Six months later - how does everyone feel about 16GB of RAM on the base M4 Mac Mini?

[redheeler]

It’s the bare minimum for a usable experience on MacOS if this is my primary computer. I can use it. I can’t be too sloppy with what I have open or it will slow down over time. I liked having 32 GB in my Intel-based Mac more, but obviously the M4 beats an Intel Mac in plenty of other areas.

Edit: still have to defer some tasks to my Linux PC such as running Docker containers or LLMs. If I wanted to do all that on the Mac then it’d need more than 16 GB.

 

[Chinch07]

16 gb Mini has been great for me! I do digital marketing and some tools like Screaming Frog can be RAM intensive. Unless I’m crawling a ridiculously large website, I really haven’t noticed a difference in my workflow between my 16 gb Mini and my 32 gb 16” M1 MBP.

 

[Duncan-UK]

Fundamentally if you are a real Pro user as opposed to a pretend one, then you'll be using your Mac for business and can claim 100% of the cost as a tax deduction. So why not just get the 24gb version and stop sticking forks into the legs of yourself and anyone else reading this thread...

If you arent a Pro then 16gb is sufficient, given the price of the computer. By the time you hit a wall memory wise (which will be years down the line) there will be vastly better Macs available for the price that you paid for the M4 Mini, so you just buy a new one.

 

[Astrohunter]

You don’t need to be pro to need more RAM.
Im on M1 16GB, got into music production and astrophotography and now I will have to “invest” into 64GB ram M4 Pro.

It’s sad how much Apple is ripping us off when it comes to ram and ssd prices.

 

[Howard2k]

Fundamentally if you are a real Pro user as opposed to a pretend one, then you'll be using your Mac for business and can claim 100% of the cost as a tax deduction. So why not just get the 24gb version and stop sticking forks into the legs of yourself and anyone else reading this thread...

If you arent a Pro then 16gb is sufficient, given the price of the computer. By the time you hit a wall memory wise (which will be years down the line) there will be vastly better Macs available for the price that you paid for the M4 Mini, so you just buy a new one.

That argument is silly.

There are professionals who do not need more than 16GB of RAM, and amateurs who do need more than 16GB of RAM.

 

[Duncan-UK]

Well fine, let's just waste even more time going round and round in circles!

It would seem that the original posters issue is FOMO more than anything else, and ultimately nobody can offer the definitive advice to settle this mental issue.

 

[theluggage]

It would seem that the original posters issue is FOMO more than anything else, and ultimately nobody can offer the definitive advice to settle this mental issue.

...because memory usage is very hard to estimate (esp. if you want some room for future expansion) and the only choice if you're worried is to bite the bullet and fork out $200 for an upgrade. Guess wrong and you'll face the double whammy of losing money on a trade-in and still having to fork out the $200 upgrade on top of that.

Apple finally upping the base spec to 16GB is a great improvement but it's still under par for a $600-$800 computer (esp. combined with the failure to bring base SSD up to date to match).

There's no way around the fact (apart from going into denial) that base RAM/SSD specs and high upgrade prices are a massive turn-off for potential Mac buyers, and pretty indefensible. Whether it's a price you are prepared to pay for the sake of having a Mac is up to the individual. I'm still on Mac but it certainly makes me less inclined to upgrade or buy an additional machine.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

As I shout into the void, yet again, that 16GB is really more than y’all think. I bet 95% of users out there would be just fine. Still, everyone can buy what they want. If you are worried you won’t have enough, you should definitely purchase more.

 

[redcarian]

As I shout into the void, yet again, that 16GB is really more than y’all think. I bet 95% of users out there would be just fine. Still, everyone can buy what they want. If you are worried you won’t have enough, you should definitely purchase more.

I am eternally amused by forum-dwellers across the interwebs who think they know better than Apple, (market cap as of now $3.16T, 2025Q1 sales of $124B) where the optimum memory size for their SKUs lands.

Here’s a hint: if you even know what the acronym “LLM” stands for, you’re statistical noise as far as Apple is concerned.

 

[dmccloud]

Apple finally upping the base spec to 16GB is a great improvement but it's still under par for a $600-$800 computer (esp. combined with the failure to bring base SSD up to date to match).

I think your assessment here is inaccurate.

I just did a search on Best Buy's website for laptops between $600 and $800. I'm going to break down some specific configuration options below, both overall and limited to new models only:

Total results: 173

32GB RAM: 29
16GB RAM: 53
8GB RAM: 78

256GB SSD: 43
512GB SSD: 67

16GB RAM/512GB SSD: 22
16GB RAM/256GB SSD: 14
8GB RAM/512GB SSD: 38
8GB RAM/256GB SSD: 29

Total New results: 70

32GB RAM: 29
16GB RAM: 37
8GB RAM: 36

256GB SSD: 13
512GB SSD: 44

16GB RAM/512GB SSD: 22
16GB RAM/256GB SSD: 5
8GB RAM/512GB SSD: 20
8GB RAM/256GB SSD: 8


The biggest takeaway here is that 8GB configurations still take up a sizeable portion of that $600-800 segment. Even when limiting the search results to new models only, the 16/512 configurations still comprised less than half of all models in that price range. Looking at some of the 16/512 options, they are often running older CPUs such as 7th gen Ryzen HS, 12th gen Intel Core i5 (classified as an entry-level CPU), or a Snapdragon X Plus. I also did not filter results by OS, so these numbers include both Chromebooks and Mac OS devices.

 

[maxoakland]

Thanks for your reply.

Can I ask about your usage in the situations where you eventually need to force quit apps?

What sort of apps are you running, how many apps? That sort of thing. That insight would be very useful.

I think the main factor is I like to have a *lot* of tabs open in Safari or Firefox. That seems to the the biggest memory drain. I also think the very small amount of storage is an issue there because it limits the amount of virtual memory the system can access. I think that's an overlooked factor in small internal drives because I don't believe it's possible to put virtual memory on an external

 

[Rokkus76]

There's no way around the fact (apart from going into denial) that base RAM/SSD specs and high upgrade prices are a massive turn-off for potential Mac buyers, and pretty indefensible.

For me it really is a big turn-off. Upgrading to 8 GB Ram more + 512 GB SSD more, exactly 500€. No thanks. I'll pass.

 

[redcarian]

There's no way around the fact (apart from going into denial) that base RAM/SSD specs and high upgrade prices are a massive turn-off for potential Mac buyers, and pretty indefensible.

What is this fact based on? It’s pretty well-understood that in a given product range, the cheapest option is almost always the best-selling.

And Apple’s customer satisfaction ratings are above industry averages across the board, so whatever they’re doing with their RAM and storage choices, it isn’t hurting them at all.

 

[theluggage]

I just did a search on Best Buy's website for laptops between $600 and $800. I'm going to break down some specific configuration options below, both overall and limited to new models only:

Last I looked, Apple laptops started at $999, so you’ve wasted your time there. Even in your price range you found a few 32GB RAM options, and 256GB SSD machines were a minority. Of course, laptops are extra-tricky to compare because of the screen - but if you shop around in the $900-$1300 price range of the MacBook Air, looking at retina-like screens you'll find a few 32GB options, almost universal minimum 512GB SSD. More to the point, you'll be able to find 32GB/1TB models for a lot less than a 32GB/1TB Mac.

As for the Mac Mini - looking somewhere like minisforum.uk which specialises in Mini PC, the minimum spec on £600-£800 machines (if you order them with RAM and SSD) is 32GB/1TB, whereas putting that spec in a Mac Mini famously doubles the price.

Upping the base ram to 16GB has kept the Mac range credible, but certainly hasn't kept it ahead of the game - and SSD capacities are still pathetic - and the problem is a mixture of the rather modest base specs and the horrendous price of BTO upgrades.

There are lots of other factors in choosing a PC, so the Mac Mini may have lots of other ticks in the "plus" column, but you can't get around the massive "minus" of overpriced/under-spec RAM and SSD.

And Apple’s customer satisfaction ratings are above industry averages across the board, so whatever they’re doing with their RAM and storage choices, it isn’t hurting them at all.

You can't throw a brick on these forums without finding someone agonising over whether or not they need to pay $200 for an 8GB RAM upgrade and/or $200 for a SSD upgrade - when, anywhere else, either the base specs would cover that or a <=$200 option would get you both upgraded.

Potential customers should be agonising over whether they wanted to spend extra to get more cores, a Pro, or Max chip, - not whether they wanted to spend $400 on $100 worth of bog-standard LPDDR5x RAM and PCIe x4-grade Flash. Unfortunately - especially with the Mini range - Apple don't have the "discriminators" they used to get from different clock speeds, TDPs and iGPUs on Intel CPUs, so they have built an artificial pricing structure around RAM and Flash.

As for customer satisfaction - you can't satisfy someone until you've made them a customer. Try selling the virtues of a Mac Mini M4 (which should be a pretty impressive machine) to a PC user and then watch it all come to a shuddering halt when you tell them that matching the 32GB/1TB spec that their PC probably already has will double the price.

 

[redcarian]

You can't throw a brick on these forums without finding someone agonising over whether or not they need to pay $200 for an 8GB RAM upgrade and/or $200 for a SSD upgrade - when, anywhere else, either the base specs would cover that or a <=$200 option would get you both upgraded.

These forums tell you nothing whatsoever about what Apple’s customers at large want or need. We’re a tiny self-selecting group of technology enthusiasts.

Potential customers should be agonising over whether they wanted to spend extra to get more cores, a Pro, or Max chip, - not whether they wanted to spend $400 on $100 worth of bog-standard LPDDR5x RAM and PCIe x4-grade Flash. Unfortunately - especially with the Mini range - Apple don't have the "discriminators" they used to get from different clock speeds, TDPs and iGPUs on Intel CPUs, so they have built an artificial pricing structure around RAM and Flash.

99% of potential customers don’t know or care what any of those words mean. Does it turn on, quickly enough? Does it go on the internet, quickly enough? Yes? Job done, end of conversation. Honestly, for an awful lot of MBA customers, the colour is the biggest decision.

(Silver, btw - it’s a timeless classic)

 

[FatLouie]

Honestly...If I need to worry about the cost of memory or drive space, then I cannot afford it or, I do not need it. Folks that are not happy about Apple pricing should consider the Intel / AMD line of computers. I have seen these same complaints in the PC world, people not happy about the price of an OE Nvidia card, they want the best but are unwilling to pay for it.

 

[OldMacs4Me]

Any issues I have with the M4 mini center around Sequoia. Apple (or is it Anti) Intelligence contributes a lot of bloat, while the system itself is not getting the attention it deserves. It took quite awhile to finally get a bootable clone so I could safely test new (to me) software. Even so one has to go into System Settings then select and authorize the external drive, then reverse the procedure to get back to the main drive. No more simple option boots. To clarify after booting from the external I shut it down removed the external and attempted to boot. Nothing but black screen. Had to force shut down, reattach the external drive, boot normally from there and then do the system settings routine to be able to boot normally from the main drive.

Back when OS X Jaguar came out I called it Mac OS-X 2-step as almost everything in OS-X required an extra step over its OS9 equivalent. OS 15 brings back those almost forgotten memories, though to be fair I did jump several generations from Sierra.

If I had it to do again I would buy an M2 with 16 & 512 so I could run Sonoma.

 

[drrich2]

99% of potential customers don’t know or care what any of those words mean. Does it turn on, quickly enough? Does it go on the internet, quickly enough? Yes? Job done, end of conversation. Honestly, for an awful lot of MBA customers, the colour is the biggest decision.

On the Windows PC side, I suspect there's a lot to that...since that's the predominant mainstream platform people tend to default to, sometimes without a lot of thought (or because it's what was assigned at work). Some PC enthusiasts are technically literate, and some users...not so much.

Mac users tend to be people who've made a conscious choice to depart from the mainstream and embrace a minority alternative platform. Some may have superficial reasons (e.g.: its their iPhone's makers platform, or they liked some cute commercials), but I suspect the average Mac user is savvy enough to care about RAM and SSD capacities. Not saying all are!

Folks that are not happy about Apple pricing should consider the Intel / AMD line of computers. I have seen these same complaints in the PC world, people not happy about the price of an OE Nvidia card, they want the best but are unwilling to pay for it.

But here we're talking about wanting the 'best' (whether that's 64 or 128 gig RAM, an 8 terabyte internal SSD, an M3 Ultra or a Mac Pro), but mid.-range spec.s.

And on the PC side, you've got to 'read the fine print' on spec.s, too, especially at the lower end. My old 2017 12" MacBook has 1 USB-C port; it can drive an external display. I naively assumed that was 'normal,' till we got our kid a Windows notebook and I eventually learned the sole USB-C port on it was data only, no video out (also common in external docks, it seems...like my CalDigit TS3+). And HDMI and DisplayPort versions are often a number of versions behind the latest.

So if someone turns from Macs to Windows PCs seeking stronger specifications at a price point, you may find that, but I recommend taking a close look at what version HDMI and DisplayPort it offers, whether those are 5 to 10 Gbps USB (C or A) ports, etc...

Because the Mac lineup is smaller and confined to one brand, it gets a lot of exposure - so things like a 256-gig internal SSD being slower than larger capacities (not that Apple made a point of warning us about this), 2024 M4 Macs having Wifi 6E but not 7 and M4 Macs having Thunderbolt 4 with 5 limited to M4Pro, M4 Max and M3Ultra and the old MacBook butterfly keyboard controversy tend to come out. Maybe I'm imagining it and Dell, Acer and Asus get the same scrutiny...

 

[redcarian]

I suspect the average Mac user is savvy enough to care about RAM and SSD capacities

What is this suspicion based on?

The whole point of Apple’s marketing approach is avoiding talking about RAM and SSD and other technical stuff, because they correctly surmise that most buyers simply don’t care. Fast enough, good enough, got the badge on it, comes in nice colours.

I’d venture more users have been swayed towards buying a Mac by seeing an HDR video playing on a MacBook Pro on the display stand, because it looks incredible and they can immediately see the benefit to them personally, than they ever have by nerdy debates about RAM and SSD sizes.

 

[drrich2]

What is this suspicion based on?

That they chose a small niche market platform over the mainstream, potentially inconveniencing themselves in various ways. Using a Mac is less of a functional compromise than it was many years ago, as we do a lot of our 'computing' via online via browser rather than so much reliance on platform-specific application software, and the Mac has many app.s, but a Mac is still usually something different from what most workplaces and most relatives (and I imagine most schools) are using. Removable media formats differ, some games and other app.s aren't available on Mac, some 'cross-platform' app.s don't look quite the same on Mac or lack a few features, etc...

I’d venture more users have been swayed towards buying a Mac by seeing an HDR video playing on a MacBook Pro on the display stand, because it looks incredible and they can immediately see the benefit to them personally, than they ever have by nerdy debates about RAM and SSD sizes.

That may be, but a person paying for a MacBook Pro ought to have some idea of those things.

 

[WilliApple]

Absolutely love the thing!

 

[Timpetus]

It's nice to know I might be able to get away with a base model in the future. I currently run a base 2014 Mac Mini as a home server. It's only got 4GB of RAM and a HDD inside, but it boots off an external SSD. This bought me at least 4 years more of usability, but I suspect it'll become too outdated in the next year or two. I'll probably get a base M4 Mini to replace it, and quadrupling the RAM will be a huge boon. It will probably last me another 10+ years.

For my other machines, I do have a need for more RAM and SSD space. My strategy has been to buy upgraded models when they're about 6 months after release, at which time they often go on sale for close to what the base model started at. That's how I got a 64GB/1TB Studio and a 64GB/2TB 14" M1 Max MBP for well under $3000 each, when the original price of the MBP would have been $4100. I don't need the bleeding edge when it comes to speed, I just need good enough speed and plenty of RAM for photo editing.

 

[Trusteft]

If 16GB is not enough, just down the line upgrade to 16GB or just use the SSD to help with the RAM limits. Down the line just upgrade the SSD if you find yourself using it too much to reduce its lifespan.

Jokes aside, depending on your usage I would always suggest to always get more RAM than you need right now, AND never rely on using an SSD as a "replacement" for smaller amount of RAM. Even more so when at least one of them is soldered.