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

[Maximara]

All you kiddos who spent a lot of time overthinking and ended up future proofing your 15 inch and 16 inch MBP RIP. Suckers

Well to be fair future proofing in of itself is not a bad thing but you need to have a firm grasp of your workflow to not cover overboard. From what I have been reading these "kiddos" effectively seemed to have 'ah screw any actual research and get as much RAM as I can afford and think will be enough'. Not Sucker but bad planners. You know like RadioShack, Sears, JC Penney's and about every other "big" retailer in serious trouble before Covid-19.

 

[nshads]

Future proofing is rationalized myth created by those who overbought and attempting to assuage their guilt of buying more than what they needed.

In late 2011, I bought a new 17" Macbook Pro and added an extra 8gb RAM to it. I'm using it right now. All I've ever really needed was a machine for web browsing, Word and Excel. Still works for what I need. Best laptop I've never had. Looking forward to the next 16". Because I love web browsing.

 

[parseckadet]

@parseckadet pointed out in another thread that these weren't a great test of whether 8GB is really enough. Max Tech is only running one app at a time. And they incorrectly assume that free memory is an indicator of whether the system memory is actually full.

Memory pressure is what you need to look at.

It was fine for Max Tech to get a baseline of app-to-app heads up, but then they should have re-ran all of those tests doing some level of multitasking.

cache

Thanks for the tag @IG88, I typically don’t read comments on news stories. As MacATDBB said, just looking at the free memory is not indicative of how much memory is available to the applications. There are several points in the video where the presenter points out that the free memory is low, but then he shows that there are several gigabytes of cache memory available. As far as I can tell, only in the very last test was the available memory truly exhausted on the 8GB system. These processors aren’t magic. If the system exhausts available memory it WILL have to resort to swap space, which WILL result in reduced performance. In 7 out of 8 tests the available memory was not fully exhausted on either machine. To me this means that the testing methodology here was flawed, and some of the conclusions that he reaches, such as “The memory is not acting as a bottleneck,” are not supported by these tests.

 

[Maximara]

It looks like 16 GB RAM on M1 is equivalent to 32 GB on Intel.

Not just intel. Based on the iPhone 16 GB RAM on M1 is equivalent to 32 GB on Android ARM. So even within its own instruction set the M1 is insanely efficient. -

"All of these things are made possible by the hardware and software being made to work together, pulling some of the same types of benefits that allow iPhones to outperform similar-pedigree Android phones with only a fraction of the RAM." - "Opinion: Is the base MacBook Air M1/8GB powerful enough for you?" 9to5Mac.

 

[Freeangel1]

$200 for 8GB upgrade?
GET OUT!!!

 

[Maximara]

$200 for 8GB upgrade?
GET OUT!!!

You do know that the RAM is built into the M1 chip, right?

 

[happyslayer]

I appreciate this comparison and all the work that went into compiling the data. Thanks to the video creator!

I'm a computer consultant and enjoy playing with/beta-testing new hardware and software. So I went ahead and pre-ordered the base mode M1 Air, just to see how it would do, fully intending to probably return it for the 16GB version if (like I kind of erroneously thought would be the case) it was too slow or did too much swapping during everyday tasks.

I gotta say though, from my experience over the last (almost) week that I will not be returning it for the 16GB model. Comparing this new base model (8GB) M1 MBA to my previous 2018 15" MBP with 16GBRAM and i7 using the same version of Big Sur and all of the same apps (except Parallels since... no Parallels yet) that this new base MBA just flat out feels faster in every app, whether it's Universal or Rosetta2. Now, admittedly, I don't do any video or sound editing. I mainly use Internet browsers like Safari, Chrome and Brave; as well as Office365 (the beta M1 Universal version), Apple Mail, Apple Music, Apple Podcasts, Scrivener 3.21 and the occasional WoW session, and my Solar Winds Take Control software to dial-in and fix my customer's PCs, Macs and Servers. All in all, it handles everything I throw at it very efficiently and never does the spinning beach-ball thing. (My 15" MBP still does that occasionally.) I've done some basic comparisons with Geekbench and Cinebench benchmarks, also opening apps at the same time and opening the same number of tabs and such and... the M1 MBA always wins, even with just 8GB RAM. Also, I get just an insane amount of battery time and it stays cooler with no fan noise, which is always good. About the only negative is that I am now 50 years old and I do kind of miss the larger 15.6" screen at times.

So, I think for the average person, like a lot of my consulting customers who do fairly average things, buying a new M1 Mac with 16GB RAM certainly isn't necessary. But if money is not a big issue, spending the $200 and having 16GB won't hurt either. As for me, I'll stick with the base model and spend the extra cash I saved staying with 8GB and maybe buy an overly expensive Waterfield Designs bag for it or something. 😁

 

[RONS67]

This is totally different. When the "M1" Mac Pro comes out, and if the M series scales as I think it will, it will make the Intel Mac Pro look like a snail out for a walk. Remember we are looking at entry level Macs here ie the worst the M1 is capable of.

AMD Epyc made the 28-core Mac Pro look like a snail 9 months ago—often 3x faster with 1 64-core CPU and maybe be 5x faster in a dual processor system. An Apple Silicon Mac Pro isn’t available. In January, Epyc was the smartest choice for my needs, no question.

 

[5883662]

@ All the people bitching about 16gb not being enough RAM for a pro machine

It isn’t. Look at the swap usage. I’d like the soldered ssd to last longer than a year.

 

[aleni]

I think nearly everyone missed the point of the referenced video - it is not the speed of SSD swapping but how often the swapping occurs and the size of the swapped memory.

"An electric effect results from the fact that data can only be written on a storage cell inside the chips between approximately 3,000 and 100,000 times during its lifetime." - How long do SSDs last? For a given TBW larger actual RAM means less swapping and, therefore, a longer life for the SSD.

I feel bad for the buyer of my 8gb m1 air next year. Lol

 

[DocMultimedia]

I'm a photography guy. Went with 16gig. No regrets. Amazed at the speed of this new MBA.

 

[RONS67]

$200 for 8GB upgrade?
GET OUT!!!

While I’m sure Apple has over-priced it, that’s 8 GB of likely the fastest memory by far available in any production computer system.

 

[Maximara]

AMD Epyc made the 28-core Mac Pro look like a snail 9 months ago—often 3x faster with 1 64-core CPU and maybe be 5x faster in a dual processor system. An Apple Silicon Mac Pro isn’t available. In January, Epyc was the smartest choice for my needs, no question.

The AMD Epyc takes 100+ Watts while the M1 takes only 10 Watts. The closest AMD, specs wise is 15 Watt and the next one up is 35 and I think get the point. That performance boost comes at a price in terms of Watts which means heat.

An AMD Epyc 7742 ist 225 Watts at $7,753.49 while the M1 is 10 Watts at far less then that given the cost of the machines it is in. If they scale in a similar matter then we can take the lazy way and say at the same wattage the "M1" will run at 22.5 time what it currently does it will kick the AMD Epyc 7742 to the curb and then laugh at its insane price.

 

[zakarhino]

Yes, this is a tech site, we all speak tech here.

The comment originated from the ABSURD idea that resale values are *ever* going to take that into consideration.

Ah thanks, I didn't get the context of the post you were responding to. Thanks for clearing that up

 

[Maximara]

While I’m sure Apple has over-priced it, that’s 8 GB of likely the fastest memory by far available in any production computer system.

No Apple can not "over-priced it". At this point I have to ask what part of RAM is in the CPU do the people complaining about the RAM not understand?

 

[Millah]

So much of this bickering and numbers/graphs obsession is just nauseating. Back on planet Earth, actually USING the new M1 MBA is just mind blowing. I got a 512/8gb model and this thing is the most impressive computer I've used in years. It honestly feels like an even bigger jump than the PPC or Intel transitions (I experienced both). It isn't just the performance that is impressive but also the overall snappiness and responsiveness, while AT THE SAME TIME doubling battery life and running cool to the touch. It feels impossible, some of that old school Apple magic.

Call it hyperbole, but as a user, this is an amazing computer. I don't know if its the "unified" memory, but it feels like a Mac with 16gb. I have 2 Safari windows open with 30 tabs open across both windows with tons of Youtube videos, Mail open, Music streaming to AirPods, Calculator, and memory pressure remains at 40%. I've never seen pressure go above 50%. Yea, there's 2-3gb of swap memory (per iStat menus), but there is no discernible difference in system responsiveness, and its still more responsive than my Intel MBP 16" with 16gb.

Also, unless you're planning on using this system heavily for the next decade, I wouldn't worry about SSD wear. I'm just going to guess that Apple engineers know a lot more about that than we do. Macs have a longer useful life than any other computers out there for a reason.

 

[Frank Philips]

The biggest difference was seen in an 8K RAW R3D to 4K export, which took the 8GB MacBook Pro 13.57 seconds to complete, while the 16GB MacBook Pro was able to complete it in 5.59 seconds, a time on par with the 2019 16-inch Core i9 MacBook Pro with 32GB RAM.

Unfortunately, as usual, all these reviewers check is speed. Which is an important part of the process, not going to argue with this.
What are also important parts of the process are quality and file size.

That was already the problem with previous generation(s). You could tap into the VideoToolkit + QuickSync to accelerate export / conversion with some apps (Handbrake comes to mind). Still, despite my best efforts, I haven't been able to get any sample of, say, ProRes --> h.264 or h.265 conversion sample for the sake of comparison.

As always, my intention is not to criticize Apple here (I keep the criticism for other areas). I really do sincerely think they've done an incredible job with the new chips.

It's just that, well, the PC world exists. You can also accelerate rendering / export / conversion with practically any APU or discrete GPU available on the market. And while QuickSync, Nvenc or VCE can indeed blaze through a video conversion, quality and file size are nothing to write home about compared to a 100% CPU conversion.
It's OK for streaming but I wouldn't convert footage from my DSLR using these engines.

So, for the moment, color me impressed.

Color me convinced after someone takes Handbrake (or other similar app) and makes a speed + file size + quality comparison between 100% CPU h.264/h.265 conversions (Mac or Windows, Intel or AMD, whatever), and the same task done with the M1 encoding engine.

 

[warp9]

While I’m sure Apple has over-priced it, that’s 8 GB of likely the fastest memory by far available in any production computer system.

The LPDDR4X memory is 34GB/sec compared to iMac DDR4 speed of 21GB/sec. It's fast but not the fastest. I believe Samsung has that crown with its LPDDR5 at 51GB/sec. Expect to see something similar in the M1X with 32GB memory.

 

[StoneJack]

Casual users are the only ones who can be early adopters. If you need MS Office, hold. If you need compatibility with your expensive VST plugins, hold. If you need running virtual machines, hold. And so on... I'm planning buying one, but I think I'll need to keep my 2012 quad Mini for VMs, legacy hardware and software.

if you need MS office, M1 will run it just fine

 

[RONS67]

The LPDDR4X memory is 34GB/sec compared to iMac DDR4 speed of 21GB/sec. It's fast but not the fastest. I believe Samsung has that crown with its LPDDR5 at 51GB/sec. Expect to see something similar in the M1X with 32GB memory.

Is LPDDR5 more than just announced or preproduction samples? Is it found in a production computer?

 

[warp9]

The AMD Epyc takes 100+ Watts while the M1 takes only 10 Watts. The closest AMD, specs wise is 15 Watt and the next one up is 35 and I think get the point. That performance boost comes at a price in terms of Watts which means heat.

An AMD Epyc 7742 ist 225 Watts at $7,753.49 while the M1 is 10 Watts at far less then that given the cost of the machines it is in. If they scale in a similar matter then we can take the lazy way and say at the same wattage the "M1" will run at 22.5 time what it currently does it will kick the AMD Epyc 7742 to the curb and then laugh at its insane price.

Epyc servers have an entirely different purpose and usually run with 1TB+ of memory. They're designed for massive scientific simulations and feature film vfx and nobody cares what they cost or how much power they use.

 

[senttoschool]

What the video doesn't show is that while you're doing the exports or compilation, you have Chrome open with 10 tabs, listening to Spotify, maybe even have Netflix on the background, Stocks app, maybe Zoom open, maybe Sketch too.

How do the benchmarks fare then?

 

[warp9]

I don't know if its the "unified" memory, but it feels like a Mac with 16gb. I have 2 Safari windows open with 30 tabs open across both windows with tons of Youtube videos, Mail open, Music streaming to AirPods, Calculator, and memory pressure remains at 40%.

It's designed for the typical user experience, ie, lots of little things. Tons of memory is getting swapped around but it's happening in tiny discrete pieces that usually aren't noticeable. It's not until you load up something that can't be split up, like a huge image or video frames, that the memory constraint becomes a problem. The reason why the 8GB Pro failed the 8K video export test so badly.

 

[warp9]

Is LPDDR5 more than just announced or preproduction samples? Is it found in a production computer?

It only started shipping this summer in limited quantities, probably with bad yields. Don't expect to see it in anything until 2021Q2.

 

[bklement]

@ All the people bitching about 16gb not being enough RAM for a pro machine

Ram size is not about how fast you complete a task on a fresh boot. These should've run on a machine with a week uptime, 20 browser tabs, mail client, music playing in the background, and some other apps open like word or news, etc. Then start the benchmark, and go back writing a mail or browsing while it runs.