Eh? My 8GB M1 Air is using 3GB swap right now. My 64GB work Pro is using zero. What made you think swap increased with RAM size?
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.
My new MacBook Air m2 - 8gb is great
- Thread starter colonelbutt
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're wrong. They do. Google is your friend...
Even on these boards we complain about it, though these are Apple centric boards obviously. Look in the news forum at the various 8GB RAM threads. It's no worse when Apple charge $200 for 8GB than when anyone else tries it.
Edit: For what it's worth, in Europe, Apple's competitors don't tend to charge as much for RAM upgrades as Apple. In the UK Apple charge £200 to upgrade from 8-16GB. Some charge only £40. Others charge £150 extra to go from 16-32GB, but at Apple price levels start with 16 as the base configuration.
Last edited:
I don't know if you were about to criticise those that think Apple are overcharging for RAM, or criticise those that say 8GB is all the average Joe will ever need, but if you're going to preface any message with such arrogance there's no reason to read anything you write.
You're wrong. Fixed it for you.
Duck Duck Go is your friend... Fixed it for you, again. Google is never your friend.
I did do some searches. I have a Surface Pro laptop. I don't find the same number of complaints against the Surface products regarding memory costs as I find on this platform. Apple people seem to be more vocal because, well, because, I have no answer.
If you don't like the Apple memory configuration, vote with your wallet. Apple is not a monopoly. Apple is not forcing you to buy their products. Buy something else and be happy rather getting riled up over something in which you have a choice.
The ones I feel sorry for are the ones buying the Windows systems with 4GB of memory, 128 GB SSD and running Windows in S mode. But, hey, it is their choice. If it makes them happy, fulfills their needs, good for them. A surprising number of people do just fine with these systems. I may feel sorry for them, but I am not one to tell them they made a mistake.
The point is he/she doesnt care as the machine is super fast. As I said above, all this nonsense about the SSD wearing down with less memory is just that, nonsense. In fact the bigger memory you have the bigger the swap space becomes.
And 128GB has fewer limitations than 16GB. And 192GB has fewer limitation than 128GB. And a Dell server can support 7.68TB of memory which has fewer limitations than the 192GB maximum that Apple offers.
No. Swap space is where needed application and OS modules are stored. Only those modules. The entire memory space is never swapped in its entirety. Swap space can grow, and shrink, depending on the demands of the applications running.
Firstly anyone can disable swap on their mac if they want to;
sysctl -a vm.compressor_mode, and sudo nvram boot-args="vm_compressor=2"
You can see if there are any kernel panics based on your usage.
Secondly, the space reserved for the swap goes up with more memory, even if it isn’t being used at the moment.
You are right, less would tend to be used with more memory if the apps you use actually need the memory.
Macos also uses memory for other things, like disk buffer, self monitor, etc. which is why people see their memory is often completely used, even under low actual usage. To get a good idea of process usage use “top”.
Last edited:
I picked up a 15" M2 MBA a while ago... got the 16GB/1TB config... I wanted to use it for my gig editing videos and photos (FCP and PS)... lots of storage, and sufficient RAM.
Long story short, the gig ended, and I decided to fully retire... so now I have a pretty beefy MBA for email. web browsing and some light photo editing... hindsight being what it is, had I realized that I was going to totally retire, I would not have selected the specs that I did... but then again, I spent 1600 on a machine that will last me well into the future...
Bottom line, I am sure the 8GB/512GB config would be plenty for most folks who aren't into heavy duty computing...
Long story short, the gig ended, and I decided to fully retire... so now I have a pretty beefy MBA for email. web browsing and some light photo editing... hindsight being what it is, had I realized that I was going to totally retire, I would not have selected the specs that I did... but then again, I spent 1600 on a machine that will last me well into the future...
Bottom line, I am sure the 8GB/512GB config would be plenty for most folks who aren't into heavy duty computing...
Haha, I do hate making typos 😅 I've instilled the correct use of you're/your and they're/their/there into so many students over the years that that's a particularly embarrassing typo for me. Eyes aren't what they used to be...
P.S. I do vote with my wallet... and I'm still right (not write 😉 ).
Think that makes you special? Based on my own postings you don't have a monopoly. I get burned by autocorrect as if I really needed help. I hope you saw the humor that was intended.
And yes, a billion dollar super computer is generally considered more powerful than an iPhone SE. Thank you for the info, Captain Obvious. 😉
Edit: Smilie added so it didn't sound angry, as sarcasm is hard to convey 😅
That's SIR Captain Obvious.
True, but can the super computer make phone calls?
I remember computer rooms the size of two basketball courts. I have more CPU computing power and direct access memory in my iPhone. But my iPhone would never be capable of running 48 tape drives, four high speed printers, two card readers, three check reader sorters, 42 ATM's and 130 teller terminals. And produce enough heat for half the support building during the dead of winter.
You're comparing apples to apples and thus your argument fails. I was able to upgrade a 2019 Mac mini to 64 GB RAM for less than $200 but I'll round up and assume this to be the typical market value for laptop RAM. This comes to about $3 per GB added.
Upgrading an M series Mini nowadays can only be done through Apple and they charge $200 to upgrade from 8 to 16 GB, resulting in each GB costing a whopping $25... eight times as much as replaceable modules!
No your counter argument does not make any sense whatsoever because it assumes that Apple stupidly decided to go with a vastly more expensive option for them when they're aiming to make as much money as possible. The only possible and logical explanation is price gouging because they effectively have a monopoly on their hardware and have designed it in such a manner that we cannot get desired configurations except through them. The fact that other manufacturers are doing the exact same thing and gouging their customers at about the same rate doesn't mean they're not price gouging.
Isn't that the goal of any company, especially a publicly traded company where the stockholders want to see dividends?
I was talking specifically of laptops, not desktop systems. I can upgrade my desktop to 128GB if I want for a couple hundred dollars. Has no relation to the memory in my Surface laptop. Different animals.
As does Microsoft with their Surface products. As does Dell with their products. No one else can make a Surface product or a Dell product. Even Ecobee has a monopoly on their hardware and software as they can only be used together.
Apple is not a monopoly in desktop and laptop computers. There are alternatives to accomplish the same productivity. The fact that Apple bundles their OS with their hardware and the two can only coexist with each other is not a monopoly.
Are you making an argument?
Following a linear model of laptop RAM costing $3 USD for GB that 128 GB figure would come out at $384 in terms of manufacturing costs. Therefore having all of that on a consumer laptop would be completely nonsensical, so why would you advocate for something so ridiculous as that? If you're simply assuming money isn't an obstacle... then of course everyone would opt for a more capable laptop than a less capable one. MBP with 8 GB for $1600 or a MBP with 16 GB for $1600... which would you rather want?
No it is exactly the same.
A-Tech 64GB (2x32GB) DDR4 3200 MHz SODIMM PC4-25600 (PC4-3200AA) CL22 2Rx8 Non-ECC Laptop RAM Memory Modules
Before the Retina MacBook Pro Apple used modules very much like these and most Windows laptops still use them. Hence I can absolutely use this as a counter example to how much RAM on the market costs in comparison to Apple's outrageous upgrade costs. If they did indeed decide to go with an extremely more expensive (for them) option for their RAM, they royally screwed up. The only conceivable conclusion one can make about going with non upgradable RAM is because the only options you get are through Apple.
They have the right to do this. However just as they do, so too do we have the right to complain... and we should.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
And I'd like it if my base model Honda Accord came with all the goodies you get when you spend $5-10K more for the next level up. After all, it doesn't cost Honda that much money to put better fabric on the seats, right?
Fact is, Apple is in business to make money. Adding RAM is a value add to the machine, so they're going to charge more for it. That's literally the business they're in. Like every other manufacturer in the world, they make their money on the markup between what they pay for something and what they can charge for it.
So, what you're arguing for is a more expensive base model Mac which -- as the OP very clearly described -- is not needed by lots of folks. I'm very glad the 8GB base model exists, because it meets a lot of people's needs at the minimum possible price. And if it doesn't? We're talking a grand total of two hundred bucks to bump up the RAM. That's a night out at this point, or like a single trip to the grocery store -- on a machine you're going to presumably use for two to five years or more.
Seems to me a lot of people are complaining in principle without checking the actual math here. And on that subject I'm also going to point out that you can go back in time 10, 15, even 20 years and you'll see that MacBooks have never ever been cheaper than they are now. Check out this iBook from 2005: retail price of $999 just like today. Mac prices have absolutely plummeted when you factor in inflation. How do you think they are doing that? By charging for upgrades.
Last edited:
this is a very good point
the ms surface laptop 5 is 1269 in the uk and comes with 8gb (vs macbok air at 1150). there is a cheaper one also with 8gb. (although there is a sale at the moment). to get to 16gb you need to spend 1499. Why is Apple and MS and Samsung more ? obviously they are trading on their brands, but also, the materials they are using are better. Anyone can get a cheapie laptop from acer with 16gb and 1gb for the same price as the base MacBook Air, but I don't want it. The base MacBook Air at 8gb and 256gb has everything I need for Netflix, prime, word, excel, Lightroom and web browsing. and I prefer the build quality, design and screen.
I am not saying this is for everyone of course, but 8gb is ample for these tasks. I know, I do them on it.
Last edited:
I have an air for work and with excel, outlook, what's app, and safari open I always get a few hundred meg swapped. I don't notice it slowing down but If it was my personal machine I want 10 years out of a machine. so I would recommend people that want to keep their machines for long periods they should upgrade the ram and SSD.
if you buy base spec Mac air for a grand and change it every 2 years you've spent 5 grand over 10 years where as spec up a decent MacBook at 3k and keep it for 10 years you've saved yourself 2 grand. although if you upgrade base spec every 3 years you've technically paid the same as speccing up and keeping for 10 years. using that logic its all a moot point! 🤔
I believe this is totally unrealistic, unless it is a hand-me-down to lower and lower users. Memory is not the issue over this time period.
Also the formula I use is "cost - sales price divided by years". the sooner you sell it the more you get back. sell it after 2/3 year and the cost per year is £100-200, which is a small price to pay for access to a laptop
@ignatius345
Inflation adjusted, all technology is becoming cheaper. Also note that demands on hardware have been increasing as well. That iBook G4 you described... I owned a 14 inch model and its 10.4 operating system worked very well even on a meager 256 MB of RAM. Also the cost to upgrade the RAM by 1 GB then was ~$200 (then dollars) and now it's around $170 USD to upgrade laptop RAM to 64 GB. Or if you want to be picky it's $85 for one module that's now 32x as dense.
Notice a trend here? Only thing is that around 2012 Apple seemed to top off around 8 GB RAM and then the upward trend just stopped. That's coincidentally when they introduced the Retina MacBook Pro and their successful MBA with non-upgradable RAM. Now everything (even desktops) has absolutely no user upgradability whatsoever.
Tis a mystery indeed why that happened.
Inflation adjusted, all technology is becoming cheaper. Also note that demands on hardware have been increasing as well. That iBook G4 you described... I owned a 14 inch model and its 10.4 operating system worked very well even on a meager 256 MB of RAM. Also the cost to upgrade the RAM by 1 GB then was ~$200 (then dollars) and now it's around $170 USD to upgrade laptop RAM to 64 GB. Or if you want to be picky it's $85 for one module that's now 32x as dense.
Notice a trend here? Only thing is that around 2012 Apple seemed to top off around 8 GB RAM and then the upward trend just stopped. That's coincidentally when they introduced the Retina MacBook Pro and their successful MBA with non-upgradable RAM. Now everything (even desktops) has absolutely no user upgradability whatsoever.
Tis a mystery indeed why that happened.
At this point with Apple's strategy this makes more sense, except that the trade in value they offer is vastly less than the computer's retail value at the time. I've no idea how one can buy a new computer each year and only lose ~20% the value via trade in.
Also Apple computers have historically been longer-lived than most Windows machines. I own a 2011 27 iMac which I upgraded to 32 GB RAM and 1 TB SSD all for less than $200 USD. It's not at all atypical for Apple machines to stay relevant even after a decade of use.
He said he sells it, not trades it in. Put in more work than a trade in and you get more. I buy all my Mac’s lightly used and backed by PayPal to the condition stated. If they don’t state the condition, I ask the seller to state as much.
In 2021 I bought a 16/512 M1 Air for $1,200 give or take. In 2022 I sold it for $1,000 and bought a 16/1tb 10c M1 Pro for $1450. This year, I sold that computer for $1,250 and bought my M2 Max 64/1TB 38C GPU. I paid a small premium for this latest one because it was a top top spec and admittedly, prices have fallen a good amount.
Aside from my current computer, my average cost per year to hold a roughly $250 a year. With this upper spec, I have more capital in the computer now, but my averaged out annual cost should be about $400 a year to hold a $4,000+ computer.
Through Apple trade in, my annual cost would be closer to $600/yr
I’ve got a iMac 2014 that still runs very well, still for all office apps, photos and video editing. The only I can’t do is 4k video. So that’s my benchmark for why I say 10 years