M4 Max Studio Only 128GB

[JouniS]

Reining in the discussion a little, is there really a latency bound workload that would perform better on a 2019 Intel Mac Pro with 192 GB of RAM vs a 2025 M4 Max Studio with 192 GB of RAM? I'm genuinely asking. Extremely large data dependent on FLOPs? Admittedly, I'm not familiar with all computing tasks that are latency dependent.

There should be no such workloads if both systems have the same amount of memory. If the Mac Pro has more RAM, you can find them easily.

I develop bioinformatics software. Many workloads there essentially stream in small pieces of data in an arbitrary order, use large in-memory indexes to determine where each piece should go, and tag the data with that information. If you don't have enough RAM for the indexes, the performance is going to be bad.

In some extreme cases, the performance of a system mostly depends on the number of CPU cores. The cores themselves do not matter much, as they spend most of the time waiting for data rather than doing computation. But such workloads are very rare in practice.

 

[dymac]

This is true and it's my fault for opening up the discussion to "any computing task."

Reining in the discussion a little, is there really a latency bound workload that would perform better on a 2019 Intel Mac Pro with 192 GB of RAM vs a 2025 M4 Max Studio with 128 GB of RAM? I'm genuinely asking. Extremely large data dependent on FLOPs? Admittedly, I'm not familiar with all computing tasks that are latency dependent.

Once you hit the memory pressure limit when you only have 128GB of ram you might as well be working on a 5.1 Mac with a 192GB of Ram because them the M4 with only 128GB is of no advantage. Yes the M4 is way faster until you hit the memory pressure limit. Hopefully the OS has something to do with that and 26.3 will have some improvements. To early to tell here. I will be keeping a close eye on the Studio M5 and see what its Ram limits are. Hopefully I can get rid of this M4 as soon as possible.

In my normal workflow I work between PS, LR, LR, IL, and ID, plus sometimes Affinity and can get to the memory pressure limit pretty easy. I have had to, like with PS turn its memory usage down, but that is the only app that allows you to do that.

 

[Adora]

Keep in mind the unified memory in Apple Silicon includes the GPU memory. There is even more than 192 GB in the Intel Mac Pro if you add the VRAM of your GPU.

 

[Rychiar]

I have been running Intel MacPro for many years now with at least 192GB of Ram. Most of the time doing my routine work Activity Monitor show using between 150GB and 180GB.

I am trying to get my head around why not more RAM available in the M4 Max. I do not do video work, mostly prepress related work like a couple of instances of LR, and PS, ID, IL. Checking AM it shows the Wacom Tablet Driver using 13.6GB of RAM which seems excessive. I know I can get more RAM in the M3 Ultra but I think with my workflow the M4 Max would make more sense but I just can't bring myself to consider to go that low on RAM.

I am wondering what others think about this issue. I am very hesitant to go for a M4 Max with that low of RAM considering that it also is used for video.

your apps will use as much RAM as its allowed to. it doesn't NEED that much if you're only using the apps you mention. hell im using a base level Mac mini m4 at home and can do the same work as I can with my m2 studio max with 96 at work as long as I don't have 50 things running at once

 

[dymac]

Keep in mind the unified memory in Apple Silicon includes the GPU memory. There is even more than 192 GB in the Intel Mac Pro if you add the VRAM of your GPU.

I realized that and that was why my initial concern. And unlike the last poster lack of Ram does cause a problem at times.

 

[aUsern@me]

In my normal workflow I work between PS, LR, LR, IL, and ID, plus sometimes Affinity and can get to the memory pressure limit pretty easy.

You're either psyching yourself out or there's something seriously wrong with your machine. Perhaps your hard drive is 90% full?

There's just no way that kind of workflow doesn't fit well within 128 GB of RAM. I've seen machines with 64 GB handle PSBs that took up 20GB of RAM and not run into memory pressure.

Just think about it in really simplistic (and not entirely accurate) terms. Let's reserve 28 GB of RAM for the OS. Then you would need to be doing a single, active task, let's say a Photoshop filter, that took up 100 GB of RAM for you to run into memory pressure. For pre-press, one hundred GB of RAM is massive. There's just no way. Or, look at like this, you listed five applications that you routinely use. You would need to actively, and concurrently, have each one using 20 GB of RAM to hit memory pressure. Twenty GB of RAM is also huge for pre-press. That's just not the way people work. Sure, the Mac can do that task, but people can't. We focus on one task, with perhaps another running in the background, and then we move onto another task. macOS (any modern OS) is designed for this kind of multi-tasking and RAM allocation.

I guess it's possible you're the one elite Creative Suite user who's pushing several 32,000 x 32,000 px images with dozens of layers through Photoshop and Lightroom while simultaneously imposing a thousand page PDF and creating Postscript files from insanely complicated Illustrator files.

If that's the case. I bet you could easily find someone who would swap a 2019 Intel Mac Pro with 512 GB of RAM for your 2025 M4 Max with only 128 GB or RAM.

If your experience were at all representative of pre-press users at-large, don't you think Apple would allow their arguablely fastest Mac to be configured with more than 128 GB of RAM? As you're well aware, pre-press, DTP and printing are large markets for the Mac. There would be thousands of Mac users, who make their living in the Creative Suite, furious that their Macs were "only" configured with 128 GB of RAM. Is that happening?

 

[SDAVE]

You're either psyching yourself out or there's something seriously wrong with your machine. Perhaps your hard drive is 90% full?

There's just no way that kind of workflow doesn't fit well within 128 GB of RAM. I've seen machines with 64 GB handle PSBs that took up 20GB of RAM and not run into memory pressure.

Just think about it in really simplistic (and not entirely accurate) terms. Let's reserve 28 GB of RAM for the OS. Then you would need to be doing a single, active task, let's say a Photoshop filter, that took up 100 GB of RAM for you to run into memory pressure. For pre-press, one hundred GB of RAM is massive. There's just no way. Or, look at like this, you listed five applications that you routinely use. You would need to actively, and concurrently, have each one using 20 GB of RAM to hit memory pressure. Twenty GB of RAM is also huge for pre-press. That's just not the way people work. Sure, the Mac can do that task, but people can't. We focus on one task, with perhaps another running in the background, and then we move onto another task. macOS (any modern OS) is designed for this kind of multi-tasking and RAM allocation.

I guess it's possible you're the one elite Creative Suite user who's pushing several 32,000 x 32,000 px images with dozens of layers through Photoshop and Lightroom while simultaneously imposing a thousand page PDF and creating Postscript files from insanely complicated Illustrator files.

If that's the case. I bet you could easily find someone who would swap a 2019 Intel Mac Pro with 512 GB of RAM for your 2025 M4 Max with only 128 GB or RAM.

If your experience were at all representative of pre-press users at-large, don't you think Apple would allow their arguablely fastest Mac to be configured with more than 128 GB of RAM? As you're well aware, pre-press, DTP and printing are large markets for the Mac. There would be thousands of Mac users, who make their living in the Creative Suite, furious that their Macs were "only" configured with 128 GB of RAM. Is that happening?

Trust me, some users need more than 128GB.

On my Mac Pro I have 192GB and I wish I had 384GB, but with this dated machine and insane RAM prices even on the used market, it's not worth upgrading anything. I may consider 256GB on the Mac Studio M5 Ultra on the next purchase. I consistently max out my RAM. I don't know I would do with 32/64GB RAM or even 128GB with my workflow. And it's been like that for many years.

 

[aUsern@me]

Trust me, some users need more than 128GB.

I don't need to be convinced. I know some people need more RAM.

Some people's projects really won't fit within 128 GB, or even 256 GB, of RAM. AI and LLMs come to mind. For those workflows, you really don't want to be swapping.

But, I'm nearly certain that the OP does not need more RAM. For one thing, in his opening post, he shows a complete misunderstanding of what Activity Monitor is relaying concerning his RAM usage. For another, he's doing pre-press. I know from decades of pre-press experience, that 128 GB of RAM on a modern Mac, for a Creative Suite pre-press workflow, is more than plenty. I need to invent super-human multi-tasking scenarios of insanely large PSBs while also generating huge Postscipts in the background before an M4 Max, with 128 GB or RAM, would run into memory pressure. I'm not trying to discount the OP's experience or denigrate pre-press in some way. But, if something's slowing his machine down, it's not a lack of RAM. My guesses would be a full hard drive or some application or accessory that has a severe memory leak.

I know Apple doesn't give its users everything we want or desire. But if 128GB of RAM were truly limiting, in their mainstream high-end Mac, Apple would offer more. And, for much more niche computing, they do offer more - up to 512 GB of RAM with 50% more bandwidth and double the GPUs - things that are of no benefit to pre-press.

 

[SDAVE]

But, I'm nearly certain that the OP does not need more RAM. For one thing, in his opening post, he shows a complete misunderstanding of what Activity Monitor is relaying concerning his RAM usage. For another, he's doing pre-press. I know from decades of pre-press experience, that 128 GB of RAM on a modern Mac, for a Creative Suite pre-press workflow, is more than plenty. I need to invent super-human multi-tasking scenarios of insanely large PSBs while also generating huge Postscipts in the background before an M4 Max, with 128 GB or RAM, would run into memory pressure. I'm not trying to discount the OP's experience or denigrate pre-press in some way. But, if something's slowing his machine down, it's not a lack of RAM. My guesses would be a full hard drive or some application or accessory that has a severe memory leak.

I know Apple doesn't give its users everything we want or desire. But if 128GB of RAM were truly limiting, in their mainstream high-end Mac, Apple would offer more. And, for much more niche computing, they do offer more - up to 512 GB of RAM with 50% more bandwidth and double the GPUs - things that are of no benefit to pre-press.

Obviously you don't work in post production. Print work doesnt need that much RAM.

And also with the rise of local LLMs, it's become fairly common for folks to get machines with high amounts of RAM, which used to be a very niche market. The funny part is now RAM prices are insane.

 

[dymac]

Your system has run out of application memory. Right in the middle of doing some heavy work. Idiots posting on here that 128GB is sufficient have no idea about the real world. So now I have to waste time rebooting and restarting everything.

Damn this was a mistake buying this M4 Max with only 128GB of RAM. I should have known better but instead I took some bad advice. I should hove gotten the M3 Ultra. I think I am going to seriously look at unloading this M4 Max and getting a M3 Ultra unless I get wind of a M5 soon.

 

[aUsern@me]

unless I get wind of a M5 soon.

Good news! Apple just announced the M5 Max. That means it's almost certainly coming to the Studio Mac very soon.

But wait, oh no. It still only comes with 128 GB of RAM.

Why does Apple keep making this same dumb mistake? It's like they don't understand how RAM or computers work. Apple has no idea about the real world.

 

[dymac]

What only 128GB on the M5. Maybe they will do M4 Ultra. They can keeping making the same mistake with only 128GB of Ram, but I won't make that mistake again.

 

[dymac]

Apple debuts M5 Pro and M5 Max to supercharge the most demanding pro workflows

Apple today announced M5 Pro and M5 Max, the world’s most advanced chips for pro laptops, powering the new MacBook Pro.

www.apple.com

There is the news release and only 128gb of Ram. Do they have no clue what a "Most Demanding Pro Workflow" involves.

 

[MacCheetah3]

I do not do video work, mostly prepress related work like a couple of instances of LR, and PS, ID, IL.

Adobe has and may still have legitimate praise in certain aspects, and is in part why they remain one of the most common (recommendations) in image and video editing. However, their software inefficiency has been a running joke for ages.

Memory Limit Overload M2

I blame everything on Adobe. (running joke in the office and home). Don't even have a single Adobe app on my computer and still blame it on them.

forums.macrumors.com

Some other examples I quickly found (which doesn’t include the many mentions in media such as YT videos):

Photoshop Using 75GB RAM – Is This Normal? | Community

Hey Adobe Team,I’ve noticed that Photoshop is consuming an excessive 75.2GB of memory while working on just a few artworks. Given my system’s specs, I wouldn’t expect such extreme usage, and I’d like to understand what’s causing this.System Specs:MacBook Pro M4 Max (64GB RAM, 2TB SSD)macOS...

community.adobe.com

"Adobe Crash Processor" hogging system memory | Community

Hi there. I'm using a Mac, running 13.7.5. I use a variety of Adobe apps, predominantly Photoshop, Illustrator, and Acrobat, but also occasionally InDesign and Audition. Every day, or sometimes multiple times a day, Adobe Crash Processor launches, and proceeds to gobble up several GB of system...

community.adobe.com

Adobe bug using up all my RAM | Community

Hi everyone, Since the last update, I have this horrible bug : when I go in my monitor, I see there is this thing called " adobe crash handler" that get craaaaazy, there are DOZENS of them to a point it takes all my ram and crash my computer. EVEN WHEN NO ADOBE APP IS OPEN. So if I start my co...

community.adobe.com

Unacceptable memory usage from Adobe apps and processes | Community

I have been an Adobe CC Full Suite user for 5 years, and while that may not appear like a long time, it is certainly something. For the first time ever, yesterday, I started to have macOS (14.5) send me messages about my system having run out of application memory, suggesting that I quit someth...

community.adobe.com

High Memory Usage for All Adobe Apps on macOS | Community

Reoccuring issue with Adobe apps using excessive memory. I'm getting pop-up warnings. For example, AI is open but no files open (18.92GB RAM), PS has 4 files open totaling less than 100MB file size using (33.09GB RAM). PS and ID are randomingly crashing without any crash report or pop-ups. I'...

community.adobe.com

https://www.reddit.com/r/mac/comments/14mcamb/apparently_adobe_acrobat_needs_almost_100

M3 iMac: excessive memory usage by Adobe Reader > All Things Tech > AR15.COM

I have noticed recently that Adobe Reader has been using an insane amount of RAM. I have searched around and haven't seen this issue. I currently have four 1-3 page documents open and the program is u

www.ar15.com

PC Builder and Setups Community | I can't think of any other programs other than Adobe which can use up almost all 256GB of Ram memory like this. | Facebook

I can't think of any other programs other than Adobe which can use up almost all 256GB of Ram memory like this.

www.facebook.com

https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/z8zue7/tech_guy_here_this_lady_was_asking_why_her

Furthermore, you explicitly point out and comment on another piece of software you’re utilizing that’s unoptimized/buggy.

Checking AM it shows the Wacom Tablet Driver using 13.6GB of RAM which seems excessive.

None of these software faults are Apple’s doing.

P.S. Of course, Apple does have faults and deserves criticism (in some areas).

 

[dymac]

We all know how much memory these apps use. Whether you want to call it excessive or not doesn't really matter it is what it is, and to my knowledge only PS allows you to limit it. And yes it is Apples fault for not providing enough RAM and my fault for buying into that 128GB is more than enough RAM BS. I have learned my lesson, never again. The M5 Ultra cannot come soon enough.

 

[aUsern@me]

We all know how much memory these apps use. Whether you want to call it excessive or not doesn't really matter it is what it is, and to my knowledge only PS allows you to limit it. And yes it is Apples fault for not providing enough RAM and my fault for buying into that 128GB is more than enough RAM BS. I have learned my lesson, never again. The M5 Ultra cannot come soon enough.

MacCheetah3 was trying to be polite and informative in his explanation - a rare combination online these days.

I'll be more blunt: you're clearly frustrated and looking for someone to blame. We get that. But you're just flaying, "It's Apple's fault!"

If you have an application(s) that's leaking memory it would not matter how much RAM you had. You could have gotten the 192GB M3 Ultra and you'd still be outta RAM. You could have gotten the 512 GB M3 Ultra and you would still be out of RAM.

What you should be doing is carefully monitoring your applications to find out where your memory leak is and then pestering the developer to fix the leak. You refuse to believe me (or everyone else here) but there's no way that 128 GB isn't super-duper plenty for pre-press. You are doing something wrong, or you have an application(s) that's eating all your RAM.

At this point, it's really a choice on your part. You can try and troubleshoot your problems or you can keep wishing for Apple release a product that you think would fix your problem even though Apple has "no idea about the real world."

 

[Chancha]

I actually was quite curious to hear from OP detailed demonstration on how a modern and involving pre-press workflow can actually stress memory usage that much. I have left being part of the print / post-production for more than a decade, and receded to just delivering and designing since shifting focus to other industries so my info in the original replies was probably outdatted. I can only imagine such as a post or managing position in a daily news outlet would be this demanding? Or the handler of the RIP machine or something in that workflow?

 

[dymac]

I actually was quite curious to hear from OP detailed demonstration on how a modern and involving pre-press workflow can actually stress memory usage that much. I have left being part of the print / post-production for more than a decade, and receded to just delivering and designing since shifting focus to other industries so my info in the original replies was probably outdatted. I can only imagine such as a post or managing position in a daily news outlet would be this demanding? Or the handler of the RIP machine or something in that workflow?

Seems you and many others here have a lack of understanding what all prepress involves. It can range form simple a few page forms, to 100 of page catalogs with lots of graphics, to wide format printing that involves files in gigabyte size. Running 6 Adobe apps and others at a time and various filters to get the jobs done all taking at least 20GB a piece, and support apps like imposition, invoice, jobs workflow etc. Then clients apps and remote desktops to interface with the printer RIPs

I have not run a machine with this small amount of RAM in over 10 years and I made a huge mistake listening to this 128GB is enough RAM BS. I have learned my lesson. I should have gotten the M3 Ultra with at least 256GB of RAM. Remember those old machines with 192GB also had video RAM of 16GB or more where this measly 128GB of RAM would have not been used for video as well.

I was considering getting an M3 Ultra and getting rid of this M4 or using it to upgrade one of the RIP machines. At this point I have decided to wait on the M5 Ultra or what ever has at least 256GB of RAM. I will limp along and close apps when I need to, to clear up RAM when I run out of application memory that kills production.

It is pointless to complain about the apps not releasing RAM because I can't do a damn thing about that and remember I ran the same apps on machines with a lot more RAM without these running out of application memory problems. Granted I was spoiled by having all that RAM and I still find I have way to many web site open at times but closing the browser is the first thing I do when and if I catch the memory pressure getting to the orange level.

 

[dymac]

A good point made here about the extra wear and tear on the SSD from all the swapping because of not enough RAM. I hadn't considered that point.

Anyone here upgraded from the 7,1 to the M2 Ultra?

Yes, when you need the memory, you need the memory. I've been there myself, just with less memory overall because of being on the 2010. Same issue though. Therefore, I know I need more than what I think I can get by with when upgrading. It keeps on going down the line as well. I've even helped...

forums.macrumors.com