I think this is SOP. The OS anticipates usage and doesn't wait til it's out or nearly out of mem to start swapping. I'll be curious to know at what point it starts to swap with 8gb.
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.
Mac Mini m2 Pro - 16GB vs 32GB
- Thread starter icemantx
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Given that the Memory Pressure is only refreshed once a second, I guess it's possible that all the physical memory was being used.
My knowledge of integrated memory management is poor, but I think the other programs/processes I had running and consuming memory (such as TV, TeamViewer, Safari) were offloaded to swap so that as much memory as was needed for iMovie was freed up, and iMovie did not slow down due to using swap itself.
My knowledge of integrated memory management is poor, but I think the other programs/processes I had running and consuming memory (such as TV, TeamViewer, Safari) were offloaded to swap so that as much memory as was needed for iMovie was freed up, and iMovie did not slow down due to using swap itself.
Trying to avoid 32GB option on a new Mac(book) but it may make sense now and longterm. I am toggling between multiple apps at the moment and doing some light activity, nothing heavy duty (no VMs running, not actively editing photos/videos) and memory is already in the yellow (but interestingly no swap).
Edit: Nevermind, didn't realize I had Docker still running. Once I closed it the Virtual Machine Service disappeared and memory pressure went down to green zone.
Edit: Nevermind, didn't realize I had Docker still running. Once I closed it the Virtual Machine Service disappeared and memory pressure went down to green zone.
Last edited:
Even with the VM active and the pressure being deemed yellow, you still got close to no swap, it seems just with memory compression it already makes enough room for itself; unless you pace up the rate of which you switch between apps / data then it is still fine either way.
True, and M1 MBA continued to feel responsive and smooth. I will get a better idea of the memory situation once I press the system a little more. Yesterday was relatively light and leisurely activity.
In the past, I "suffered" frequently of a lack of memory on my computers. I experienced often a downgrade of performances on all of my previous computers, even when doing "normal" stuff (I usually multitask a lot, and keep several apps open at once). I promised myself that I'll never experience that again, so my new mini will have a LOT of ram, even if it's "overkill" and overpriced by Apple: 24GB on the M2, or 32GB on the M2 Pro. Not 16GB. I still have to justify the need and cost of the M2 Pro over the M2. This decision is very difficult to do, for me: mini M2 24GB/1TB, or mini M2 Pro 32GB/1TB ?? The last one is clearly "overkill" for me, but I want the "peace of mind" for at least 10 years with my desktop computer. I don't want to have regrets with the former choice, in a few years...
Seeing as how you get so much life and longevity out of your past machines, the cost difference amortized over 10 years will be relatively small. That said, I respect sticking to a budget.
I am still flip-flopping between MBP or desktop. I definitely want the M2 Pro (10c/16c) so it will be between 16GB and 32GB for me. Definitely 1TB as well. I plan to wait until at least April to see the rumored 15" MacBook Air specs and design.
Can you do 32/512? That seems lopsided but unless your storage needs are modest eventually you'll need more than 1TB anyway. External SSD will be way cheaper if not as fast
Portable Macs are usually very good and well made. I'm still using a 2010 MBP 13" with 8GB ram (it's more than 12 years old!), and it is still great as my desktop computer to replace a dead 2009 mini, even if memory is frequently an issue to me (8 GB ram isn't enough today). I love this portable! Personally, I much prefer a real desktop computer. If you do have to move frequently away from home and still need a computer, you can't go wrong by selecting a portable Mac. But get as much ram as you can. On the long run, I believe that 16GB isn't enough, even if Ventura manages memory extremely well.
Yes, I'm also considering this compromise. This is also why the decision is so rough for me. But on the M2 Pro, the 1TB is faster than the 512GB. And I expect that I *may* need more than 512GB on a long period of time for the internal ssd, even if I could complement it with external devices. I admit that the configuration mini M2 Pro 32GB/1TB is really "luxury" and overkill. I'll never need something more powerful than this in the far future (I'll be retired in about 5 years). I'm almost 59. Before I die, I'll most probably own only one more computer after that mini.
Last edited:
I briefly considered 512GB but my MBA 512GB that is only two years old is down to 30GB (well, 130GB if I eliminate the Windows 11 VM). My Windows 10 PC with a 1TB SSD is also down to about 50GB.
Sometimes I have to backup devices to my local drive temporarily and a few times I've been stuck having to spread things around multiple external drives. It is doable but a little bit of a pain. I don't want to go overboard with internal storage either because externals are more cost effective, but I feel 1TB gives me enough flexibility as not to rely on externals as often (especially for a laptop that won't always be on my desk). Plus, with photos and video files getting larger I feel 512GB is definitely the bare practical minimum. The cost of the internal storage upgrade doesn't bother me as much as the ridiculous 32GB RAM upgrade option.
I fully agree with you. This is exactly why I decided to select the 1TB, instead of 512GB.
Why not spend less now, and upgrade in a few years to something nicer when Apple introduces new capabilities that you can take advantage of then?
Apple's past history suggests that the software support cycle for that machine will be 6-7 years. I wouldn't keep it beyond that if you seek current security updates and such.
If security isn't an issue for you, by all means..
In the past, I always kept my costly computers for more than 10 years, except in two cases:
- Mac IIci: 11 years of constant use until access to internet (Usenet, at that time) became impossible, and wasn't powerfull enough to handle new apps and OS,
- Mac Pro G4 for 4 years, until it wasn't powerfull enough for my needs (I was deceived by this Mac),
- Mac Pro G5 for 4.5 years, until its video card died/melt from temperature issues,
- 2009 mini (only 4GB ram) for more than 11 years, until the HD crashed from swap files abominations and other abuses,
- 2010 MBP 13" (8GB ram) for now 12 years and still running well!
I don't want to buy a new computer in only 5 years. To me it doesn't make any sense to upgrade after only a few years only. The next computers (M3, M4, ...) will be far more powerfull than what I really need. The mini M2 Pro is already more powerfull than what I'll ever need. So this is it, this is the right choice for me, that I'll be able to keep for another 10 years (at the very least). I don't care much about the model becoming unsuported by new OS in 6-7 years, and "security" issues. Ventura (an UNIX system) is already a very strong and secure OS. Once a system is perfectly stable, why upgrading it? I'm still using OSX 10.6.8 (Snow Leopard) since more than 12 years, and never encountered any security issue at all, despite all the "dirty web sites" that I may have visited in the past.
Last edited:
Financially, your decision doesn’t make sense to me; you’re paying 40-200% ++ up charges for memory, disk, and +Pro for things you clearly do not need. Financially, IMHO, it’s far wiser to wait, and then in a few years if your needs change, THEN spend the money (and buy the base $499 model now; the concept that you can just buy the $499 model and have a fully usable, fast to you machine is the central tenant here). You’ll stay under support longer, and in the end you’ll have a far better, more modern system - and I suspect you’d spend a lot less doing it.
Particularly as retirement nears.
In fact, the smart choice for you is to see if you can pick up a Costco $350 M1 mini, as some Costco right now are rumored to have them in stock and available for in-person pickup (only) at that price. For you that’s perfect.
And yes, whether you realize it or not, your machines, particularly a 10.6.8 machine, are ridiculously insecure. Wow. That’s just bad.
Your 2009 Mini’s HDD status doesn’t determine usability. You can stick an SSD into that in about 10 minutes and some patience, and then you can put OpenCore Legacy Patcher on it, and it would remain viable (+ supported - at least by somebody; we can debate OCLP), if you really did want to stick with a Core 2 Duo machine. Similar story with the Macbook 2010 13”. If they really were running well, you should put a modern MacOS on there.
But I don’t consider a Core 2 Duo machine to be viable. Maybe that’s just me.
Last edited:
...
And yes, whether you realize it or not, your machines, particularly a 10.6.8 machine, are ridiculously insecure. Wow. That’s just bad.
Your 2009 Mini’s HDD status doesn’t determine usability. You can stick an SSD into that in about 10 minutes and some patience, and then you can put OpenCore Legacy Patcher on it, and it would remain viable (+ supported - at least by somebody; we can debate OCLP), if you really did want to stick with a Core 2 Duo machine. Similar story with the Macbook 2010 13”. If they really were running well, you should put a modern MacOS on there.
But I don’t consider a Core 2 Duo machine to be viable. Maybe that’s just me.
I don't agree with the financial aspect. Over a long period of time, the computer "pays itself". And I hate to upgrade anything, transfering all the files, update apps, reconfigure the preferences, etc. Once a good computer is able to do what I want it to do, then that's it, I keep it until it brakes.
When the old 2009 mini had an HD failure, I tought about upgrading its components, but it wasn't worth it. I had to change the HD, upgrade the ram, reinstall everything, and I coulnd't change the old Core 2 Duo anyway. This computer was too slow at the time of its death, and the 2010 MBP was better (more ram, faster GPU, ...).
The security risk of an old UNIX system isn't really a problem, contrary to what many ppl here think. I was well aware of some risks, but I was pretty confident about this system, and like I said I never had any issue with SL during 12 years (this is a very long period of time!). But anyway, it is time for me to change my desktop computer since I need to do things that the old 2010 MBP is no longer able to do (web browsers are too old and can't be upgraded anymore) or because it is too slow with a few things (notably some Mathematica calculations). Also, my 17 years old Apple 20" display (from my previous G5 Mac Pro) is now showing its age. I need a better and larger screen, that the old MBP is unable to drive.
Last edited:
Well, you are spending for more than what you need, on the off chance it will make it more futureproof, but since what you have now meets your needs, by definition you are overspending. If a 2010 machine was even remotely viable, then a $499 Mac mini would easily meet and massively surpass your needs. And then you can keep the extra $ in your pocket and have it for other retirement needs, or you could spend it later on a “better” machine from Apple. Since ‘future value of money’ and having money accessible to you now is better than not having it now, particularly for retirement - well, hence my comment.
To put it another way, 150% more $ spent now gets a fairly incremental upgrade in the grand scheme of things if the base model already massively addresses your needs. In 5 years, the difference between the models will be seen as minor, but that $750 you kept in your pocket will easily buy a nice upgraded Mac (and you can sell the old one for $). Or can be used for other things in retirement. There’s a theme here….
Are you doing paid work with this computer? How does a computer “pay itself” ?
Perhaps you’ve not used Migration Assistant to migrate from old Mac to new, but the process is trivial. If that’s your fear, don’t worry about it; it’s nothing now. Turn on old Mac, run Migration Assistant, boot up new Mac, put both on network, let them talk for a few hours, done. It’s wonderful.
Those are trivial upgrades. 10 minutes and a screwdriver…
IIRC both were C2D / nVidia 320 based, so I’m surprised there was that much difference, but putting an SSD into anything breathes new life into it.
You are wrong in what you say about security implications. Point blank, full stop. I suggest going to https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-49/product_id-156/Apple-Mac-Os-X.html here and reading for a few minutes. You’re essentially a decade unpatched, give or take a few years, so you’ll see lots of nifty exploits.
I don’t include the display in any calculations because you could resolve that issue completely outside of the question of whether to replace a 2010 Mini, and/or what to replace it with. It’s neutral to this discussion.
On the contrary, the display is part of the equation. I can't use any modern large display on the old MBP (especially a Retina display). The 17 years old Apple display is one major reason why I want to upgrade the whole computer. The old MBP is now just good as a backup, in case something wrong happens with the new mini.
But this is all off-topic. We should return to the original question: 16GB or 32GB? To me, the answer is clear: 32GB, despite the high - insane - cost and while it's a bit overkill! We can't upgrade the memory anymore. So I'll take the mini M2 with 24GB, or the mini M2 Pro with 32GB. My own experience shows that 16GB is a critical minimum if the user multitasks alot.
That's not right.
The 2010 13" MBP (https://support.apple.com/kb/sp583?locale=en_US) has a DisplayPort out, and DisplayPort is dead-common for monitors. If your only acceptable usage model is a USBC connection and Apple 5K display, then sure. Other than that, the sky's the limit with DisplayPort. Almost any modern display is made with DisplayPort in mind, and HDMI is typical too.
* The Early & Late 2009 Mini have DP, so that can go to almost any modern monitor too.
Last edited:
I'm only interested in high res monitors (4k or 5k). The old MBP can't drive these. Its video card just can't. Or else, it's just not worth it to upgrade! Why should I go to another display similar to the old 20"? I need a much better display, i.e 4k or better.
Gotcha. If your required spec is 4k or 5k, then the 2010 MBP 13" can't do that; it tops out at 2560x1600.
Indeed, I have done just that - upped to 8GB ram as well as SSD. I still have that old '09 mini which my wife uses daily running Win10. It works perfectly for her. The only problems I have ever had with my minis (on my 3rd one now) are the fans wearing out; but they are even more trvial to replace. What a waste not to upgrade those especially now when you can't.
On second thought, after comparing both side by side, if the intent is to see metrics on memory swap / paging in action, then Bjango's iStats Menu is better than (free) Stats product. The additional detail is useful.
brew install --cask istat-menus
brew install --cask istat-menus