Do you think there will be 32 GB of RAM options and more for the new Mac Mini?

[Silly John Fatty]

For a moment I've been wanting to go with the highest spec Intel Mac Mini to replace my old Mac Pro 5,1. Now there's this new Mac Mini released and I believe it's better than the Intel ones, but it only comes with max. 16 GB of RAM. I would be happy to have at least 32. My Mac Pro has 32 right now and sometimes I feel like I need more.

Do you think they will upgrade it at some point?

 

[mdwsta4]

At some point, yes

 

[Silly John Fatty]

I hope it's going to be soon.

 

[velocityg4]

It just came out. I wouldn't expect anything until next fall. Assuming they upgrade the chips yearly like the iPhone. Not something like every other year.

 

[mdgm]

They may be holding up making available things like 32GB RAM till after releasing an iMac with Apple Silicon. Would not be surprised to see a 32GB RAM option added for the Mini at that point.

 

[Bollockser]

16GB was good in 2012, but in 2020 it's pitiful, M1 efficiency or not.

 

[macdos]

It's gotta be 128 GB at least before I am even considering it.

 

[Fomalhaut]

16GB was good in 2012, but in 2020 it's pitiful, M1 efficiency or not.

For what purposes? Have a look at all the YouTube reviews with 8GB machines. They are doing just fine for most tasks, even extensive photo and 4K video editing. I'd agree (as do several reviewers) that 8GB is a bit limiting, but I have yet to see *any* tests where the 16GB model is shown to be lacking due to memory limitations; the CPU / GPU performance reaches its limit before memory becomes the bottleneck.

Of course, there are applications and use cases that require more than 16GB of RAM - editing massive photos, working with extremely large data sets, in-memory databases, running multiple virtual machines and so on, but these entry-level computers are not positioned for those users. These are consumer machines for the mass-market. For that purpose they are adequately specc'd and perform very well.

What are your uses that require >16GB RAM?

 

[Moonjumper]

The MacBook Pro has the old top end Intel models still on sale. I expect them to be replaced by a higher spec Apple Silicon chip. An M1X or whatever it will be called. I think it likely to have an option for more RAM. Long term there will be much higher limits as all Mac models will eventually be replaced, including the Mac Pro, and that will not be limited to 16GB RAM.

The Mac Mini has the old top end Intel model still on sale. I hope it will be replaced in a similar manner to the high end MBPs.

 

[MacCheetah3]

Admittedly, I was initially skeptical, disappointed at first by some of the options/specs/features, also planning on having 32GB of RAM in my next Mac mini. I've changed my mind following research, including looking more closely at the resource usage of my current machine (i.e. Activity Monitor) as well as discussions in other M1-related threads.

As @Moonjumper has stated, Apple hasn't yet released a model to replace the higher end Intel configurations. I can accept that Apple is intentionally holding back on the higher end models. Because the M series processors are unified, everything is in one die. So, when Apple adds more processing cores and RAM chips, the die size will increase and thus the the yields per wafer will decrease. Supplies are already low/restrained, thus sticking to the lower end (i.e. smaller) package for now is best.

Basically, @Silly John Fatty, I assume a 10 or 12 core M1X (maybe dubbed M2) with 32GB and perhaps a 64GB RAM options in models with possibly four USB4/TB3 ports could be released as soon as late Spring 2021.

16GB was good in 2012, but in 2020 it's pitiful, M1 efficiency or not.

I was surprised when 8GB wasn't cutting it for my workflow that 16GB appears to be okay for my current as well as upcoming demands (Xcode plus a couple Web browsers, Mail, Messages, and a few other apps running frequently/constantly). Granted, it could be tight later on, but I'm probably not going to worry. Even so, I'm waiting until at least late Spring 2021 to purchase a new Mac mini because I won't be beginning any major app development until then. Seriously though, after using all of your regular apps for awhile, look at the RAM stats in Activity Monitor.

@Fomalhaut Exactly. I only pushed up against the fill line of 32GB of RAM while running two VMs (Win10 and WinServer) on a Win10 laptop, each running SQL Server -- granted, small scale DBs.

 

[Fomalhaut]

Admittedly, I was initially skeptical, disappointed at first by some of the options/specs/features, also planning on having 32GB of RAM in my next Mac mini. I've changed my mind following research, including looking more closely at the resource usage of my current machine (i.e. Activity Monitor) as well as discussions in other M1-related threads.

As @Moonjumper has stated, Apple hasn't yet released a model to replace the higher end Intel configurations. I can accept that Apple is intentionally holding back on the higher end models. Because the M series processors are unified, everything is in one die. So, when Apple adds more processing cores and RAM chips, the die size will increase and thus the the yields per wafer will decrease. Supplies are already low/restrained, thus sticking to the lower end (i.e. smaller) package for now is best.

Basically, @Silly John Fatty, I assume a 10 or 12 core M1X (maybe dubbed M2) with 32GB and perhaps a 64GB RAM options in models with possibly four USB4/TB3 ports could be released as soon as late Spring 2021.

I was surprised when 8GB wasn't cutting it for my workflow that 16GB appears to be okay for my current as well as upcoming demands (Xcode plus a couple Web browsers, Mail, Messages, and a few other apps running frequently/constantly). Granted, it could be tight later on, but I'm probably not going to worry. Even so, I'm waiting until at least late Spring 2021 to purchase a new Mac mini because I won't be beginning any major app development until then. Seriously though, after using all of your regular apps for awhile, look at the RAM stats in Activity Monitor.

@Fomalhaut Exactly. I only pushed up against the fill line of 32GB of RAM while running two VMs (Win10 and WinServer) on a Win10 laptop, each running SQL Server -- granted, small scale DBs.

Actually, the memory is not on the silicon die, it is on the SoC package as you can see here (RAM is on the right):

Blown up, here is the die. You can see the memory controllers on the right, but the actual RAM is off the silicon:

We would expect that an M1X SoC would have more CPU and GPU cores and therefore be larger. This would necessitate a larger SoC package which if scaled up in the same proportion as the M1, would have space for at least 2 more RAM chips. If they are the same density, then I would expect 32GB RAM in a future model, possibly 64GB if using higher density RAM (which may already be available).

 

[HDFan]

16GB was good in 2012, but in 2020 it's pitiful, M1 efficiency or not.

It's gotta be 128 GB at least before I am even considering it.

We know that IOS is extremely efficient in RAM utilization. Our expectations of what is needed is based on our experiences with Intel. Early indications are that you need much less RAM on an M1 than on an Intel model, but it is going to be a while until we know. With ram hungry programs such as video, photography, simulations, etc. it will be interesting to see if you need as much RAM as on an Intel CPU.

 

[harvester32]

Skeptical or not, I can't find anything that can make this thing hiccup and I have the 8GB Mini. It's been amazing considering how my i7 can use up all the ram with just a few apps. Not sure the voodoo under the hood, but it's working. That said, I did order the 16gb as I do plan on using Parallels when they come out with their compatible version and that could be the only thing that could cause a problem.

 

[Fishrrman]

None of the "m1" Macs seem to come with more than 16gb of RAM.

I'm thinking that this might be a limitation of the m1 chip itself, and that it will take an "m2" chip to support 32gb or more RAM configurations.

As such, I would not expect to see "a new m2 Mini" until late NEXT year.
Nothing sooner...

 

[theluggage]

None of the "m1" Macs seem to come with more than 16gb of RAM.

Realistically, though, if you look at competing ultraportables like Dell XPS, Asus Zenbook and MS Surface Laptop, a choice of 8 or 16GB of soldered-in LPDDR RAM is pretty much par for the course.

While it's clear that, even with 8 or 16GB, the M1 machines can do a lot more than the low-power Intel models they replace, people are being a bit hasty in their rush to replace their tricked-out Intel MacBook Pros and higher-end Intel Mac Minis with M1 machines - the cheapest Macs available - when we know that there will be M2/M1X/whatever "pro" Macs coming real soon now. These will most likely offer not just more RAM, but more CPU and GPU cores, more TB3/USB4 ports and better multiple display support, which are also going to appeal to the sort of people who actually need 32GB or more of RAM.

Patience, folks - we're currently in a short hiatus where the cheapest, entry-level Macs have had a big power up and currently seem to outperform the more expensive Intel models. This too, will pass, probably before you've finished paying off your credit card... and if you're planning on selling your M1 when the new ones come out, bear in mind that lots of other people will have the same idea, so it's gonna be a buyer's market.

I think people have got fixated on the RAM "issue" (understandable, because Apple charge so much for the upgrade and you can't change your mind later) when performance is actually a complex formula of CPU/GPU core speed, number of CPU/GPU cores, SSD speed and RAM that varies enormously depending on what software, file formats etc. you are using. There's a danger that even if you could put 32GB in your M1 you'd find that your GPU or SSD I/O had pretty much hit the peg with only 16GB.

 

[DiGiornot my real dad]

Realistically, though, if you look at competing ultraportables like Dell XPS, Asus Zenbook and MS Surface Laptop, a choice of 8 or 16GB of soldered-in LPDDR RAM is pretty much par for the course.

I think this exemplifies the weird spot the Mini sits in, as there's no reason to make any of the same power or packaging tradeoffs in a desktop machine. To me, the Mini always feels like the forgotten child of the Mac lineup, so I'm not positive they'll bother to make a "pro" version... but we'll see.

 

[Bollockser]

The MacBook Pro has the old top end Intel models still on sale.
The Mac Mini has the old top end Intel model still on sale.

FOR sale, not ON sale
But they should be ON sale since theyve been completely BTFO'd

 

[Moonjumper]

FOR sale, not ON sale
But they should be ON sale since theyve been completely BTFO'd

I was speaking in British English as opposed to American English. See the difference here: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/on-sale

If you are going to try to correct someone, at least write "they've" correctly.

 

[robertosh]

They may be holding up making available things like 32GB RAM till after releasing an iMac with Apple Silicon. Would not be surprised to see a 32GB RAM option added for the Mini at that point.

This makes sense, I am expecting the same. I hope in June we have a new mini option.

 

[Pressure]

Actually, the memory is not on the silicon die, it is on the SoC package as you can see here (RAM is on the right):

View attachment 1686292

Blown up, here is the die. You can see the memory controllers on the right, but the actual RAM is off the silicon:

View attachment 1686294

We would expect that an M1X SoC would have more CPU and GPU cores and therefore be larger. This would necessitate a larger SoC package which if scaled up in the same proportion as the M1, would have space for at least 2 more RAM chips. If they are the same density, then I would expect 32GB RAM in a future model, possibly 64GB if using higher density RAM (which may already be available).

That image clearly shows 3 16b channels to the right, four along the top and a single channel in the upper left side.

 

[gnasher729]

16GB was good in 2012, but in 2020 it's pitiful, M1 efficiency or not.

Apple replaced low end Macs with low end M1's. 16 GB is plenty for these machines. If it's not enough for you, wait for the next series of mid-range Silicon chips.

 

[gnasher729]

I'm thinking that this might be a limitation of the m1 chip itself, and that it will take an "m2" chip to support 32gb or more RAM configurations.

I wouldn't call it a limitation, I would call it a deliberate design choice. The current M1 is a low end chip. Low end chips don't need more than 16 GB of RAM, and don't need to be upgradeable.

 

[hagjohn]

Clearly, the M1/SoC has reduced the need for excess memory. We are seeing the M1/SoC doing some amazing things with 8GB but I think with M2 or whatever is next out the door, you need to look at the reviews before deciding what memory you need. Artificially deciding you need a certain number is just going to waste you money.

 

[Fomalhaut]

That image clearly shows 3 16b channels to the right, four along the top and a single channel in the upper left side.

Indeed it does, but these are memory controllers and the channels to the CPU/GPU, not the memory itself. I'm guessing that 2 channels are used for each LPDDR4 DRAM chip (from context in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LPDDR#LP-DDR4X)

Have a look at this thread for more discussion: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/will-mac-soc-include-the-memory-in-the-soc.2250238/

@cmaier used to design AMD chips and generally has some good info on how this stuff works!

It is unusual to include RAM on the same silicon die as the CPU/GPU cores. Cache memory, yes, system RAM...not usually.

Here's another source that discusses this very question: https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/175615/why-is-ram-not-put-on-the-cpu-chip

 

[Ethosik]

Realistically, though, if you look at competing ultraportables like Dell XPS, Asus Zenbook and MS Surface Laptop, a choice of 8 or 16GB of soldered-in LPDDR RAM is pretty much par for the course.

While it's clear that, even with 8 or 16GB, the M1 machines can do a lot more than the low-power Intel models they replace, people are being a bit hasty in their rush to replace their tricked-out Intel MacBook Pros and higher-end Intel Mac Minis with M1 machines - the cheapest Macs available - when we know that there will be M2/M1X/whatever "pro" Macs coming real soon now. These will most likely offer not just more RAM, but more CPU and GPU cores, more TB3/USB4 ports and better multiple display support, which are also going to appeal to the sort of people who actually need 32GB or more of RAM.

Patience, folks - we're currently in a short hiatus where the cheapest, entry-level Macs have had a big power up and currently seem to outperform the more expensive Intel models. This too, will pass, probably before you've finished paying off your credit card... and if you're planning on selling your M1 when the new ones come out, bear in mind that lots of other people will have the same idea, so it's gonna be a buyer's market.

I think people have got fixated on the RAM "issue" (understandable, because Apple charge so much for the upgrade and you can't change your mind later) when performance is actually a complex formula of CPU/GPU core speed, number of CPU/GPU cores, SSD speed and RAM that varies enormously depending on what software, file formats etc. you are using. There's a danger that even if you could put 32GB in your M1 you'd find that your GPU or SSD I/O had pretty much hit the peg with only 16GB.

I think people should not be buying these computers if it takes you even a month or two to pay off your credit card on a $699 system at the base price (referring to Mac mini not the laptops)!