Air 13"
Mac14,3 :: M2 Mac mini
Mac14,5 :: M2 Pro MacBook Pro 14"
Mac14,6 :: M2 Pro MacBook Pro 16"
Mac14,7 :: M2 MacBook Pro 13"
Mac14,8 :: M2 Ultra Mac Pro
Mac14,9 :: M2 Max MacBook Pro 14"
Mac14,10 :: M2 Max MacBook Pro 16"
Mac14,12 :: M2 Pro Mac mini
Mac14,13 :: M2 Max Mac Studio
Mac14,14 :: M2 Ultra Mac Studio
Mac14,15 :: M2 MacBook Air 15"
M3
Mac15,3 :: M3 (8/10) MacBook Pro 14"
Mac15,4 :: M3 (8/8) iMac (Two ports)
Mac15,5 :: M3 (8/10) iMac (Four ports)
Mac15,6 :: M3 Pro (11/14) MacBook Pro 14"
Mac15,7 :: M3 Pro (12/18) MacBook Pro 16"
Mac15,8 :: M3 Pro (12/18) MacBook Pro 14"
Mac15,9 :: M3 Max (14/30) MacBook Pro 16"
Mac15,10 :: M3 Max (14/30) MacBook Pro 14"
Mac15,11 :: M3 Max (16/40) MacBook Pro 16"
Mac15,12 :: M3 MacBook Air 13"
Mac15,13 :: M3 MacBook Air 15"
Last edited:
"For most of these people is an IPad base model or a Chromebook the right choice, they don‘t even need 8gb!"
Nope... it's a laptop. Or perhaps a Mini. Most people who use their computer everyday (like the users I mentioned in my post) like real keyboards rather than typing on glass. Again these are people who are not tech enthusiasts who religiously follow Apple not tech forums everyday like this one. And don't know the difference between a CPU and a GPU - and don't need to. 8 GB if RAM works great for their basic computing needs.
"I generally don't understand why users defend Apple's insane policy with mini Ram equipment, it's simply outrageous and an exploitation of market power."
Nope. It's not defending Apple. It's about giving the overwhelming majority of Apple's 1 Billion person customer base what they need for their basic computing tasks, without making them pay for more memory they'll never use. It lets people who want to purchase an Apple computer get in the door. That's a good thing!
For people who daily hang out on Apple tech forums who *think* they need more memory, Apple has you covered as well. Simply pay for it.
Don't like Apple's ways of doing business and feel you're getting screwed?
No worries, mate. Send Apple a very strong message and purchase a competitor computer that you feel offers better value by giving you more stock RAM. Believe me, if enough people, ie the majority, of Apple's 1 Billion customers do that, Apple will increase their base RAM in an eye blink.
That's common business sense.
Will you do it, and send Apple that strong message?
Had to log in to refute this nonsense.
Ram is shared with GPU! That is the most crucial factor that people seem to ignore. So no, 16 will always be better than 4
Ram is shared with GPU! That is the most crucial factor that people seem to ignore. So no, 16 will always be better than 4
Sure, but I'll have spent money on a PC, maybe new software, gone through all the effort of moving my workflow to Windows or Linux, started to re-program my muscle memory... I'm not gonna do all that and then, the next month, be like "yay! Apple have upped their base RAM to 16GB! I'm switching back immediately!"
If Apple push their prices so high that customers start departing, there's no guarantee that they'll get those customers back soon, or ever. Meanwhile, they could be losing an unknowable number of potential new customers: whenever I've extolled the virtues of Mac to PC users, the lousy RAM/SSD specs coupled with silly upgrade prices are usually the end of the argument. Even silly "don't buy it then" things - like $800 wheels, $1000 display stands and $20 cleaning rags are perpetuating the image of Apple as "over-priced".
These "the invisible hand will decide" arguments usually make the mistake of treating every transaction like buying a loaf of bread - sure, I'll try the £1 one over my usual £1.50 one, if I don't like it I can come back in a day or two and try a £1.20 one instead. It's not a long-term commitment, they're all 100% compatible with my existing collection of spreads, I don't have to re-learn how to make a bacon sandwich (and none of them fit properly in the stupid toaster anyway). Unfortunately, other transactions are not quite as simple - and lock-in is a real problem that limits competition, and fosters all these anti-trust cases, in the IT market.
Life is full of difficult decisions. Simply make a choice based on what's more important to you.
"If Apple push their prices so high that customers start departing, there's no guarantee that they'll get those customers back soon, or ever."
Again, don't worry. Apple is an extraordinarily well-run company. And one of the most successful tech companies in the world. Manufacturing and selling 600,000+ iPhones per day, every day of the year says a lot. Apple knows what it's doing.
Still thinking ...
8 GB 8 CPU 8 GPU base models for iMac and new Mac mini (most people like me use little or no AI)
12 GB 10 CPU 10 GPU mid range iMacs and Mac minis
16 GB 10 CPU 10 GPU upper range iMacs and Mac minis
8 GB 8 CPU 8 GPU base models for iMac and new Mac mini (most people like me use little or no AI)
12 GB 10 CPU 10 GPU mid range iMacs and Mac minis
16 GB 10 CPU 10 GPU upper range iMacs and Mac minis
I suppose a lot of people said the same thing about Xerox, IBM, HP, Compaq and others in their day. No doubt Apple knows a lot about what they are currently doing. But they do not know everything and cannot predict the future. So what they do not know creates a problem For them. Apple has developed a sort of arrogance that established companies like Xerox, IBM, HP, Compaq and others had in their day. They need to recognize that and work hard to push against it.
OMG... the sky might be falling, the sky might be falling!
When the number of Apple's active users falls from the current 1,000,000,000 to a mere 1,000,000... let me know and we can have a discussion.
"Apple has developed a sort of arrogance that established companies like Xerox, IBM, HP, Compaq and others had in their day. They need to recognize that and work hard to push against it."
Hmmm... I wonder if Apple ever thinks about their future and how the company is doing? Nah... Apple has simply been oblivious to the market and winging it over the last 48 years. And getting very lucky!