Own 2 Mac mini M1's - one 8 GB RAM and one 16 GB of RAM - do not get the 8

[phrehdd]

Hmm, I've been using 8GB model for 3 weeks now and not once it showed any problems or case of instability. If the 16GB model cost just 50$ more, like if it was an additional RAM for PC, there wouldn't be question. But as it stands now, the choice should depend on given user case, i.e. planned tasks for the machine. IMO, 16GB in case of M1 currently is absolutely unnecessary for average home use.

I had like 10 instances of VLC player opened with videos and Chrome with 5-8 tabs and the most Mac used was about 6.8 GB of RAM. Actually, only few times I noticed it used swap file, it was after I run some games, and the swap file was under 1GB. Most of the time my Mini uses around 5-5.5GB of RAM (mainly Chrome).

It seems that the M series machines have with the OS a miserable memory management system. If all was handled better, I would happily advocate with you that 8 gigs is more than enough. However, as some others as well have found a rather odd consistency of these machines to handle memory, - more seems to be a good temp remedy. As you pointed out, it is not just a 50 bucks upgrade (like a PC).

Presently I have 3 tabs open (two consoles for NAS machines) and the other one right here. I also have messages open and VPN. The entire amount of RAM used, just over 15 gigs. Fortunately for me, I am not on a Mini here but another Mac M1 using far more RAM. For those of us who remember DOS days, paying attention to how to get upper space in memory was of great value and to control how apps behave. Sadly, seems with this amazing hardware, we would have memory contention issues. I'll again fully agree 8 gigs should be enough but in some instance it is not (when it could be).

 

[ResPublica]

Hmm, I've been using 8GB model for 3 weeks now and not once it showed any problems or case of instability. If the 16GB model cost just 50$ more, like if it was an additional RAM for PC, there wouldn't be question. But as it stands now, the choice should depend on given user case, i.e. planned tasks for the machine. IMO, 16GB in case of M1 currently is absolutely unnecessary for average home use.

I had like 10 instances of VLC player opened with videos and Chrome with 5-8 tabs and the most Mac used was about 6.8 GB of RAM. Actually, only few times I noticed it used swap file, it was after I run some games, and the swap file was under 1GB. Most of the time my Mini uses around 5-5.5GB of RAM (mainly Chrome).

You are right, adding $200 to the price of a $600 Mac mini or even a $1000-$1200 Macbook Air is really not so easy for many people, especially if they will potentially never notice the difference. It is of course true that the RAM is not upgradeable, so yes 16GB is of course better, but those $200 are never coming back either.

 

[opeter]

You are right, adding $200 to the price of a $600 Mac mini or even a $1000-$1200 Macbook Air is really not so easy for many people, especially if they will potentially never notice the difference. It is of course true that the RAM is not upgradeable, so yes 16GB is of course better, but those $200 are never coming back either.

Well, it depends, what you do with that machine. If you use it to make money, it will pay for itself relatively quickly.
But I do agree, for hobbyist and home users it is not so simple. The question is, if it is expensive, why would you in the first place buy a Mac, when there are affordable (cheaper) alternatives?

And believe me, outside of the US of A, the Macintosh computers are very expensive.

 

[yellowhelicopter]

The question is, if it is expensive, why would you in the first place buy a Mac, when there are affordable (cheaper) alternatives?

I bought it for 470 (used like new), would never buy it for, say, 670 - too expensive for me. I couldn't assemble a PC with similar performance much cheaper than 470. Plus it would be much bigger, hotter and louder, so this Mini is great for that price, probably one of the very few Macs that actually really worths it for the masses.

 

[djc6]

I have a 2018 mac mini w/16GB RAM and I can't even run Chrome + Terminal:

 

[yellowhelicopter]

I have a 2018 mac mini w/16GB RAM and I can't even run Chrome + Terminal:

Something is very wrong with your system then, if it's not a joke. As you can see the summary memory the apps use is just under 1.5GB.

 

[djc6]

Something is very wrong with your system then, if it's not a joke. As you can see the summary memory the apps use is just under 1.5GB.

Its not a joke, I don't know whats wrong with it. I also noticed the totals didn't add up to anywhere near 16GB.

 

[phrehdd]

Its not a joke, I don't know whats wrong with it. I also noticed the totals didn't add up to anywhere near 16GB.

I can fully appreciate your situation. Perhaps you can find an app such as Memory Diag which gives just a tiny bit more info. Caches are often notorious sources of memory hogging. I grew frustrated with my Mini M1 as it ran into the memory wall rather quickly in daily instance. I think the hardware is not fully the issue but rather, a lack of good memory management or ability to have "choices" that would help avoid these problems.

As I mentioned Memory Diag, I went and took a look and it reported very similar numbers to yours on apps and then on my present system - over 12 gigs of cache. Memory Diag (and I am sure other apps that are similar) allow you to flush memory. I just did this and the 12 gigs went to under 6 gigs.

Sadly, I am selling my M1 512/16. I was very sure at the time it would be the machine to last me a few years given that the most mem intense app I use are items like Affinity Photo. I was wrong.

EDIT - Btw, I tend to find that browsers are some of the worst offenders for memory hogging. Chrome is no exception and while reasonably fast, I opted to remove it from my system.

 

[ResPublica]

I have a 2018 mac mini w/16GB RAM and I can't even run Chrome + Terminal:

Some other (system) process is using far too much memory (and GBs, not MBs). It might be a background process of one of your browsers. Nowadays, browsers create multiple processes to run all websites. Try finding the process which is the culprit in Activity Monitor.

I had a similar issue with Firefox for a while on my MacBook Air 8GB, but an update for firefox fixed it.

 

[FFabian]

I'm waiting for the M2 Minis to replace my iMac 27 (hopefully October). This RAM issue is very divisive. One gets totally conflicting reports about the 8 vs 16 vs 24GB performance.

I use my machine for Home Office and it's the usual Office stuff: Citrix for remote instances for work, Browsing, Mail Text, Powerpoint, Excel BUT I also do some gaming in between - mostly strategy/building games (Frostpunkt, Total War etc).

My Intel iMac had 16GB and I'm leaning toward buying 16GB for the M2 too. Am I right that especially the gaming aspect of my use case would want for more than 8GB RAM?

 

[phrehdd]

I'm waiting for the M2 Minis to replace my iMac 27 (hopefully October). This RAM issue is very divisive. One gets totally conflicting reports about the 8 vs 16 vs 24GB performance.

I use my machine for Home Office and it's the usual Office stuff: Citrix for remote instances for work, Browsing, Mail Text, Powerpoint, Excel BUT I also do some gaming in between - mostly strategy/building games (Frostpunkt, Total War etc).

My Intel iMac had 16GB and I'm leaning toward buying 16GB for the M2 too. Am I right that especially the gaming aspect of my use case would want for more than 8GB RAM?

From my PoV, I would opt for 16 gigs (if not more). My frustrations grew with the M1 Mini with 512/16 given that this sweet spot should have been enough to do what I needed with certain apps open most of the time. I was wrong. Somehow, memory management does not exist. In turn, I said good bye to my Mini and got its big brother with more RAM. If I were to get the M2 Mini and it offered up 32 gigs...I would have happily run with it. My lesson learned is that the new M chip architecture is brilliant under certain conditions yet can be miserable under typical conditions. However, to be fair, the person who ended up with my Mini already had exactly the same spec Mini and absolutely finds it to continually be amazing. This was his first intro to the Apple world from Windows. So, no perfect solution, one person's issue may not be another's. I'll continue to consider the RAM challenge a legitimate issue that Apple should address (and I know some others who too, have the same frustrations).

 

[gradi]

Sadly, I am selling my M1 512/16. I was very sure at the time it would be the machine to last me a few years given that the most mem intense app I use are items like Affinity Photo. I was wrong.

First let me say I do not doubt anything you have said. I will just tell my experience with my M1 Mac Mini 16gb/512gb + external 2tb SSD. Connected to 2 monitors.

I use Lightroom Classic, Photoshop, Topaz programs (Denoise AI, Sharpen AI, Gigapixel AI), XnViewMP, Safari, Chrome, TextEdit, Finder, etc. I usually have Lightroom open, Safari with about 40-50 tabs open, Chrome open with 15 tabs open, multiple Finder windows open, TextEdit with several files in different tabs open, and XnViewMP open. Sometimes I also run Photoshop, a Topaz program, FreeFileSync, or Vuescan. I mostly process 20mp and smaller photos.

After several months of use I have never had any slow interactive response, no slow switching among apps, etc. I usually don't look at the Activity Monitor, but if I do look at it then sometimes while using Lightroom I will see yellow memory pressure (never seen red) and I see that there is some swap used, but everything is still responsive and no evidence of that. If I don't look at the Activity Monitor I would never even know. If the only way for me to know about yellow memory pressure and swap is by checking the Activity Monitor then I don't really care.

Clearly for some people though depending on what they do then 8gb or even 16gb may not be enough, but I have found no problems with 16gb doing what I normally do.

By the way, I typically reboot about once a week. I have done this for years to clear everything out, let the OS reinitialize stuff, etc.

 

[phrehdd]

First let me say I do not doubt anything you have said. I will just tell my experience with my M1 Mac Mini 16gb/512gb + external 2tb SSD. Connected to 2 monitors.

I use Lightroom Classic, Photoshop, Topaz programs (Denoise AI, Sharpen AI, Gigapixel AI), XnViewMP, Safari, Chrome, TextEdit, Finder, etc. I usually have Lightroom open, Safari with about 40-50 tabs open, Chrome open with 15 tabs open, multiple Finder windows open, TextEdit with several files in different tabs open, and XnViewMP open. Sometimes I also run Photoshop, a Topaz program, FreeFileSync, or Vuescan. I mostly process 20mp and smaller photos.

After several months of use I have never had any slow interactive response, no slow switching among apps, etc. I usually don't look at the Activity Monitor, but if I do look at it then sometimes while using Lightroom I will see yellow memory pressure (never seen red) and I see that there is some swap used, but everything is still responsive and no evidence of that. If I don't look at the Activity Monitor I would never even know. If the only way for me to know about yellow memory pressure and swap is by checking the Activity Monitor then I don't really care.

Clearly for some people though depending on what they do then 8gb or even 16gb may not be enough, but I have found no problems with 16gb doing what I normally do.

By the way, I typically reboot about once a week. I have done this for years to clear everything out, let the OS reinitialize stuff, etc.

Glad your system does well by you and honestly, I hoped very much the same (for me). Presently, if Memory Diag is accurate, Safari is taking up 4.x gigs of Ram. Tabs, MacRumor's main page and the other tab, this page. That is all. Doesn't that seem a bit excessive to you? With only Safari open, email, messages and VPN, I am using over 28 gigs of RAM.

Btw, I am only using Affinity Photo and Topaz (same 3 + Photo AI( for the most part where photo editing is concerned.

 

[gradi]

Glad your system does well by you and honestly, I hoped very much the same (for me). Presently, if Memory Diag is accurate, Safari is taking up 4.x gigs of Ram. Tabs, MacRumor's main page and the other tab, this page. That is all. Doesn't that seem a bit excessive to you? With only Safari open, email, messages and VPN, I am using over 28 gigs of RAM.

Btw, I am only using Affinity Photo and Topaz (same 3 + Photo AI( for the most part where photo editing is concerned.

Hmm, that is certainly perplexing. Here is what I have running right now:

1. Lightroom Classic 11.5 (it has been running for several hours and earlier today I was editing photos, but now it is just sitting there unused)
2. Safari with 47 open tabs
3. Chrome with 12 open tabs
4. Finder (4 windows)
5. TextEdit with 3 files open in tabs
6. XnViewMP
7. Activity Monitor

Here is a screenshot:

The last time I rebooted was about 4 days ago so just now I rebooted again using the option to reopen my open windows. Here is the screenshot after rebooting with everything started up again:

I am currently on Monterey 12.6, but I have used all the earlier versions that have been released since I first got this M1 Mac Mini a few months ago.

When I am editing a photo in Lightroom sometimes the memory pressure will get into the yellow and there will be swap shown in the Activity Monitor, but I have never experienced any slow downs, poor interactive response, etc.

I wonder if you need to do a reinstall of MacOS or something? It sounds to me like what you are experiencing is not normal for your usage. It might be worth your while to do more investigation and ask in a new thread for advice.

 

[phrehdd]

Hmm, that is certainly perplexing. Here is what I have running right now:

1. Lightroom Classic 11.5 (it has been running for several hours and earlier today I was editing photos, but now it is just sitting there unused)
2. Safari with 47 open tabs
3. Chrome with 12 open tabs
4. Finder (4 windows)
5. TextEdit with 3 files open in tabs
6. XnViewMP
7. Activity Monitor

Here is a screenshot:

View attachment 2071586

The last time I rebooted was about 4 days ago so just now I rebooted again using the option to reopen my open windows. Here is the screenshot after rebooting with everything started up again:

View attachment 2071592

I am currently on Monterey 12.6, but I have used all the earlier versions that have been released since I first got this M1 Mac Mini a few months ago.

When I am editing a photo in Lightroom sometimes the memory pressure will get into the yellow and there will be swap shown in the Activity Monitor, but I have never experienced any slow downs, poor interactive response, etc.

I wonder if you need to do a reinstall of MacOS or something? It sounds to me like what you are experiencing is not normal for your usage. It might be worth your while to do more investigation and ask in a new thread for advice.

I appreciate your response here and the time you took to put it together.

Let's consider - cache size and swap. At 16 gigs there should be no swap save for if your photo apps are handling exceptionally large files or histories in edits (such as found in Photoshop). I hope we can agree on that alone. As for Safari taking up "gigs" is a questionable practice (as is Chrome doing much the same).

Here is my system with email, Safari (again only two tabs), messages and VPN app.

Hard to justify so much RAM being used whether the system has hiccups or not.

I believe that 16 gigs should be quite enough in most instances. I can't find real information on how the OS and apps determine the cache amounts and when to release (if at all).

 

[pshufd]

My wife has an 8 GB 2018 mini and it works fine for her. I offer her an upgrade annually and she says that she is happy with what she has.

I have a 16 GB Mac mini and it is a workhorse but I use it next to a 32 GB 2014 iMac and I move stuff that requires a lot of RAM but isn't CPU heavy on the iMac and stuff that requires CPU resources on the M1 mini. I think that M2 solves this problem as 24 GB would make for a nice option on the mini. An M1 Pro would be even nicer with native display for three monitors instead of just two.

 

[Corefile]

The 8GB/256GB version is usually available for such a cheap price that upgrading it increases the price by 50%. I think most folks will get by fine with the base model IMO.

 

[wingennis]

Thank you, OP, for your information. I wish I had it available when I bought my Mini with 8g. The computer as a whole far surpassed my expectations but memory pressure was the reason I ended up selling it and buying something else.

 

[Gudi]

8 gigs are plenty. I wouldn't want more, even if it was for free.

 

[s.g.w]

I run Windows under a VM - Wouldn't even consider it with 8GB.

If I was a run off the mill home user - or did the odd Video work etc - the 8GB version would be more than sufficient for my needs.

Just work out what you need it to do. Youtube etc etc is your friend.... and buy the version best suited for your needs.

 

[Corefile]

I run Windows under a VM - Wouldn't even consider it with 8GB.

If I was a run off the mill home user - or did the odd Video work etc - the 8GB version would be more than sufficient for my needs.

Just work out what you need it to do. Youtube etc etc is your friend.... and buy the version best suited for your needs.

It's all down to use cases. Only technology experts need to run such complex programs as a "VM" so most folks are not in that segment. Probably 95% of folks don't run them (at a guess).

 

[EugW]

It's all down to use cases. Only technology experts need to run such complex programs as a "VM" so most folks are not in that segment. Probably 95% of folks don't run them (at a guess).

Probably more like 99% of Mac users don't run a VM, and never have or never will.

 

[fricotin]

Probably more like 99% of Mac users don't run a VM, and never have or never will.

I do and 99% seems a bit high...

 

[EugW]

I do and 99% seems a bit high...

You are the 1%. Or 2% or whatever.

Anyhow, it would be interesting to see how Apple Silicon has changed things. A popular usage (in that 1% or 2%) was Windows x86 VM on Intel, but that is no longer possible on Apple Silicon.

 

[Digitalguy]

You are the 1%. Or 2% or whatever.

Anyhow, it would be interesting to see how Apple Silicon has changed things. A popular usage (in that 1% or 2%) was Windows x86 VM on Intel, but that is no longer possible on Apple Silicon.

My guess is that VM use has gone up, since it's no longer possible to run Bootcamp, by how much noone can tell