RAM-Gate

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Bryan Bowler, Oct 27, 2016.

  1. Bryan Bowler macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    #1
    Ok, about 5 hours ago I got off the computer and got some exercise in on the treadmill. Then I drank a few beers, flirted with the wife, and then...let's just say that I relieved some stress. It does wonders to step away from the intense negativity that is flooding these forums right now.

    I love everything about the new MBPs except for the fact that the max RAM is and always will be 16 GB. Actually, I was pretty irate about that fact. Now, after some stress relief and time away, I'm trying really hard to take a logical approach to determining if I can make the new MBP work or if I need to put on my big boy pants and cancel the order and wait until Apple offers 32 GB of RAM.

    Time and research will tell. Tomorrow, I'm going to carefully study the Activity Monitor while I process Canon 1D X Mark II full-frame 35mm video at 4K 60 fps while simultaneously processing a multitude of 65 mp Canon 5DsR files. Granted, since I'm using older hardware it's not a proper comparison, but I want to see how much RAM I really consume in these two activities, which I routinely perform on my laptop about 120-140 days a year.

    Aside form my own personal testing, can anyone offer sound advice on the RAM situation? If I can assure myself that 16 GB of RAM will mostly work for the next 3 years, then I'll keep my order. If it can't, then I will cancel my order.

    Any and all thoughts are welcome. Thanks!
     
  2. duervo macrumors 68000

    duervo

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    #2
    More like RAMjob.

    Sorry ... these silly jokes regarding today's keynote keep popping into my head.
     
  3. Murgatroyd314 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    #3
    I went ahead and ordered mine, but there's a good chance that as soon as a 32GB model comes out, I'll buy it and sell this one.
     
  4. negatv1 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Location:
    MI
    #4
    There should have been a 32GB option. That would be my only complaint. I've been running with 16GB in my last several MBP's, and it's time to at least offer that build to order option.
     
  5. David58117 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    #5
    Doesn't MacOS operate on the "use it if you have it" principle regarding RAM? So your test won't really tell anything useful.

    I think all you can really do is see how it works out for you during the return window.
     
  6. vipergts2207 macrumors 65816

    vipergts2207

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #6
    And it's not even proper DDR4 RAM, it's on-the-way-out DDR3. Apple really cheaped out on the RAM this time around. Heavily considering canceling my pre-order as well.
     
  7. Bryan Bowler thread starter macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    #7
    True, that would be good for now, but still leaves wondering if 16 GB will still be good 2 years from now.
     
  8. yillbs macrumors 6502

    yillbs

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2015
    Location:
    Texas
    #8
    You don't need 32GB , ever, even more so on a mac.
     
  9. Bryan Bowler thread starter macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    #9
    Do you realize the size of the files I'm processing and doing so on a deadline? Do you realize that one minute of Canon 1D X Mark II 4 K 60 fps video is 5.7 GB? Perhaps you do and your'e right, but I'd like to hear more on why you think more than 16 GB are not needed.
     
  10. Murgatroyd314 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    #10
    If you're using multiple RAM-intensive programs, and want to be able to use more than one of them at a time, 16GB may not be enough. Three or four years from now, that's likely to be even more true.

    I have 16GB on my current machine, and it's usually enough. Not always.
     
  11. Merlyn3D macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    #11
    Your comment is 100% wrong. You've obviously never had to deal with running one or two beefy VMs. With 16GB of RAM, my MBP is paging between 2-3GB with just one VM using 8GB and all the other apps I have running. I do this on a daily basis, so I was really looking forward to a 32GB option.
     
  12. David58117 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    #12
    After being an apple guy for years, I recently looked at some windows machines. I ended up getting a surface book and couldn't be happier, but..

    In case you need to go that route too - the dell xps 15 is absolutely amazing. And the ram and ssd are user upgradable.
     
  13. yillbs macrumors 6502

    yillbs

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2015
    Location:
    Texas
    #13
    If you're using a MacBook Pro for any actual intensive vm usage you're on the wrong machine buddy. But even still I've got three vms fired up on my early 2013 MacBook and still have 3gb to spare. I do it on the daily as well too. Vms are for emulation, it's not apples fault there fanboys expect the MacBook to perform on the Xeon level.
    --- Post Merged, Oct 27, 2016 ---
    I'm the epitome of high ram usage. Ive never needed more and the other 80% of MacBook users are in the same boat. Apple isn't going to appease a niche group of people and make less profits, that's not who they are.
    --- Post Merged, Oct 27, 2016 ---
    That means nothing, this is an ultra portable travel companion. It's not designed to replace your Imac, or your desktop. If you're trying to render 5.7GB 1 min videos, then you have the wrong machine. It's important that the people buying macbook's ( laptops ) are educated on what they are buying. I edit 4k video all the time, ALL the time, i edit it, store it, move it, render it , then push it out.
     
  14. Murgatroyd314 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    #14
    Evidently not, given your opinion here.
    What makes you think offering an option to upgrade RAM at well over market price is a way for Apple to make less profit?
    --- Post Merged, Oct 27, 2016 ---
    For some people, this isn't "an ultra portable travel companion"; it's their only computer.
     
  15. malko macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    #15
    The only performance bottleneck I have in my current early 2011 15" MBP is its 16 GB ram. I've been waiting years to upgrade to a newer model, but no way I will pay over 2 000 USD for a laptop with the same bottleneck as my almost six years old one (that cost less at the time).
     
  16. Merlyn3D macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    #16
    Wow....so the world revolves around you, huh? Here you have four different people telling you that your use case isn't the only one, but you're unwilling to listen. There's no point in debating anything with someone who can't accept their viewpoint may not be the only viewpoint.
     
  17. vipergts2207 macrumors 65816

    vipergts2207

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #17
    My one thought, Apple didn't have to make less money. Judging by the SSD upgrade prices, Apple could've made 32GB an option for $300-400 and actually made more money from the people willing to pay for it.

    My one question, if the MBP is supposed to be an ultra-portable travel companion, what in the world are the MacBook and the MBA?
     
  18. Zellio macrumors 65816

    Zellio

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2012
    #18
    People run what helps them. In the past running guis was a power constraining effort, yet people ran them. Who are you again to tell people what they can run?

    The epitome of bad opinions while acting smug yes. The epitome of bad avatars. But screwing around on tumblr all day isn't what people call 'using ram'.

    Things are moving past 16 gb ram. I had issues with Deus Ex Mankind Divided on 16gb!

    What part of 'Pro' do you not understand? A MacBook or MacBook Air is an 'ultra portable travel companion'. Beefier quad core laptop cpus are supposed to be used for on the go productivity. Not as good as a desktop, but these are meant for business people and professionals to work on things on the go.
     
  19. fatalogic macrumors regular

    fatalogic

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2016
    #19
    I think their should be an option just for the fact that macbooks tend to last a long time and you can't upgrade the ram later on down the road. 16gb might be fine now but maybe in 3 years you'll be wishing you had more.
     
  20. fox10078 macrumors 6502

    fox10078

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    #20
    My question is how did they use LPDDR3 when 2133mHz is LPDDR4?

    It has to be a typo right? Seems odd they would use DDR3 at a DD4 speed, does that even work?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_DDR
     
  21. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #21
    I think before people cry wolf they should try the machine. The ssd is quicker again so it'll go a long way to helping the lack of ram for the very few that need it. Time will tell
     
  22. Bryan Bowler thread starter macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    #22
    Sorry, but your way off the mark. The MacBook or an iPad Pro is an ultra portable travel companion. The MacBook Pro is the workhorse for the road.

    You say I have the wrong machine and that I need to take an iMac with me. I don't think that was a viable option on my 12-day trip to China a couple of weeks ago, nor my trip to Dallas next week, or my 14 days in Africa in December, my two months in Florida in Jan/Feb, or my 15 days in a Panama rainforest in March. I'm not listing these trips in a bragging manner. I'm just trying to show that I travel, alot, and I need a MacBook Pro that is up to the task at hand.

    The MacBook Pro is the workhorse for traveling creative pros and there is no harm or money loss for Apple had they included 32 GB of RAM as a BTO option.
     
  23. duervo macrumors 68000

    duervo

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    #23
    VMs are usually constrained by storage IOPS first, RAM second, and CPU last. I find it rather strange that the only metric you bother to mention is the CPU (and even replying to a post about RAM ... you're all over the place,) as "Xeon level" CPU performance is most certainly not needed for VM workloads. I suppose you just like hyperbole to try to make your point.
     
  24. Zellio macrumors 65816

    Zellio

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2012
    #24
    Let's not even get into the fact that Xeon processors are basically desktop consumer ones with support for ECC memory. There are specific xeon versions of desktop chips!

    What he means is 'desktop' processors. And laptop cpus certainly don't match but they can come close.

    He doesn't know what he's talking about.
     
  25. Gav2k macrumors G3

    Gav2k

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #25
    Honestly you travel a lot so weight is a concern?

    To get 32gb of ram your looking at a gaming laptop or a thinkpad. Both of which are a lot heavier and skip a lot of what the Macbook does have going for it.
     

Share This Page