Hold up now - does the Compressed Menu column show the physical memory used by compressed memory, OR the size of that memory when uncompressed ? I think its the later because on my machine the compressed memory for one item is bigger than allt he compressed memory down the bottom.
You are not entirely correct in your interpretation. @Ryan P 's correction to my post above was correct (thanks Ryan P). The cache is loading up stuff that the OS thinks will be soon needed. But that memory would otherwise be sitting there charged up but doing nothing (you can't turn off RAM fully). The OS is using spare CPU cycles and disk access to predict whats next and load it into cache. If it is right then you get a 'performance boost' as it doens't have to fetch stuff from disk. But its not really your apps using that memory - its just what the OS thinks is next and it can throw it away whenever. Its simple more efficient than having all zeros there or random bits. You are mixing up swap space and cache (as I did before Ryan P's correction).
NO, your point was that you should have extra RAM even if you are NOT using up all the RAM. As you can see I'm using way over that. Nobody buy nobody is disputing extra RAM is needed in that case. (well.... some people will tell me I should optimisie the code blah blah blah... but those people are idiots who dont' realise its not my code causing the problem 😜).
No the swap does what you think cache does. The cache is a speculative exercise than might save you loading from SSD to RAM time IF the OS guessed right. This being said - have more space in which to guess things may improve the odds of guessing right 🤔
I'm probably more in agreement with you than most on this thread!
I'm not talking from a single time point. Watch it for a while while you load some stuff up - they mostly stay in balance ass I suggested. Cache is physical minus used IF the machine is not too busy doing other stuff (i.e. CPU is at 100% or SSD i/o is maxxed). So it can happen that it won't be used - and it seems to keep a few hundred MB doing nothing most of the time - it doesnt' add up to 100%.
I was going to ignore this but your memory pressure calculation makes no sense.
Edit: Also. Pay attention to the design - the graphic tells you how it makes up physical memory - the littel dent is to show you the thing on the left i.e. physical memory is made up of the stuff in the on the right (App + Wired + Compressed). Its Apple - you know they love such little design features:
View attachment 877992
edit: Okay, after some testing, you are right about Cached Files not being part of Memory Used. But Cached Files doesn't always equal Physical Memory minus Memory Used either. In my iMac, it never does, not even close, but maybe that's because I have 40 GB of RAM. And as a computer engineer, I still think that Cached Files should be included in the Memory Used calculation, because everything I know as an engineer tells me that freeable memory, which is what Cached Files are, is still used memory until it has actually been freed, not free memory. Apparently, the engineers at Apple used to think the same way as me, as you can see by the previous design of the Activity Monitor below. This screenshot is from Mavericks, and as you can see, Cached Files used to be included in the Memory Used calculation and grouped in with App Memory, etc in that pane on the right. Not sure when Apple made the change to take it out of there, but it seems like some confused intern decided that freeable memory was the same as free memory. I guess Apple was trying to make it look like computers had more free memory than they actually did, because maybe some users were concerned that almost all of their physical memory was always being used on machines with lower amounts of memory.
Last edited: