Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Base model iMac is pretty good value imo. 16GB ram and the 8 core M4 has the same number of performance cores as the 10 core model, so no reason to pay more going up to the next tier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: staypuftforums
256 is also plenty, if like me, you have your files on a server in an office. I don’t need 6 iMacs each with SSD sitting almost empty.

The other nice thing with this lineup is that the base 8 core M4 is 4p4e so it has the same number of p-cores as the 10 core model.

Given Logic doesn’t use e-cores for processing that’s great news!

Edit- my Mac mini has 110 GB used with over 50% free. So 256GB is plenty in my use case.
Yup. External hard drives are the way to go. I understand how some people might want a large internal drive in a laptop, but not a desktop.
 
A powerful computer, with an outstanding display, intended to be the hub of your digital world, appropriate for editing your photos, creating your digital video content, and the centerpiece of your computing experience across all your devices.

In what world is 256gb of storage appropriate for that? 512? Do I really have to pay double the cost of the base machine in order to simply have 2tb of storage?
It really depends on if you keep your photo library and other large files like videos on it or not. My work Mac only has about 100GB used. there just are not that many large local files. Not everyone needs to store large amounts of data.
 

Hmmm. More typical M1 Pro result:

1730196554949.png


Still great, though. And that isn't even the M4 Pro.
 
Dropping 8GB as the base spec will help a huge amount of people.
In my profession I have met quite a lot of people who got the base Macbook Pros each time, without knowing of the obvious limitations.
Making it impossible to spec a machine with just 8GB is a great move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drrich2
FI. NA. LYYYYYYYYYY.

It’s about time.

Apple Silicon is fantastic, hardware design across Apple is fantastic, Apple intelligence is exciting, but this has been long overdue.

The fact that base price now includes 16GB, and this means more common sales on base models already has it, is wonderful. Nothing worse than finding a good deal on a base model MBA…… with only 8 GB of RAM…… which simply isn’t enough.

Finally.
 
Apple promised a week of updates. It’s only Monday. Don’t drop down to their level.
But kind of the point is that all of the people who got duped into buying 8GB Pro laptops are still stuck with it. But this move makes clear Apple has known for a long time that 8GB was insufficient for any type of lifespan on the systems.
 
But kind of the point is that all of the people who got duped into buying 8GB Pro laptops are still stuck with it. But this move makes clear Apple has known for a long time that 8GB was insufficient for any type of lifespan on the systems.

You should have worded your post differently if that was the point you wanted to make. I've long been a proponent of 16 GB base, glad it will be that case on all new laptops purchased now.
 
Honestly, that looks more like either a memory leak, or rather high-end use.
It looks like it, doesn’t it? But actually doing some fairly simple edits on a 180 mp photo (on an M4 iMac), which is larger than most photos but isn’t exactly extreme. The same editing on my Intel iMac uses about half the amount of memory. Both machines have 32GB ram.
This is consistent with my previous observations that Adobe apps tend to be memory hogs on Apple Silicon, and appears to be because they consume a large amount of the unified memory for their graphical acceleration function.
 
It looks like it, doesn’t it? But actually doing some fairly simple edits on a 180 mp photo (on an M4 iMac), which is larger than most photos but isn’t exactly extreme.

I mean… I'd say that is rather high-end. Even the Canon EOS R5 only has 45 MP.

The same editing on my Intel iMac uses about half the amount of memory. Both machines have 32GB ram.
This is consistent with my previous observations that Adobe apps tend to be memory hogs on Apple Silicon,

That is indeed interesting. (Does the Intel iMac have a dedicated GPU?)

and appears to be because they consume a large amount of the unified memory for their graphical acceleration function.

But if that's why, it sounds like Adobe needs to take more advantage of zero-allocation copying between CPU and GPU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.