MBP late 2013 8gb vs 16gb? performance, speed?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by umbilical, Nov 7, 2013.

  1. umbilical macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2008
    Location:
    FL, USA
    #1
    8gb vs 16gb on the new late 2013 mbp... the difference is a lot? it worth add 16gb??? performace, speed etc...?
     
  2. PDFierro macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    #2
    RAM isn't going to benefit you with performance/speed in the way a SSD or the CPU will. What kind of programs are you running? But if you plan on keeping your Mac for a good 4-5 years, then definitely get the 16.
     
  3. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #3
    You will only see a difference in speed when the system needs more then 8GB of ram. At the moment most people don't push their systems enough to see a difference.

    You will see boost in performance when the system needs to read or write page outs at 8gb, that is, it requires more then 8gb of ram so it swap some stuff to disc. Most people with the current apps don't push their systems to the point where it will start swapping out with 8gb
     
  4. Vladislav macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2011
    #4

    Here we go again....:rolleyes:
     
  5. PDFierro macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    #5
    The debate of 2013!
     
  6. umbilical, Nov 7, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2013

    umbilical thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2008
    Location:
    FL, USA
    #6
    Im designer/coder so photoshop illustrator... sublime text etc... sometimes open windows with vmware... games? well not much, sometimes but not heavy gamer.

    after see this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4IuYCaKOfY I think 8gb is probability ok for me and sell the machine in 3 years.

    one more http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPebejM_G50
     
  7. jondunford macrumors 6502

    jondunford

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2013
    Location:
    Going for a poo Moderator
    #7
    even if you don't need 16gb it will be useful in 3 years when you sell it because the buyer will want to keep it for 2-3 years and by then he probably will need it
     
  8. umbilical thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 3, 2008
    Location:
    FL, USA
    #8
    mmm good point
     
  9. Tears Apart macrumors 6502a

    Tears Apart

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Location:
    Outside Closer
    #9
    It boils down to a psychological choice.

    Will you regret not having bought 16Gb and you can afford it? Then get 16Gb.

    If you won't think about it, don't buy 16Gb.

    :p
     
  10. myxomatosis macrumors member

    myxomatosis

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Location:
    Montréal
    #10
    Personally, I picked the 16GB version when I bought my 15" rMBP back in 2012, and I've never regretted it since, for two good reasons: VMWare and Photoshop

    Open some heavy files in Photoshop or launch more than a single virtual machine and 8 GB or RAM rapidly becomes a problem ;)
     
  11. marivaux macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #11
    I generally use computers for a long, long time, so I may spring for the 16gb--the reason it will have a higher resale value with more RAM is because it will still be a useful computer. It's not really worth it for the better sale value (are you going to sell it for $200 more? Probably not). It might be worth it if it keeps you from buying a new computer for another two or three years.

    Of course, it might not even do that, so it's annoying that it's soldered on. It would be interesting to have some people in the software industry weigh in on the future of RAM usage. Mavericks apparently helps reduce RAM usage, so most people don't need more RAM at the moment. But two or three versions of OSX from now and whatever software is released four years from now...you might need it.
     
  12. richard371 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    #12
    But if you don't need the 16 GB now and you sell it in 2 years you will not get $200 more for it over the 8 which I believe is the cost to go from 8 to 16. Not to change the subject but I kept buying iPads at 64GB and never used more then 32. I find when I sell them I can't get near the $100 difference in ram I paid. From now on I am going with the 32GB iPads. Get what you need and don't think about resale. if anything lower models have better resale value.

     
  13. john123 macrumors 68000

    john123

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2001
    #13
    This is correct. The "add-ons," just like with cars, depreciate much more steeply and quickly than does the base. In two years, I think getting $100 is the upper end of what you might be able to expect, and even that's probably a stretch since there will have been two releases in the meantime.
     
  14. marivaux macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #14
    Right, but if you drive the car instead of selling it for a fancier upgrade, you save money by having a longer-lasting car. So, in this case:

    $1500 computer for 4 years = $375 /yr, somewhat less if you sell your computer for whatever small amount you get for the 4-year-old laptop.

    $1700 computer for 6 years = $283 /yr, or less if you use it for longer. Resale value is essentially nothing, like the powerbook I'm writing this on, but you have extra computers around for running old software you still use/donation/whatever.

    I can see it either way. Either way, the moderators will probably close this thread like all the other RAM-argument threads.:rolleyes:
     
  15. richard371 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    #15
    Good point. It really depends on how long you keep and use it. I upgrade my iPads/iphone every release/year. Laptops every 2 years and desktops 4 years. For me it makes sense to hit the middle models for the MacBooks and maybe high end for the desktops although I'm moving away from he desktops as I like to be more mobile.

     
  16. john123 macrumors 68000

    john123

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2001
    #16
    To me personally, double the RAM will not buy two extra years of usage. Everything else becomes dated too. But sure, if that situation describes you, then I suppose it works.
     
  17. marivaux macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #17
    Sure, it depends on your personal upgrade cycle and what you usually do with computers. I agree that it doesn't make sense to upgrade a computer based on the potential resale value--if it's a usable computer, you're going to lose money by not using it for longer and instead forking out the $$ in a couple of years for whatever the new thing is. If it's not really a usable computer, you're not going to get much for it anyway. But I'm also the kind of person who wants to drive a car for 200,000 miles instead of getting a nice, new, expensive car, and we still don't own a flatscreen TV.

    The non-upgradeability of the new macbooks almost makes me want to buy a non-retina mbp, since Apple's introduction of computers as disposable devices is pretty heinous. In the non-retina, you can spend the money on extra RAM as needed, or buy a big new SSD when the price is right. I think the new retinas are too nice for me to really do that, but it bugs me.
     
  18. KeegM480 macrumors 6502a

    KeegM480

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    #18
    16GB is very nice if you do editing, otherwise 8 will be fine, I wouldnt go back to 8GB though after having 16, so much more fluid with Photoshop, Final Cut, and other apps open
     
  19. cool11 macrumors 65816

    cool11

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2006
    #19
    For 8gb model
    http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs-retina/
    Apple says 'Configurable to 16GB'.

    Is it upgradeable only in the initial purchase? Only as built-to-order(bto) order?
    Is it upgradeable in apple service center?
    Is it user upgradeable?
     
  20. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #20
    Not user (or otherwise) upgradeable, must be configured as build-to-order.
     
  21. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #21
    Correct you can configure it a purchase time, but you cannot install it after the fact, as I stated in the other thread you posted this question in. Its soldered onto the logic board.
     
  22. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #22
    I'd say go for 16GB since you'll be running VMware and Photoshop.

    IMO, I always buy more than what I need today because my needs will increase over time. Software requirements will also rise over time too.

    And to top it all off, since the RAM is soldered, you can't upgrade it post-purchase.
     
  23. 5to1, Mar 11, 2014
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2014

    5to1 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    #23
    I disagree, other then battery life, where would most people likely see a component become so dated they'd need to upgrade. I know very few people that were regularly (if ever) CPU bound when they upgraded for example.

    RAM , SSD's, Battery life, Screen Res/quality have been the main improvements for the masses in the past decade IMO. And all of them were essentially ignored in favour of the BS silicon/clock cycle/etc marketing battles for years. Having started from such a low point, but having finally been prioritised recently, I think the massive up ticks are done in these areas. Most users aren't going to need to upgrade for a slightly faster (real world) SSD, a few extra hours battery life (when they can already pull almost a whole working day untethered), etc.

    IMO SSD capacity followed by RAM is likely to be the only two things that will constrain most users in the future. But at 8GB, i'd be hesitant to advise anyone that doesn't already heavily use RAM to dump $200 more. Of course historically under speccing RAM and over speccing CPU is a common error.
     
  24. john123 macrumors 68000

    john123

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2001
    #24
    Whaaaaaa? What was there in my statement for you to "disagree" with? Let's review my quoted statement again, emphasis added:
    "To me personally, double the RAM will not buy two extra years of usage. Everything else becomes dated too. But sure, if that situation describes you, then I suppose it works."

    Answer: nada. But let's review the rest of this thing, since it's actually relevant.

    That's a function of who you know. There's a group of people who run CPU-bound tasks with regularity. And that group is growing, especially with the number of people who do big data junk on their own computers. I was recently running something that took two weeks to finish. Could I have run it on AWS or the like? Sure. Did I want to? No.

    But even that is beside the point. Compared to newer machines, one that's a couple years old just feels sluggish in a relative sense. Given that the economics of selling an old machine and buying a new one are actually quite favorable with Macs (assuming you're staying in base model units).

    And you end by calling people's decisions a "common error"? Geez.
     
  25. 5to1, Mar 11, 2014
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2014

    5to1 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    #25
    I'm sorry, let's take the I disagree bit out, perhaps you can leave the whaaaa in the pram :/

    And no my second statement is not a "function" of who I know, it's an opinion based on an observation of the users of laptops I know. Fair enough, if your observations are based largely on people who are CPU bound. My dad, my gf, my friends, all the other basic users (which is the vast majority when I look around) of laptop users that I know are rarely if ever CPU bound.

    What they have found repeatedly is that they've run out of HDD space, or the measly RAM that came with their machines is not adequate. And I certainly didn't say peoples choices were wrong, its the industry as a whole that has made CPU a headline feature, while shipping SKUs with better apportioned RAM/HDD would suit many of their customers better. People walk into PC World and are persuaded they need a faster processor, when they'd be much better off going for 4GB and a bigger HDD/SSD. That's unfortunately a hangover of the immense power wielded by the silicon vendors/manufacturers throught out the industry and retail chains.
     

Share This Page