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.
М1 8Gb vs 16Gb
- Thread starter yellowhelicopter
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Go to 16gb.
8gb are poor in 2020 and you can use only if you watch video e work with office
16GB, yes its more money but $180 compared to having a machine you regret not upgrading at the time and not being able to do anything about it.
I probably don't need it but I ordered mine with 16Gb. After having a MacBook Pro with 16 Gb for so long it just felt wrong to try and order less.
It's always a good idea to consider future needs. With that said, you can check your current Mac's memory use to see if you're already anywhere near utilizing 8GB.
Mainly, consider the App Memory amount as caching is an optional benefit.
View memory usage in Activity Monitor on Mac
In Activity Monitor, view the amount of system memory being used on your Mac, including physical, compressed, wired, and app memory.
support.apple.com
Why didn't they simply offer 16gb ram with an option for 32gb ram.
They could have made it 799 for the 699 model and a 256gb ssd
With option for 32gb at 999 and 256gb ssd.
They could have made it 799 for the 699 model and a 256gb ssd
With option for 32gb at 999 and 256gb ssd.
Last edited:
In nearly 3 decades of Mac ownership I have never wished I had less RAM. With the M1 Minis you only get to make this choice once. So unless $180 is all that separates you from starvation, get the 16GB of RAM.
GetRealBro
GetRealBro
I think its a limitation of the SOC - 16GB is the high limit.
Probably in the future Mx releases, the bar will be raised or the option of upgradeable RAM will be offered.
What are you migrating from?Just ordered the 16GB / 256GB version with an insanely fast external SSD for thunderbolt
I ordered my M1 Mac Mini with 8GB. Here in ?? 16GB RAM is $250 more. Which is insane. However early reviews seem to suggest that Apple Silicon utilizes RAM very differently than Intel and hopefully 8GB will be adequate for my needs.
I think 16 is the safer bet, but I'm not writing off 8 GB on Apple Silicon. The performance on the base models are insane.
Hopefully, but if it's not then you're out $2,000 and stuck with a machine that doesn't meet your needs. Seems like something not worth risking for $250.
$1899 CAD with the 2TB option. $2149 CAD with the 16GB ram option.
I wouldn't mind no home upgrading if Apple didn't see fit to over charge for RAM. I know if I settle into a new M1 machine, it will have 16 gigs RAM. If they offered 32 gigs, even better. If I was only doing email and social media and tiny vid and photo projects, I would be okay with 8 gigs but opt for 16 as we don't know what tomorrow will hold with newer software.
It's insane to think Big Sur on M1 has magic sauce and can pull a rabbit out of the hat. No review has yet to show that happening.
That's no L3. The code would have to be the the highest complex assembly. The swap thrash may not be as noticeable thanks to its storage.
Yes when the CPU has its hands on code and data it crunches it.
Traditionally give any system more memory up to a point it uses it to load code and data and cache so a 16GB will load 12GB where the smaller system only used 6-7GB.
Are we back to using video RAM out of that pool? 1.5GB on 8GB system and 2GB on the 16GB one? Don't know.
Don't mistake marketing and flowery language - Safari has always been a buzz kill which doesn't look good.
Samsung's Qualcomm 8xx has Support for 12-16GB and can't see why Apple's ARM wouldn't support 64GB.
That's no L3. The code would have to be the the highest complex assembly. The swap thrash may not be as noticeable thanks to its storage.
Yes when the CPU has its hands on code and data it crunches it.
Traditionally give any system more memory up to a point it uses it to load code and data and cache so a 16GB will load 12GB where the smaller system only used 6-7GB.
Are we back to using video RAM out of that pool? 1.5GB on 8GB system and 2GB on the 16GB one? Don't know.
Don't mistake marketing and flowery language - Safari has always been a buzz kill which doesn't look good.
Samsung's Qualcomm 8xx has Support for 12-16GB and can't see why Apple's ARM wouldn't support 64GB.
It’s not that Apple managed to make 8GB RAM hold more than 8GB. From what I have read, there is plenty of disk swapping to be had in activity monitor. However, the new storage is so much faster than we are accustom to, users are not yet able to perceive the swapping.
So, are you saying, if you absolutely needed 16GB or more on an Intel machine that 8GB won't cut it on an M1?
And the 32GB limitation is likely due to the embedded RAM situation we have with the M1.
I think a lot of people have been convinced by marketing that they need more RAM. A lot of the tests have shown that additional RAM didn't make the M1 perform any better doing the same task. Not taking benchmarks here, talking actual usage. In fact, in some cases where memory did show to be a bottleneck, the system wasn't even utilizing all 8 lanes at the time.
There would need to be a test showing the same bottleneck test on both an 8GB and a 16GB configuration of the same machine to show whether that additional 8GBs of RAM really changes anything. The assumption is the RAM is insufficient when running at 8GBs. But since some tests have shown additional RAM to have little to no affect on the performance of the same test on the same hardware sans one having more RAM, it could be said that 8GBs may be all this chip really was designed to utilize optimally.
There would need to be a test showing the same bottleneck test on both an 8GB and a 16GB configuration of the same machine to show whether that additional 8GBs of RAM really changes anything. The assumption is the RAM is insufficient when running at 8GBs. But since some tests have shown additional RAM to have little to no affect on the performance of the same test on the same hardware sans one having more RAM, it could be said that 8GBs may be all this chip really was designed to utilize optimally.