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.
How much RAM do I need in my MacBook?
- Thread starter Meister
- WikiPost WikiPost
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
I'm all for having plenty of RAM, but when you're complaining about greedy processes while you have ~16GB of unused memory....what exactly is that idle RAM doing for you?
IBM mainframes are sold, leased, and maintained on the basis of capacity. The machines are designed to run well at 99% usage, even though the desktop world is likely to view this as "having no headroom." That "headroom" costs a lot of money that leasers would rather not pay for unless it's really needed
But when the difference between 24 GB and 16 GB of RAM (at least on expandable machines) is $50-$75, the wasted memory is of no great concern.
It is possible to design algorithms that use memory to save CPU cycles, and it is possible to design algorithms that use CPU cycles to save memory.
The point I was trying to make is that some individual processes take up memory for a speed advantage, when there's enough to go around. Because I have enough memory, I like this behavior. Because others don't, they're more likely to extol the genius of compressed memory.
But when the difference between 24 GB and 16 GB of RAM (at least on expandable machines) is $50-$75, the wasted memory is of no great concern.
It is possible to design algorithms that use memory to save CPU cycles, and it is possible to design algorithms that use CPU cycles to save memory.
The point I was trying to make is that some individual processes take up memory for a speed advantage, when there's enough to go around. Because I have enough memory, I like this behavior. Because others don't, they're more likely to extol the genius of compressed memory.
Last edited:
totally new here - I appreciate that this thread is talking about ram
as this topic is not everywhere.
it's not about budget
it's about how much ram a person really needs for smooth performance
8G vs 16G <- how much difference in terms of performance
Question:
I am going to buy a macbook, and I know that since I can only afford one laptop (not a desktop +laptop), I am going to need one solution fits all. I already decided to get the 2015 macbook pro 13", 2.9Ghz, 512GB, the only thing not sure it's 8G or 16G ram.
My use:
as this topic is not everywhere. it's not about budget
it's about how much ram a person really needs for smooth performance
8G vs 16G <- how much difference in terms of performance
Question:
- for the test questions 1- 7, 3 points max for each question, so almost everyone will score under 19-20, ONLY if one chooses all 7 X 3 = 21... does it mean almost everyone will be fine with 8G of ram?
- Swap & Cached memory - so 8G of ram will turn out using SSD as ram when all ram are used, total around 15- 18G of ram will be able to use? I must have misunderstood something... please kindly explain
- the swap feature will be happened only if SSD space is available, correct?
- is the performance still smooth and fast during using swap
- is this only test under single task? what's the purpose of it... >>--
I am going to buy a macbook, and I know that since I can only afford one laptop (not a desktop +laptop), I am going to need one solution fits all. I already decided to get the 2015 macbook pro 13", 2.9Ghz, 512GB, the only thing not sure it's 8G or 16G ram.
My use:
- OSX + VMware Windows 10 （really love to have smooth performance when switch between them)
- web browsing 30+ tabs
- word + excel in VMware Windows 10 (excel sometimes may be 50,000 - 100,000 rows data. file size about 16MB)
- final Cut pro/ photoshop - not now, but will be using them sometimes, I will start learning them and would love to have smooth performance using them)
- I do blogging/ website/ and going into mobile app business (xcode/ eclipse)
- all the above remains open, but I will only do one task at a time, and will switch back and forth between them.
- plan to use about 2 years
- currently using thinkpad i5, 500 HDD, 16G ram, so far is smooth and no problem at all (in terms of performance, but not ok with windows OS). Just wanna switch to completely mac as windows is always weird.
I'd get the 15" due to quad core CPU which will tremendously help in multitasking when running multiple VMs. Dual cores are adequate for one OS, but if you're doing some heavy CPU on VM, you'll notice lag on the main OS X despite having massive amount of cached RAM due to CPU cycles/cache being used up completely. With quadcore CPU, you can dedicate 2 cores for your VM while having 2 extra free cores for your main OS
i know 15" will be perfect, 4 cores always good, but price is too high as I need 512G and not portable compared to 13", thank you though!
For your described workload the 15" would be much better suited. I would really not recommend any 13" since it only sports a dual core.
If you insist on a 13", while the base models would do the job, considering that you are planning on running VMs and FCP I'd recommend 16gb ram and the highest cpu upgrade you can afford. (1tb ssd wouldn't hurt either of course)
do I need 4-cores for web browsing/ word/ excel??
Since I am doing absolutely fine with my thinkpad i5 dual core/ 16G/ HDD, I assume with macbook i5 dual core/ 16G/ SSD will be fine as well?
and yes I have no choice to insist on a 13" as it's my only computer I need some portability and lower price range compared to 15"
thanks!
why 16G of ram is pointless when it is just " a large desk to show more documents at once" ?
do I need 4-cores for web browsing/ word/ excel??
Since I am doing absolutely fine with my thinkpad i5 dual core/ 16G/ HDD, I assume with macbook i5 dual core/ 16G/ SSD will be fine as well?
and yes I have no choice to insist on a 13" as it's my only computer I need some portability and lower price range compared to 15"
thanks!
You don't need 4 cores unless you are running VMs and doing CPU intensive tasks on those VMs while running multimedia apps on OS X. Those tasks will show the limitations of a dual core chip.
Really? In my experience, it's somewhat difficult to use more than 8 GB of RAM (except cache, but that rarely yields substantial performance improvements.) It's extremely difficult to use more than 16 GB. Eventually, the kernel runs out of things to cache. VMs and photoshop, neither of which I use, tend to grab very large amounts of memory at the outset-- so if you use those programs, the decision to upgrade RAM should be trivial. Most other programs are less aggressive in demanding memory.
But, it's quite easy for me to use more than two cores. The compiler, for instance, is trivially configured to compile 4 source files at once. For something a little more exotic, my copy of Abby Finereader launches four FineExec processes, which can easily peg my CPU.
Now, I don't have a portable machine, and have enough screenspace to work on several applications at once. On the other hand, Apple does use the "race to sleep paradigm"-- the sooner the task at hand is completed, the sooner the machine can sleep.
So I have gone through the checklist at the top of this thread, and came out with a score of 15 (albeit possibly over compensating a little bit on my VM usage and the frequency of my video editing), so it seems as if 8GB will be sufficient for my usage - However, I cannot shake the feeling that I will regret not upgrading to 16GB when I have the chance.
My usage is mainly going to be Running multiple (Read: very many [word, powerpoint, chrome with many many tabs, endnote, itunes, VLC, Torrenting, iPhoto/Photoshop]) apps at the same time, as well as the high possibility of a VM with moderate usage for some light gaming, as well as moderate photo editing and some very light-moderate video editing.
Alot of this will be done at the same time, and even though 8GB makes sense, I still feel like I might be short changing myself - however I do need to be able to justify the price
So many decisions, I am just after some succinct guidance
My usage is mainly going to be Running multiple (Read: very many [word, powerpoint, chrome with many many tabs, endnote, itunes, VLC, Torrenting, iPhoto/Photoshop]) apps at the same time, as well as the high possibility of a VM with moderate usage for some light gaming, as well as moderate photo editing and some very light-moderate video editing.
Alot of this will be done at the same time, and even though 8GB makes sense, I still feel like I might be short changing myself - however I do need to be able to justify the price
So many decisions, I am just after some succinct guidance
Some succinct guidance, buy what YOU feel YOU need. You have clearly done your research and understand your usage so buy what you think that will need now and into the future.
One point I will make is don't game in a VM it'll be terrible use bootcamp for windows gaming.
Thanks for that, its harder than it seems, im just severely indecisive in this kind of stuff because on the one hand I don't want to have overkill and spend too much when 8GB would suffice, however on the other I don't want to be left lacking. I am going for the 512GB 2.9Ghz 13" rMBP, so maybe that might assist in performance on an 8GB RAM machine, however again, not wanting to be left lacking.
Thanks for your pointer too btw!
same thought here -> don't wanna overkill and speed too much when 8GB would be fine. So I have tried both 8GB and 16GB (bought them home, used them , and then returned them), for me I feel 16GB is a lot smoother and faster overall, the effect is quite obvious.Thanks for that, its harder than it seems, im just severely indecisive in this kind of stuff because on the one hand I don't want to have overkill and spend too much when 8GB would suffice, however on the other I don't want to be left lacking. I am going for the 512GB 2.9Ghz 13" rMBP, so maybe that might assist in performance on an 8GB RAM machine, however again, not wanting to be left lacking.
Thanks for your pointer too btw!
the 8GB is just fine too, but it's not as snappy as 16GB.
of course, agree with 15" if need 16GB ram. but only 256G is not enough for me, going up to top model 512G 16g ram is too expensive...
I am in the situation of either buy now sell it next year for the next model as it's a very high chance that mbpr will have redesign update early 2016...
The thread's addition of needs makes no sense. So the survey penalizes me for being someone who wants to upgrade machines every year to have the latest and greatest (lower point score) yet I love having a virtual machine running and having a bunch of resources dedicated to it.
So the answer is flawed... the person who designed the point system says if you plan to keep it for a year only, performance doesn't matter as much because you only have to live with it for a year?. Highly illogical....
So the answer is flawed... the person who designed the point system says if you plan to keep it for a year only, performance doesn't matter as much because you only have to live with it for a year?. Highly illogical....
Huh? I bought a rMBP 13" with 16. I walked into the store, bought it, and walked out. In most major cities the stores carry the 3.1 i7/16gb/256gb "ultimate" configs... so the RAM thing should be a non-issue to anyone who wants a performance-packing 13 inch model.
I don't think you understood my post.
1. For the $$$ for the ram upgrade you might as well get the 15"
2. If you can actually utilize 16gb ram then chances are extremely good you will benefit more from the quadcore than the increased ram
I comprehend it, it's just illogical. It's like saying if you want a fully loaded compact car with all of the features, you might as well get a full-size car that comes standard with all of the features and will benefit from the more powerful engine. That argument holds no water. My two primary drivers for which laptop I chose is size and performance. I don't want the huge boat anchor of a 15" macbook pro any more than I want a full-size car. I sure hope you're not a car, or any other type of salesman. LOL
Let me sell you on the 15":
If you want the performance then you want the quadcore. I don't know what it is you are doing exactly, but with media creation apps the cpu will be your bottleneck.
(I own the 13"
with 8gb and when I see beachballs it's either the internet connection or the cpu working at 200% )
Let me sell you on the 15":
If you want the performance then you want the quadcore. I don't know what it is you are doing exactly, but with media creation apps the cpu will be your bottleneck.
(I own the 13"
I own the 13" ultimate (3.1 ghz i7, 512gb SSD, 16gb RAM). Never see beach balls. You went cheap and got the entry level, so I'd expect some of those issues. And PS - Internet connection would never cause beach balls... you lost credibility with that one. And how do you determine your CPU is "working at 200%" ???
No sale.
Not the entry level model.
I highly doubt that you use your 'ultimate model' for the same purposes as I.