Guys, get 16 GB.

[yangchewren]

That's a pretty ignorant statement. How long ago was 640k? There are a lot of people that don't even use the full 8 gigs yet. I have a 2 year old gaming desktop that I have to push hard to use the full 8. Unless you are using VMs, doing heavy photoshop, movie editing, CAD and things like that... then you wont need 16 gigs in the next 4-5 years. Software just doesn't double its needs like that.

Engineers are not trying to push the hardware. Using the memory comes from lazy programming. RAM is so cheap that your variables don't matter. There is no need for efficient programming so programmers get lazy.

----------



That's because you are using VMs. Not everyone does that. Most people that do that don't need to do that either. In fact you don't even need to do that. Run it on bootcamp.

Not to point out the obvious, his first statement was made out of jest.

Also as services become more complex, it should follow that the underlying software use more resources, so it is never wrong to recommend more ram especially since the RMBP is non user upgradeable.

Additionally, I think you've agreed with the quoted poster by saying there are lazy programmers out there, we should always have headroom in our systems so we can compensate for ram guzzlers. Sometimes our workplaces or schools may not cater for other more efficient software and that's where having that extra bit of ram will count.

Lastly, nothing beats the convenience of a VM, bootcamp rearranges your partitions and requires a lengthy reboot. VMs are totally modular and can be transferred from computer to computer without hassle.

 

[jont-fu]

I completely disagree.

Have RAM requirements increased over the past two years? Nope. If anything, they've decreased.

One thing to consider is the RAM price. Prices have actually almost doubled in the last year (ref: http://pcpartpicker.com/trends/memory/). This is partly because of a flooded memory chip factory in Asia, and the rest of the manufacturers instantly raising prices. But also, the PC market has stopped growing and people are instead buying tablets which have much lower memory requirements. Apple-supplied memory was ridiculously expensive 1 year ago, but now it's just fairly expensive.

Still I think 16 GB is a safe bet for the professional user; even if you currently don't need to handle a bunch of virtual machines or process 4K video, you might in a few years.

 

[simon48]

So will a 16gb RAM machine run faster than an 8gb RAM machine or not?

It depends on what your doing and how long term we're talking.

 

[illian]

Totally agree! I am a software developer and also use lightroom and photoshop for my RAW files. Honestly, 8 GB is more than enough for me.

So for most people getting 16GB, the only difference they will see is a -200$ on their bank account.

RAM discussion again
RAM is very expensive on the haswell mbp (200,- from 8 -->16)
The average user will be perfectly fine for the next 4-5 years with only 4gb.
If u run VMs u wanna get as much ram as possible.
it completely depends on what u use ur mac for.
a lot of people posting on here don't seem to understand that u don't need a pimped out mbp to surf the web, write reports, watch netflix and listen to music.
i got the rmbp with 8gb/256gb because I need it for heavy multitasking (many tabs, pages, word, keynote and photoshop open at the same time) with flawless swiping between apps, some video editing in iMovie, photoshoping, movie watching. 8gb ram is and will be enough for a long time for these tasks.
I know i won't use VMs, i know i am not gonna produce a hollywood blockbuster on it. 16gb ram is money down the toilet in my case.

 

[RngRngBananaRam]

Not to point out the obvious, his first statement was made out of jest.

Also as services become more complex, it should follow that the underlying software use more resources, so it is never wrong to recommend more ram especially since the RMBP is non user upgradeable.

Additionally, I think you've agreed with the quoted poster by saying there are lazy programmers out there, we should always have headroom in our systems so we can compensate for ram guzzlers. Sometimes our workplaces or schools may not cater for other more efficient software and that's where having that extra bit of ram will count.

Lastly, nothing beats the convenience of a VM, bootcamp rearranges your partitions and requires a lengthy reboot. VMs are totally modular and can be transferred from computer to computer without hassle.

Wouldn't the marginal utility of going from a dual-core i5 (in the 13-inch rMPB) to a quad-core i7 (in the 15-inch rMPB) be far greater for virtual-machine users than the marginal utility of going from 8gb of RAM to 16gb of RAM?

----------

So will a 16gb RAM machine run faster than an 8gb RAM machine or not?

For 99% of tasks, no.

For the remaining 1% of tasks, like running multiple VMs, there's still no gaurantee that the RAM upgrade would be the best place to put your extra money. Perhaps going from a dual-core i5 to a quad-core i7 would actually be more cost-effective?

 

[simon48]

Wouldn't the marginal utility of going from a dual-core i5 (in the 13-inch rMPB) to a quad-core i7 (in the 15-inch rMPB) be far greater for virtual-machine users than the marginal utility of going from 8gb of RAM to 16gb of RAM?

16GB of RAM is a big boost too. You can give your VMs 6-8GB of RAM and have both OSs run fast.

 

[racer1441]

I have found the 4 in the base model is fine.

 

[TrollToddington]

I see a lot of threads/posts where people are getting 8 GB, or are unsure if they should get 16 GB.

Trust me, ...

I've learned to never trust people who begin their sentences with 'trust me'. Do you represent a respectable institution or something? You, like me, are just an anonymous guy on the Internet and you do not have any credentials to show when you just say 'trust me'. You should begin your sentences with 'in my opinion' or 'I think' or the like.

On the topic, you have a point in saying that but only if you intend to use a computer for a longer period, say, 5 years or so. From my point of view, spending extra money on RAM just because some software I might use in the future might require > 8GB of RAM is just ridiculous. The computer is just a device, when it stops fitting its purpose, sell and buy a new one. I welcome the fact that Apple equip the MBP with 8GB of RAM because that is plenty. For the most of the users 4GB is fairly enough and that's why the MBA comes with only 4GB. Don't like the screen of the MBA? Get the base 13" MBP, for $100 more you get the nice screen.

I think the standard configurations of all Apple computers are fairly good. If your current needs require more RAM, get the higher computer or BTO.

 

[Meister]

"I need a computer to update my Facebook profile and to Listen to music. Sometimes I write a report for school. Are you sure I will be fine with 16gb on my new 15" rmbp. I wish apple would give me a 32gb option. I need it future proofed till at least next year!!"

 

[InfinitiG]

Ram usage has leveled off...

I had 4gb on my 2006 macboook and now 8gb on my 2008 macbook
7 years later and apple is selling macs that come with 4gb. That should tell you something. 4gb will be good for another 5 years. 8gb for another 10+ years. Especially with the new memory management in OS X

 

[Azathoth]

As many others have already pointed out - 4GB is fine for most uses (unless you run VMs or movie editing).

OS (both OS X 10.9 and Windows 8) RAM requirements have actually decreased the past iteration as there is a shift to mobile platforms (for better or worse) - which are currently at 1-2GB for state of the art.

Sure, 16GB is nice and more is better - but I see no reason that people's usage patterns (FB, netflix, movies, email, web) are going to change much, and OS memory usage has been going down, so IMO 8GB is likely to be fine for most people with a 5 year horizon.

 

[RngRngBananaRam]

Ram usage has leveled off...

I had 4gb on my 2006 macboook and now 8gb on my 2008 macbook
7 years later and apple is selling macs that come with 4gb. That should tell you something. 4gb will be good for another 5 years. 8gb for another 10+ years. Especially with the new memory management in OS X

It's more than leveled off, to be honest. RAM requirements have been begun to shrink the past two years as desktop operating systems have gotten better at managing memory.

 

[walkie]

With Mavericks (that comprises memory) and SSD's the situation is not the same as it was years ago when HD's were the mainstream on storage, now the rMBP comes with a lightning fast SSD, if the system run out of RAM memory and starts to page memory, the SSD will still be fast enough, so you don't need to overcharge your laptop with excessive amounts of RAM, since the culprits of slowness (HD's) are not present anymore.

 

[KPOM]

For people that just use computers to web browse, email, listen to music, watch Netflix, do word processing homework, maybe play some Facebook games, and other minimal tasks... they are unlikely to ever need 16 gigs much less within the next 4 years. 8 gigs is plenty for those type of people. Do not mislead them with your opinion.

Exactly. Remember, a big point of Mavericks is better memory management. Also, with a PCIe SSD, page-outs result in much less of a performance hit. For the user you describe above, by the time RAM gets to be an issue, so will the processor and GPU. I.e., it will be time for a new Mac anyway. By then, in terms of resale, the upgraded model won't sell for much, if any more than the 8GB model.

 

[ja12ke]

Just use that extra $200 to get more storage on the SSD instead. It's so fast now, who cares if I'm swapping.

 

[InfinitiG]

Exactly. Remember, a big point of Mavericks is better memory management. Also, with a PCIe SSD, page-outs result in much less of a performance hit. For the user you describe above, by the time RAM gets to be an issue, so will the processor and GPU. I.e., it will be time for a new Mac anyway. By then, in terms of resale, the upgraded model won't sell for much, if any more than the 8GB model.

good point on the page outs and like someone else mentioned apple is an excellent indicator on future developments

the OP has no idea what he's talking about

 

[Harrycooke]

For people that just use computers to web browse, email, listen to music, watch Netflix, do word processing homework, maybe play some Facebook games, and other minimal tasks... they are unlikely to ever need 16 gigs much less within the next 4 years. 8 gigs is plenty for those type of people. Do not mislead them with your opinion.

Like myself for example. I don't even use 3GB let alone 8GB, which is what I have in my base 15" rMBP. (I only got the retina because I love the screen, and the size.)

 

[Meister]

Then how do you explain the endless threads in here with people on 4 gig machines that have fairly basic needs that are looking to increase the speed of their machines and everyone suggests 8 gigs and an SSD?



Same response as to the guy above, if you look around here there are any number of threads of people suffering with 4 gigs, I myself was with a mid-2010 i7 Arrandale machine, and my uses are about as basic as they get.

If you think 8 gigs is fine today, that's fine and dandy, but the point I'm trying to make is most people thought 4 gigs was fine a few years ago and a lot of machines are struggling today with that. 8 gigs is doubtful to be fine in another 4 years, and this time, you are stuck with what you bought. You can't upgrade it like I could on my 2010 machine, hence why you should just get it now. I would prioritize a RAM increase over a processor or SSD capacity increase.

And to those complaining about price, you're buying Apple, you don't really have any grounds to whine about price on a machine that costs $1200-$3000. Not to mention, $200 is pretty fair for 8 gigs considering the Apple tax; my 8 gigs of Crucial that I bought for my machine a couple months ago was $80. As has been mentioned, RAM doesn't constantly decrease in price - a year ago that same 8 gigs of crucial RAM was $40, so $200 for it from Apple in a non-upgradeable machine is plenty fair, that's the price Apple used to charge to go from 2 to 4.

I still don't see an answer as to why anyone advocating against 16 gigs also isn't advocating for 4 gigs instead of 8, since after all, basic tasks should be able to run smoothly on 4 gigs, right? So why even say people should get 8 gigs? Why waste the money on 8 when 4 gigs should get you through surfing and netflix? Right?

I just bought a mba with 4gb
runs snappy and smooth with multitasking and even video editing.
4gb is utter overkill for web surfing and entertainment. my ipad1 runs on 1/4 gb and i can watch netflix and surf with no lag.
i also bought my rmbp with 8gb ram for heavier tasks.
people who complain about their 4gigs not working usually run on hdd drives and try to multitask and VM.

 

[KPOM]

then why dont they just get 4 gigs? isnt four gigs enough for those tasks?

people said the exact same thing four years ago about 8 gigs, "nobody needs 8 gigs for surfing/netflix/etc" and here we are four years later and most users struggle with four gigs.

same logic, buying a $1000-$3000 computer going into 2014 with 8 gigs that cant be upgraded is foolish.

I wouldn't say most users struggle with 4GB. "Pro" users, maybe, but remember that most of the people buying the MacBook Pro aren't "pro" users. They may want the Retina screen, for example.

Also, a 4GB MacBook Pro from 2009 or 2010 likely doesn't have an SSD, and it also has a Core 2 Duo processor. 8GB RAM wouldn't solve those issues, and it wouldn't be appreciably faster now. Heck, my Windows PC from the office has 4GB RAM, a dual-core Ivy Bridge processor and is running a 32-bit version of Windows 7 (on a HDD, for that matter). For basic Microsoft Office, it is fine. Our statisticians can request quad-core machines with SSDs and 8GB RAM, but the rest of us don't seem to have a problem with the dual-core 4GB machines.

There are some people who should buy a 16GB system. For instance, people who do advanced photo editing (digilloyd goes into detail about this at macperformanceguide.com).

 

[Ryan1524]

SSD is not as fast as RAM.

If it were, Apple wouldn't have gone through the trouble of doing memory compression on Mavericks. Arstechnica did a very detailed report on this. It's a very interesting read.


http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10/os-x-10-9/

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10/os-x-10-9/17/#compressed-memory



I think most of these 'common' users will eventually do just fine with an iPad. So anybody buying a Pro grade machine will probably be the same group that can and will benefit from more ram. But let's not get into tablet vs laptop debate.

 

[Meister]

SSD is not as fast as RAM.

If it were, Apple wouldn't have gone through the trouble of doing memory compression on Mavericks. Arstechnica did a very detailed report on this. It's a very interesting read.


http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10/os-x-10-9/

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10/os-x-10-9/17/#compressed-memory

SSD is no competition for RAM.
And you cannot have enough RAM
There is very good reason for some users to get 8gb and even 16gb of RAM. No doubt.
BUT: For the vast majority its just a money waste.
Even pro users are fine with 4gigs of ram if its with pcie like on the mba.

 

[yangchewren]

Wouldn't the marginal utility of going from a dual-core i5 (in the 13-inch rMPB) to a quad-core i7 (in the 15-inch rMPB) be far greater for virtual-machine users than the marginal utility of going from 8gb of RAM to 16gb of RAM?

----------



For 99% of tasks, no.

For the remaining 1% of tasks, like running multiple VMs, there's still no gaurantee that the RAM upgrade would be the best place to put your extra money. Perhaps going from a dual-core i5 to a quad-core i7 would actually be more cost-effective?

Perhaps you should discuss long term utility too. And I think the thread is generally discussing lesser ram versus more ram with processors/ other specs being the same.

But I do not disagree with your statement. Your core count is probably the limiting factor in running your VM smoothly, though it depends on what you are running in the VM in the first place (if one were running a single hungry app in one VM, an upgrade of ram may yield better results).

 

[puma1552]

One other thing to consider is that Apple reduced the price of the rMBP by $200, so it's effectively a free upgrade to get 16 gigs compared to a week ago.

 

[Lolito]

get 16gb. A 8gb model in 4 years time will be difficult to sell even 2nd hand. 16gb will be usable and soldable...

 

[ValSalva]

get 16gb. A 8gb model in 4 years time will be difficult to sell even 2nd hand. 16gb will be usable and soldable...

Partially agree. I don't know if an 8GB model would be difficult to sell in four years. IMO a 4GB would be difficult to sell then though. 16GB may sell better. No guarantee you'd get your money back.

But that being said, I bought the 16GB option for 'future proofing' and it being possibly easier to sell, though I tend to hold on to Macs forever - but who knows?