Video Demos Performance Differences Between 8GB and 16GB Apple M1 MacBook Pro

[Superhai]

Just for fun, let's use a car analogy to compare the 8 GB and 16 GB version.

The 16 GB version is like an Audi RS 6 Avant. It's very very fast and since it's a wagon it can carry a lot of stuff.
The 8 GB version is like an Audi RS 5. It's also very very fast but it can't carry the same amount of stuff.

So for workloads where you need to move a lot of stuff, the RS 6(16 GB) will be faster. The RS 5(8 GB) version can move the same amount of stuff, but it will have to drive multiple times back and forth, making it take longer.

For situations where you don't need to move a lot stuff, you just need to move it fast. They will be more or less identical in performance.

😁

A better analogy to explain here, is that 8 GB Intel is an older car of same model, but engine is larger and thus decrease the available space for your stuff than a 8 GB M1. Which in turn will mean that the small sofa you want to give to your mother-in-law that did not fit your Intel 8GB, may fit in your 8GB M1. On the other hand the new big cool bed you and your girlfriend/boyfriend are buying may still need 16GB on the M1, as it fit neither in 8GB Intel or 8GB M1.

 

[mlykke]

A better analogy to explain here, is that 8 GB Intel is an older car of same model, but engine is larger and thus decrease the available space for your stuff than a 8 GB M1. Which in turn will mean that the small sofa you want to give to your mother-in-law that did not fit your Intel 8GB, may fit in your 8GB M1. On the other hand the new big cool bed you and your girlfriend/boyfriend are buying may still need 16GB on the M1, as it fit neither in 8GB Intel or 8GB M1.

No, because that analogy tries to verify the factually incorrect statement, that 8 GB on the M1 is more than 8 Gb on the Intel. This is incorrect.

 

[Superhai]

No, because that analogy tries to verify the factually incorrect statement, that 8 GB on the M1 is more than 8 Gb on the Intel. This is incorrect.

Not at all, it is explaining the nuance that lesser space is used by the system itself, and you have more space left for your use. It does not imply, as you seem to believe, that one square meter can vary.

 

[mlykke]

Not at all, it is explaining the nuance that lesser space is used by the system itself, and you have more space left for your use. It does not imply, as you seem to believe, that one square meter can vary.

If thats what you got from I wrote then you really need to re-read what I've written in this thread and multiple others. Because the one thing I'm saying is that 8 GB = 8 GB, which is the exact opposite. So far I haven't seen any proof that Big Sur on M1 uses less memory compared to Big Sur on Intel. Sure there might be a difference, but most likely it's very small and will not have any significant difference in available ram when comparing two computers with the same amount of ram. It's not like Bir Sug on Intel uses 5 GB to load and it only uses 1 GB on M1.
It doesn't matter how many times you keep claiming it, it still remains a fallacy.

 

[Maximara]

Your analogy just doesn't hold up. Amount of ram doesn't have anything to do with "mileage". 100 MB of data, takes up 100 MB of data.

I guess these compression things I have heard like zip are just my imagination

Seriously it is becoming obvious from your comments you just don't get it.

"But I think it’s also the case that for most tasks for most people, these M1 Macs need less RAM to perform equivalently to, if not better than, their Intel-based counterparts. This sounds like ******** but it’s not. It’s the result of a hardware system architecture whose design aligns with Apple’s software architecture." - The M1 Macs by John Gruber

"You don’t have to take my word for this — this, in a nutshell, helps explain why iPhones run rings around even flagship Android phones, even though iPhones have significantly less RAM. iOS software uses reference counting for memory management, running on silicon optimized to make reference counting as efficient as possible; Android software uses garbage collection for memory management, a technique that, whatever you think of it philosophically, requires more RAM to achieve equivalent performance."

Never mind that with modern programs 100 MB of RAM is a joke. Heck, one of my tabs in the Safari browser (which isn't the the RAM muncher MacOS Chrome is) is 199 MB on my Intel Mac.

 

[hifimacianer]

I've written less than 1TB a day and killed an SSD through swap. Samsung's 250GB Evo has a warranty of 150TBW. If you're writing 1TB a day that's your warranty gone in less than half a year.

How do you know, that your SSD was killed through swap?
There are SSDs dying after 1 month of usage, where swap is definitely not the cause.

 

[Maximara]

How do you know, that your SSD was killed through swap?
There are SSDs dying after 1 month of usage, where swap is definitely not the cause.

Why SSDs Die a Sudden Death (and How to Deal with It) goes into the details on how a supposedly "healthy" SDD can croak.

 

[justperry]

Related to the longevity issue, a point brought up in M1 Mac Mini 8GB and why i'm returning it for the 16GB version is because of the greater chance a 8GB will do disk swap which will lessen the life of the SSD (by how much I have no idea) and so for the best lifespan the 16GB is better.

I know it's been several days since you posted this but I have some information most people are not aware of.

The SSD in macs are MLC AFAIK, those are much better than TLC or worse QLC, your Mac will most likely be long outdated before troubles with the SSD will occur.