What do we need 16GB for?

[TheMacBookPro]

You are giving poor advice to other buyers/users. That's all there is to say.

Ah yes, the classic 'I was wrong, but since I was so adamant about myself being correct, I can't let up the façade now. I know, I'll just tell him he's wrong without addressing any of his (accurate) points! He'll definitely shut up now!' argument.

I'll even type out your response for you: 'Whatever you want to believe '

Would saying that my advice is poor not be an insult? Certainly seems like it is to me.

 

[blow45]

Ah yes, the classic 'I was wrong, but since I was so adamant about myself being correct, I can't let up the façade now. I know, I'll just tell him he's wrong without addressing any of his (accurate) points! He'll definitely shut up now!' argument.

I'll even type out your response for you: 'Whatever you want to believe '

Would saying that my advice is poor not be an insult? Certainly seems like it is to me.

No of course it's not an insult. I made a case for my opinion, others will be the judge of it, I don't have to debate it with you anymore you know. My purpose isn't to convince anyone who thinks otherwise (and I got sidetracked and did a lot of pretty pointless debating back and forth with some of you guys already, thank you much). My purpose is to inform the op and others in his or her similar position on what I firmly believe if the best choice for them. I appreciate it when others here who know a bit more on an apple related issue than I do help me out. And I am the only judge of who's giving good and who's giving poor advice when it comes to deciding who I should be listening to. You said your bit too, ok, that's it, what else?

 

[Minicube]

Non-upgradable RAM=Good reason not to buy this computer

Apple finally figured out a way to force users to buy its overpriced RAM.

And finally, since page swapouts now occur on SSD drives, shouldn't they be almost as fast as additional RAM? My wife's Air has only two gigs of RAM and I never notice a lag even though I'm sure all the physical RAM is way maxed out.

 

[blow45]

Non-upgradable RAM=Good reason not to buy this computer

Apple finally figured out a way to force users to buy its overpriced RAM.

And finally, since page swap outs now occur on SSD drives, shouldn't they be almost as fast as additional RAM? My wife's Air has only two gigs of RAM and I never notice a lag even though I'm sure all the physical RAM is way maxed out.

They sure did.

Ssd swap outs are helping out new macs that's why apple has dropped development for better memory management at the software level in os x and as a result hard drive macs suffer. But ram latencies are way, way faster. So I guess you could say they are much, much faster than a hd drive that would be crippled, but considerably less fast than if they had more memory. Of course to what extent all this translates to real life noticeable performance lags is anyone's guess.

In a machine such as the pro with reported ui lags due to the retina I wouldn't want to be offloading anything to the ssd to add to any potential responsiveness issues. I would also be worried what with the proprietary ssd ports of apple (another way to have users buy their overpriced hardware) the lifecycle of the flash would decrease with the wear from the swap outs and then there'd be no cost effective options for upgrades.

 

[TheMacBookPro]

You said your bit too, ok, that's it, what else?

I'm just saying that you're extremely misinformed about what average users do and what average users need.

 

[blow45]

Who is the average apple user? Soccer moms? Facebook, twitter, youtube 15 - 25 year olds? Creative professionals? Corporate business people? University professionals? Uni kids? Developers? Small business owners? Scientists?

You 've taken only the first two categories. And in addition you 've hypothesized that everyone belonging there will necessarily do an absolute minimum usage scenario...

and you claim this the average user... yeah ok.

 

[jcpb]

My record was 40+ tabs on Firefox.

Except... 30+ of that is porn.

All I see is blow45 likes to argue in circles with the classic "I am right/You are wrong" mentality. That is all.

 

[TheMacBookPro]

Who is the average apple user? Soccer moms? Facebook, twitter, youtube 15 - 25 year olds? Creative professionals? Corporate business people? University professionals? Uni kids? Developers? Small business owners? Scientists?

You 've taken only the first two categories. And in addition you 've hypothesized that everyone belonging there will necessarily do an absolute minimum usage scenario...

and you claim this the average user... yeah ok.

I don't know why you think that only social networking tweens and soccer moms are the only people out there with less than 30 tabs and multiple documents opened at one time. Clearly, 'absolute minimum' is different in the universe you live in.

Perhaps I have only considered the first two categories (as based on the people I see with MacBooks in airports and Starbucks these days, those seem to be the average user to me), but judging by your definition of absolute minimum it's fairly clear that you're only considering power users to be the average Mac user, which I'm afraid is quite untrue these days (and has been for several years now).

 

[blow45]

My record was 40+ tabs on Firefox.

Except... 30+ of that is porn.

All I see is blow45 likes to argue in circles with the classic "I am right/You are wrong" mentality. That is all.

What kind of mentality should I have if I firmly believe something? I think I am right but anyone can chime in with whatever level of experience or expertise and if they have an opposing viewpoint I ll change mine?

Thanks for registering a month ago btw to inform us of your porn habit... That's a very average male usage scenario too. When priests are polled and one out of two is into internet porn I am sure the rest of the male population isn't trailing behind. They would be much better served with 4gbs of memory for their porn consumption. Flash doesn't play nice with os x, unless porn sites have switched to html5, I wouldn't know as I am not into it.

 

[blow45]

I don't know why you think that only social networking tweens and soccer moms are the only people out there with less than 30 tabs and multiple documents opened at one time. Clearly, 'absolute minimum' is different in the universe you live in.

Failed sarcasm aside, I was referring to your usage scenario for "average use" as bare minimum. A few tabs open, skype, twitter, one doc in word, two pdfs in preview, itunes and mail. If this isn't the bare minimum then what's your idea of the bare minimum, one browser window mail and itunes?

I am not only considering "power" users, but I am not excluding them to find what average usage is. Btw power users is a misnomer, professionals, scientists, business owners, developers, people undertaking university education are not by definition power users, they are just users with a few more demands for their mac than cheking mail, twitter, and facebook and fooling about with imovie

Maybe average usage is just fine on 2gbs where the intel hd takes up 256gb of ram, the os take up another 750 gbs, and you have 1gb left. The op can also take your advice and NOT max out their pro to 16gbs despite being able to and be forever stuck with 8gbs thus severely limiting both how capably it can run now as well as how well it will hold in the future. Problem is you are not his friend and in a year, two years, three years time he won't be able to call you up and tell you what was that great advice about. I can't even sell it, everyone's looking for maxed out 16gb models and the 8gb ones no one really cares about because why would one buy the needlessly compromised model of a three year old computer when they can get the maxed out one?

 

[sireShonBohn]

If you always have 30+ tabs open on your browser you're living life in a cluster____ of ADHD compulsions.

 

[katmeef]

Problem is you are not his friend and in a year, two years, three years time he won't be able to call you up and tell you what was that great advice about. I can't even sell it, everyone's looking for maxed out 16gb models and the 8gb ones no one really cares about because why would one buy the needlessly compromised model of a three year old computer when they can get the maxed out one?

I don't think that 'everyone' in the used mac market are looking exclusively for specced out BTO models, if they were so interested in bleeding edge they wouldn't be buying a years old machine off kajiji... For example, check out 2011 airs on ebay- 2gb models look to be holding their value quite well. I'd be surprised if the extra money you'd get for the 16gb model in a few years would even pay back the upgrade cost today, as 16gb or 8gb models are both going to seem pretty small then compared to new machines...

I'm getting a 16 order because my usage is probably going to require it as I will be virtualizing windows for work, but if I didn't have any need for 16 I don't see why I should pay extra (and go through the horrible 3-4 week BTO wait) for extra RAM that may never be utilized.

 

[TheMacBookPro]

Failed sarcasm aside, I was referring to your usage scenario for "average use" as bare minimum. A few tabs open, skype, twitter, one doc in word, two pdfs in preview, itunes and mail. If this isn't the bare minimum then what's your idea of the bare minimum, one browser window mail and itunes?

That is what I think is what the average user does. I agree that a few tabs open, a document open in Word, music playing in iTunes and Mail.app retrieving mail from a few email accounts. Perfectly reasonable.

Bare minimum? Yep- one page open or one file open in Word. That's the definition of bare minimum. Having a whole bunch of applications opened is not the bare minimum.

If you really need 30 tabs opened all the same time, and that's considered normal for you, you should take a look and see how many of those you'll actually be using. Don't worry, it's okay to click the X button. You can bookmark pages you want to get back to next week.

I am not only considering "power" users, but I am not excluding them to find what average usage is. Btw power users is a misnomer, professionals, scientists, business owners, developers, people undertaking university education are not by definition power users, they are just users with a few more demands for their mac than cheking mail, twitter, and facebook and fooling about with imovie

Except none of those people will be needing 20 tabs and a whole bunch of professional applications opened all at the same time.

I'm fairly certain that any game/software developer is a computer power user, unless you're talking about a real estate developer or something like that.

Maybe average usage is just fine on 2gbs where the intel hd takes up 256gb of ram, the os take up another 750 gbs, and you have 1gb left. The op can also take your advice and NOT max out their pro to 16gbs despite being able to and be forever stuck with 8gbs thus severely limiting both how capably it can run now as well as how well it will hold in the future. Problem is you are not his friend and in a year, two years, three years time he won't be able to call you up and tell you what was that great advice about. I can't even sell it, everyone's looking for maxed out 16gb models and the 8gb ones no one really cares about because why would one buy the needlessly compromised model of a three year old computer when they can get the maxed out one?

Seriously, that's so ridiculous I don't even know what to say.

First of all, please stop mixing up your gigabytes and megabytes. It's throwing me off.

Secondly, your previous assertions that 16GB iPads are worthless and 64GB iPads are keeping their values well were already proved to be moot, so what makes you think you'd be correct here?

Let me prove you completely wrong again.

Used MacBook Air, 11", 1.4GHz, 64GB SSD, 2GB RAM, in good condition: $581.00
Exact same vintage and spec Air with 4GB RAM, in good condition, with a case and other freebies thrown in: $625.11

The poor guy wasn't even able to make up the $100 difference for the RAM he paid at check out. You'll be looking forward to his call soon, telling you that you were wrong when you told him to order 4GB because he'll get thousands of dollars over an equivalent 2GB model when he sells it in two years' time, right?

Seems like there's still people out there buying the 'needlessly compromised model of a [two, in this case] year old computer'

Please stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[jcpb]

Maybe average usage is just fine on 2gbs where the intel hd takes up 256gb of ram, the os take up another 750 gbs, and you have 1gb left.

 

[blow45]

@guy above: yeah so I type fast and a gb became mb, even prof. journalists routinely have a few errors in their text before proof reading. Better luck next time at sarcasm.

If you always have 30+ tabs open on your browser you're living life in a cluster____ of ADHD compulsions.

And since your attention and reading comprehension is in no way suffering from ADHD you might want to read that I referred to 20 tabs as a usage scenario, and I told the guy who wanted to stress test the device, and opened as much as he could up (without opening preview at all, that's how much he stress tested the mac) that if you want to see what maxes out ram and to what extent don't open up 5 tabs open up 30 tabs. If you 've never had 20 tabs open you have probably never done real work on a browser btw.

If you really need 30 tabs opened all the same time, and that's considered normal for you, you should take a look and see how many of those you'll actually be using. Don't worry, it's okay to click the X button. You can bookmark pages you want to get back to next week.

First of all once again your poor attempts at sarcasm are noted, and that's why this time really is the last time I am replying to you.

Secondly, 30 tabs was in response to a user who said I tried opening as much as I could to see the maximum that the ram would get. And I told him don't open 5 tabs, open thirty if you are stress testing the machine and maxing it as much as you can for an experiment. All that of course has flown over your head.

You didn't prove nothing btw with ipads, and you are not proving anything with quoting two ebay auctions. It's auctions you 've chosen to have the least difference between them. This doesn't show on average how much one device goes for on average and how much the other. There's always going to be idiots anyway buying stuff off of ebay overpriced and underspec'd. They are buying the machine to use for the next 2-3 years and they don't understand its limitations and how great it will function in a while when the small ssd with crude error correction has worn off from the page outs, and they can't afford a few tens of $ more to future proof their device? Yeah I am sure there are these kinds of people too.

And in addition, which is more important you are talking about 2 year old machines, get back to me in 2-3 years if the the 2gb air sells at all, and how well the 4gb will sell.

@katmeef.
I agree not everyone on ebay will be looking for the bto option. But a lot of people will and as time goes on, people will only look for the 16gb and not for the 8gb, because what now seems a much smaller advantage in few years time (not two years of course) it will be huge. Try looking at how much base powerpc models sell for and how much the fastest cpu ones sell for, the former pretty much don't have an audience other than the occasional hobbyist. In addition you are not only looking at resale value you are looking at a better machine here.

Even if you don't use a vm, the 16gb one will be a much better machine as it will hold much more in ram and wear your ssd much less with page outs. Moreover no one knows what they might need their mac in a few years time, maybe there is some specialized software they need to run that's a monster in ram resources, maybe they need to have vm for something for work that's not on the mac. 8gbs ties your hands there, 16gbs frees them up. And the whole point of this discussion is that you can't make up your mind later. That's it you maxed out a machine that could go to 16gbs at 8gbs for

If I were you I d be much less naive about apple's policies here. Apple want you to say oh I can't wait 3-4 weeks let's get the 8gb option, because the less ram they sell on a device, the faster it's going to be obsolete in the future and the more macs they ll sell. 3-4 weeks wait can also be very desirable as the more of these they make the less kinks they ll have and more manufacturing problems will be ironed out, better chances for an overall better device, better chances for better retina panel with no ghosting.

People used to upgrade their ram all the time to expand the life of their device, to do more things as the need arose, to be able to use newer more demanding software. Now apple takes that away in the macbook pro. You are given one chance to max it out for 10% or so more on the price of the machine. A lot of people in the future as the software becomes more demanding, as their needs might change to something more demanding will end up regretting that one chance they had to max the memory of their device.

 

[noteple]

Originally Posted by noteple
Future proof, get the additional RAM now

Wrong, future proof means in 2-3 years 8gb would be normal and 16gb would be a 100 dollar upgrade.

You do understand the thread is about the base 8GB or 16GB rMBP ?

Future proof means 2-3 yrs from now 16GB will be standard right ?

 

[phyrexia]

I can open one file in photoshop and use more RAM than that. Using applications is different than having them sit in a freshly initialized idle state.

Just wanted to pop by this specific thread as to why most people probably do NOT need 16gb YET.

I have a 2011 MBP base 13", 2.4 i5 processor, 500gb HDD and I've just upgraded it to 16gb DDR3-1600MHz RAM. I do a lot of photography editing and large batch conversions (300+ RAW files) so decided 16gb would be a safer bet.

Anyhow just to test how unnecessary it is for the average user I loaded every app my MBP has installed and checked the usage. I don't yet know how to get a screen shot as I'm new to OS X but with every program open including mail, iPhoto, Lightroom, Safari + a handful of random tabs, app store, iTunes and so on I managed to use up 4.9gb of my available RAM. 11.1gb free

So, decide for yourself, do you NEED 16gb of RAM?

 

[colour]

y u haz 16gb 4 in retina?

Because I like to increase the bank accounts of apple execs and shareholders.
I waste money unjustifiably, I am, apple fanboy.

 

[zerotiu]

What I see in this thread :
One is a complete Apple hater, one has weak argumentation and pretty much attracted to porns

and I am......... Apple fanboy some might say , Apple fanboy which only has 1 mac and a bunch of other brands.

Anyone who has bought 16GB have their own reason. Whatever you say about 16GB is ridiculous, we don't see it that way.

I love seafoods, whatever bad things you say about seafoods, I still eat seafoods.

For you guys who are confuse about 8GB or 16GB, look at your wallet. The main reason you guys are confuse because you WANT rMBP and you ask : is it worthed to spend $200 for 16GB?. You don't have any choice. If you look closely there are 2 variables there : WANT rMBP and WANT 16GB. So don't suggest us to buy MBP.

If the askers don't know anything about RAM , it is wrong to ask in this forum, just look back at your wallet again

 

[blow45]

you guys shouldn't go on branding other people apple haters, we do love apple, so much that we love to hate it too sometimes.

I just want to submit a bit more evidence on the table for the neccesity of 16gbs of ram. I suspected this was the case because on my intel hd 3000 mac mini when I decided to throw 16gbs at it (because thanks to lion it was a dog with 4gbs) the gfx performance improved too due to the machine allocating more memory to the integrated graphics. I wasn't sure however how that would play out with discrete graphics too, maybe then the integrated gfx only relied on whatever allocation was there originally. I 've been reading about this a bit, and I am glad I 've found another poster here who knows what they are talking about, so I ll just quote them:

With the i7 chips the more ram you put in, the more vram you have on battery/low power mode. Integrated graphics memory is based on how much you can spare. 16GB brings it to almost a GB of vram, which I'm sure can make a big difference when rendering using the HD4000.

I am sure people trying to make an informed choice will be happy to learn this.

@phyrexia, boy is it a relief dude to get some people here who actually know what they are talking about.

 

[pragmatous]

You cannot upgrade your RAM in retina MBP. You are stuck with it forever. It's integrated into the motherboard itself.

If you run multiple RAM intensive applications at the same time, more RAM will allow them to run faster and more smoothly.

If you're unsure about 16GB, I'd buy the MBP with the 8GB and if you find you need more, based on a high Page Out count, you can add more RAM later.

You really do not want to buy any extra RAM from Apple because it is always grossly over-priced.

 

[Mongol]

You cannot upgrade your RAM in retina MBP. You are stuck with it forever. It's integrated into the motherboard itself.

The CPU is integrated into the motherboard too, and if you upgrade to the 2.7gh version, you get 8 mb of L3 cache instead of 6. Why don't you max that out too?

33% more L3 cache is pretty significant for performance as well breh, and it's useful always, not just when you are running 15+ applications..

 

[TheMacBookPro]

@guy above: yeah so I type fast and a gb became mb, even prof. journalists routinely have a few errors in their text before proof reading. Better luck next time at sarcasm.

I'm fairly certain that wasn't sarcasm...

Even journalists make errors, yes, but not something as simple as mixing up MB and GB. That would be akin to a war correspondent mixing up Iraq and Iran.

And since your attention and reading comprehension is in no way suffering from ADHD you might want to read that I referred to 20 tabs as a usage scenario, and I told the guy who wanted to stress test the device, and opened as much as he could up (without opening preview at all, that's how much he stress tested the mac) that if you want to see what maxes out ram and to what extent don't open up 5 tabs open up 30 tabs. If you 've never had 20 tabs open you have probably never done real work on a browser btw.

So now 20 tabs is a stress-test usage scenario?

Most people will open preview with 4-5 items, safari and/or chrome and firefox with 20+ tabs and have 2-3 excel and word documents open. That again is a minimum usage scenario,

Very interesting.

We were disagreeing with your claim that everyone has at least 20 tabs open on average. If you were saying that it was a stress test, or was when you were doing some real work that requiring citing from the internet or something like that, I'm sure we would have all agreed with you.

First of all once again your poor attempts at sarcasm are noted, and that's why this time really is the last time I am replying to you.

Exactly what I would say if I were wrong but did not want to admit it.

You didn't prove nothing btw with ipads

I did prove something with the iPad price thing. I proved that your '64GB=holds values well, 16GB=worthless' assertion was incorrect, and thus, there is no reason to believe your '2/8GB=nobody will buy it, 4/16GB=everyone will buy it' assertion now.

, and you are not proving anything with quoting two ebay auctions. It's auctions you 've chosen to have the least difference between them

That's extremely offensive. Perhaps it's something you'd do? I'm actually perfectly happy to admit when I am wrong, but that is not the case here.

No, I quoted the first two ebay completed auctions on the list. Unlike some people, I don't tailor facts to what I say.

This doesn't show on average how much one device goes for on average and how much the other.

Where do you check the current average price of a product, and where do you check the estimated future selling price?

I've only seen Mac2Sell and they're producing ridiculous results- $200 for a base 11" C2D Air and $260 for the same Air with 4GB. Still nowhere near recuperating the original cost of the 4GB RAM, and the price is at least 50% off from the actual market value.

There's always going to be idiots anyway buying stuff off of ebay overpriced and underspec'd. They are buying the machine to use for the next 2-3 years and they don't understand its limitations and how great it will function in a while when the small ssd with crude error correction has worn off from the page outs, and they can't afford a few tens of $ more to future proof their device? Yeah I am sure there are these kinds of people too.

So now there's another class of Mac user? Idiots, average users, and the misnomer, the power user. Right, why does it sound like you're desperately making 'classes' of people up now?

And in addition, which is more important you are talking about 2 year old machines, get back to me in 2-3 years if the the 2gb air sells at all, and how well the 4gb will sell.

Why? I already called your bluff on the price claims twice and neither time were you accurate.

How about we look at some iPhones? I know that you haven't made any ridiculous price claims on the iPhone yet, but let's see:

8GB iPhone 3G: M2S: $70, eBay Instant Sale: $56.90
16GB iPhone 3G: M2S: $100, eBay Instant Sale: $59.17

Let's go back to the base 11" Air with 2GB RAM. Looking at the top listing for a used model (not refurbished) when filed under 'price+shipping highest first' with shipping set to the USA:

2GB RAM: $642.99

Now, the only other 64GB/1.4GHz/4GB RAM Air I could find in the completed listings section was the one I'd previously already linked to, which you claimed was the listing at the bottom of the 'highest first' list. So we'll compare another 11" Air, but this one is a 1.6GHz/4GB RAM/128GB SSD model: $682.99

Both models are from the same seller, so there's no way you can claim that I've specifically looked for listings with the least difference between them now.

Lots of idiots buying 2GB RAM MacBook Airs on eBay it seems, maybe you're now going to claim that the average Mac user is 'an idiot'?

I just want to submit a bit more evidence on the table for the neccesity of 16gbs of ram. I suspected this was the case because on my intel hd 3000 mac mini when I decided to throw 16gbs at it (because thanks to lion it was a dog with 4gbs) the gfx performance improved too due to the machine allocating more memory to the integrated graphics. I wasn't sure however how that would play out with discrete graphics too, maybe then the integrated gfx only relied on whatever allocation was there originally.

Please read this article directly off the Apple support website: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3246

With the HD 4000 and 4GB RAM, you get 384MB allocated to the integrated GPU, while with 8GB RAM, you get 512MB allocated. The amount of VRAM allocated does not increase any further with additional RAM past 8GB, which means there is no integrated graphics performance boost with the 16GB RAM option.

With the HD 3000, you get 256MB allocated with 2GB RAM, 384MB allocated with 4GB RAM and 512MB allocated with 8GB RAM. It does not increase any further. (with the Sandy Bridge 15- and 17-inch MacBook Pros, the integrated GPU stays at 384MB allocated for the HD 3000, even with 8GB+ RAM, as they have a dedicated graphics to haul the heavy stuff)

The boost in graphical performance you are seeing is due to the jump from 4GB. You got 512MB VRAM allocated (a 128MB boost) when you hit 8GB RAM. The additional 8GB, bringing the total to 16GB, did not allocate any more VRAM to your computer. The poster you were quoting was incorrect, at no point does the integrated graphics get 1GB VRAM allocated.

 

[Mongol]

you guys shouldn't go on branding other people apple haters, we do love apple, so much that we love to hate it too sometimes.

I just want to submit a bit more evidence on the table for the neccesity of 16gbs of ram. I suspected this was the case because on my intel hd 3000 mac mini when I decided to throw 16gbs at it (because thanks to lion it was a dog with 4gbs) the gfx performance improved too due to the machine allocating more memory to the integrated graphics. I wasn't sure however how that would play out with discrete graphics too, maybe then the integrated gfx only relied on whatever allocation was there originally. I 've been reading about this a bit, and I am glad I 've found another poster here who knows what they are talking about, so I ll just quote them:



I am sure people trying to make an informed choice will be happy to learn this.

@phyrexia, boy is it a relief dude to get some people here who actually know what they are talking about.

Look, if you are not even getting page outs, you have more RAM than you need. I've been using the base rMBP for a week now in various situations. I don't get page outs. at all.

I don't care what happens 3 years later. I'll be switching to a 13" retina MBP when it comes out anyways.

My philosophy on laptops is this: you should get the most portable, cheapest machine that meets your needs and that you find enjoyable to use, because ultimately laptops are throwaway machines, because if you travel a lot, they can get banged up or get stolen etc.

also, i'm guessing you got the 16 ram upgrade on the 256 SSD. lol, if you think that'll help the resale value 3 years from now, because the SSD size will be by far the first thing to be not adequate in that configuration.

now, I think people who got the 2.6 512 gb version have a good reason to get the ram upgrade.

 

[blow45]

excuse me I just posted some evidence that more ram actually provides you much more vram for the integrated graphics in a machine that's driving a retina display that need all the gfx power it can have, that didn't have any impact at all?

sorry but you are wrong, actually the stupid purchase is the marginally better cpu that will be completely unnoticeable since the bottleneck here is the gpu. In addition 512gbs means buying apple's not that great and way overpriced ram. But you did guess right, I am in the market for the base model with 16gb of ram which is the cheapest smartest purchase (of course if anyone can afford to throw any money at these buys and can max everything out that's not a dumb thing to do, good for them).

You know why? Cause it is the cheapest configuration where you are not making the poor choice of crippling your machine's memory ceiling when you don't have to. And where it's actually going to be a much faster machine because most anything you throw at it will have ample space to be in the fast ram. And as far as storage goes it IS upgradeable, and if someone can handle the space of 256gbs right now they can very well in a year or two go for 700gbs from a third party and it will be a much faster ssd and much cheaper one. Old ssd goes to ebay which I am sure there will be quite a few people looking for replacement units, and a new one comes in at a fraction of the cost. At any point from a year say onwards you can make this mac almost as good as the maxed out model with much, much less than what you will be paying now, provided of course you maxed the ram.

Recap: Smart purchase, base model, maxed out 16gbs memory to have an extra gig for the intel gfx, and a machine that's waiting for tasks for you to throw at, you want to encode video? Throw this baby the task, there's ram for it, you want to work with raw photography? throw that too, you want to have a proper full vm windows system with 4gbs of ram in there, no problem, want hardcore dev. taks, adobe cs, you got it, forget opening and closing documents in preview, just keep them minimised on the the dock icon, and keep most of the web you visit frequently in different windows and tabs constantly open (not a bad idea to restart the browsers once in a while). All that for two hundred extra dollars. The only problem I see in this is spoiling you to want 32gbs of memory in your next mac.

----------

The CPU is integrated into the motherboard too, and if you upgrade to the 2.7gh version, you get 8 mb of L3 cache instead of 6. Why don't you max that out too?

33% more L3 cache is pretty significant for performance as well breh, and it's useful always, not just when you are running 15+ applications..

I challenge anyone to show me the benefits of of 2mb more of l3 cache on a four core cpu in their daily tasks. If anyone can notice anything more than a 3% increase in performance... For the rest of the reply see above. It's not a smart choice to get the higher end cpu, the gpu is the bottleneck, and it's the same in both configurations, save your money, sell the mac in a year add the money saved from this year, and buy the rev. 2 product with wifi ac and much better gfx, twice the base storage, as well as a cpu in the base model that as with any tick tock intel one is way better than whatever benefit you had from an incremental update to the current line up.