RAM-Gate

Bryan Bowler

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Sep 27, 2008
3,800
3,680
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!
 

Murgatroyd314

macrumors regular
Feb 10, 2012
127
45
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.
 

negatv1

macrumors 6502
Aug 12, 2005
320
22
MI
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.
 

David58117

macrumors 65816
Jan 24, 2013
1,225
507
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.
 

vipergts2207

macrumors 68020
Apr 7, 2009
2,169
2,785
Columbus, OH
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starlock

yillbs

macrumors 6502
Oct 2, 2015
381
157
Texas
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!
You don't need 32GB , ever, even more so on a mac.
 

Bryan Bowler

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Sep 27, 2008
3,800
3,680
You don't need 32GB , ever, even more so on a mac.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starlock

Murgatroyd314

macrumors regular
Feb 10, 2012
127
45
You don't need 32GB , ever, even more so on a mac.
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.
 

hevaKmaI

macrumors 6502
May 15, 2006
256
103
You don't need 32GB , ever, even more so on a mac.
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.
 

David58117

macrumors 65816
Jan 24, 2013
1,225
507
True, that would be good for now, but still leaves wondering if 16 GB will still be good 2 years from now.
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.
 

yillbs

macrumors 6502
Oct 2, 2015
381
157
Texas
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.
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.
[doublepost=1477629041][/doublepost]
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.
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.
[doublepost=1477629243][/doublepost]
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.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: myscrnnm

Murgatroyd314

macrumors regular
Feb 10, 2012
127
45
I'm the epitome of high ram usage.
Evidently not, given your opinion here.
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.
What makes you think offering an option to upgrade RAM at well over market price is a way for Apple to make less profit?
[doublepost=1477629802][/doublepost]
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.
For some people, this isn't "an ultra portable travel companion"; it's their only computer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starlock and Ledgem

malko

macrumors member
Nov 8, 2014
51
47
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).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starlock

hevaKmaI

macrumors 6502
May 15, 2006
256
103
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.
[doublepost=1477629243][/doublepost]
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starlock

vipergts2207

macrumors 68020
Apr 7, 2009
2,169
2,785
Columbus, OH
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.

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.
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?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starlock

Zellio

macrumors 65816
Feb 7, 2012
1,131
450
If you're using a MacBook Pro for any actual intensive vm usage you're on the wrong machine buddy.
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?

I'm the epitome of high ram usage.
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!

That means nothing, this is an ultra portable travel companion. It's not designed to replace your Imac, or your desktop.
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.
 

fatalogic

macrumors regular
Aug 16, 2016
248
242
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.
 

Gav2k

macrumors G3
Jul 24, 2009
9,217
1,606
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
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheBuffather

Bryan Bowler

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Sep 27, 2008
3,800
3,680
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.
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.
 

duervo

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2011
2,319
1,042
... Vms are for emulation, it's not apples fault there fanboys expect the MacBook to perform on the Xeon level.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JTToft and defender

Zellio

macrumors 65816
Feb 7, 2012
1,131
450
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.
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.
 

Gav2k

macrumors G3
Jul 24, 2009
9,217
1,606
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.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: agaskew
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.