Welcome to Incremental Social! Learn more about this project here!
Check out lemmyverse to find more communities to join from here!

ModernRisk ,
@ModernRisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

I like Apple. Got Apple Watch, AirPods Pro and iPhone. I love the design of MacBooks however I refuse to ever buy MacBooks.

Overpriced like crazy. For half of the price you can get a really great laptop.

I’m honestly even thinking to buy a €200 android device to get used to the system.

woelkchen ,
@woelkchen@lemmy.world avatar

I’m honestly even thinking to buy a €200 android device to get used to the system.

Don't. Unless it's a slightly older Pixel A-series 2nd hand phone. Manufacturers of cheap Android phones skimp on everything and add bullshit crapware. Shit like that is the cause of many "Android sucks" comments.

ModernRisk ,
@ModernRisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

Ohh that’s sad to hear. I was thinking to get the Samsung Galaxy A14.

EddoWagt ,

The A30 and A50 series are fine to be honest, plenty fast for most people. Not sure about the A10 line though

Poem_for_your_sprog ,

Don't the new ones have shit processors?

kusivittula ,

would be a very ecological phone if it had a waste treatment facility built in

Poem_for_your_sprog ,

Apply phone directly to anus.

EddoWagt ,

They're okay, nothing to write home about and also not really any better than their predecessors, but they handle day to day tasks just fine

__ghost__ ,

They're acceptable for basic productivity but very sluggish if you're coming from a flagship device. Get an S10 series if you're looking for something cheap and Samsung

golli ,

Honestly imo 200€ phones are allright, but you do get what you pay. And the A14 at least here in Germany starts at like 120€, which is substantially below 200€. So if you get it and end up comparing it to an iphone, then it most certainly will look lackluster.

I would say that the sweet spot is probably in the 300-350€ range. There you have a decent amount of selection and get some really solid phones that are good for daily drivers. Like the already mentioned pixel A series that gets you clean software and shoots some of the best pictures. Or the samsung a54/55 that gets you a nice allrounder, which still includes a headphone jack and sd-card slot.

lemmytellyousomething ,

The A series is great to be honest.

It's the same as the S series, but for people who don't play high end games or live stream or render videos or don't need to record videos in a high quality that I can't even replay on my other devices.

woelkchen ,
@woelkchen@lemmy.world avatar

Samsungs come with excellent Windows support right out of the box, so if Windows is you jam it's a good choice. Not familiar with the A14, though. Would advise against cheap Chinese brands.

xthexder ,
@xthexder@l.sw0.com avatar

Windows support? What does that even mean in the context of a smartphone?

woelkchen ,
@woelkchen@lemmy.world avatar

What does that even mean in the context of a smartphone?

Windows Phone Link has: Shared clipboard, notification sync, media player widget, you can even share the Android screen to Windows and run apps from there. It's quite nice. The Samsung file manager and photo gallery also support OneDrive, Samsung Mail has Exchange support.

Phone Link overlaps quite a bit with KDE Connect which also works between two Android devices and comes out of the box with Steam Deck which is why I prefer KDE Connect to Phone Link but that's just me.

deranger ,

I dunno, I’ve got a base model M1 and it feels like one of the best laptops I’ve owned. Overpriced is exactly what I feel it isn’t. $1000 for a decent laptop is not bad. Nothing below that price has a good trackpad.

BearOfaTime ,

Lol $1000 for "decent"

deranger ,

Beats the $800-1200 PC laptops that I would consider trash based on the trackpad and display. I’ve had it for years now and haven’t found myself wanting for anything but dual booting.

cosmicboi ,

Are there any other good ARM laptops?

pr06lefs ,

There's the thinkpad x13s. But its pretty slow. Should be snapdragon elite laptops coming out this year tho.

Andromxda ,

I’m honestly even thinking to buy a €200 android device to get used to the system.

Don't do that, I can tell you from experience: Most of them suck, especially cheap Chinese ones.

The Google Pixel 7a is currently $350 and it will get cheaper when the 8a comes out. The 7a will get security updates until May 2028. If you want to get into mobile device privacy/security, a Pixel is an excellent choice. You can install an alternative operating system called GrapheneOS, it's a much more private and secure, improved version of Android. It doesn't include Google spyware and thus also improves battery life. It also extends your feature updates, by default the 7a would only get feature updates until 2026, but GrapheneOS provides Android feature updates as long as the device gets security updates. That would mean 2 additional years of Android feature updates. I highly recommend it!

UsernameIsTooLon ,

I agree with this. Pixel A series are pretty much the smoothest android experience for cheap. Plus they have a pretty good camera as a bonus. The low end Chinese phones and even the Samsung A series just don't quite do it for me. I think OneUI was made for faster hardware.

justJanne ,

The affordable Sony Xperia 10 series is really good. My new Xperia runs circles around my OG Pixel, costs basically nothing, is waterproof, has upgradable storage and a headphone jack, and besides Apple, Google and Intel, Sony is the only manufacturer that actually has working bluetooth.

kameecoding ,

The best way to have a MacBook is your employer giving you one, but trust me you kinda wont want to work on regular notebooks after experiencing macbook.

ripcord ,
@ripcord@lemmy.world avatar

I don't have one of the ARM ones, and after using Macs for like 20+ years, I barely use the ones I have. But that 16 hour battery life and performance is really nice.

Mac OS X used to wow me in the 2000s and even 2010s; it was definitely why I used Macs. But nothing about it is all that interesting to me anymore, and in some ways it's gotten worse.

PraiseTheSoup ,

It's weird how you draw the line at MacBooks for being overpriced, considering every other apple device you name dropped is equally overpriced.

pancakesyrupyum ,

I spent about a year arguing with C-levels that our fleet running 8GB was slowing down productivity, with evidence to prove it. It was like pulling teeth to procure some SODIMMs.

I’d still say this article is coming at things from the wrong perspective. That $700 Walmart M1 MBA is more than adequate for most kids doing school work, and/or grandparents farting around on FB. If you have a family and had to grab a few identical laptops, and you aren’t able/willing to be tech support, it really makes a lot of sense financially.

echodot ,

If you were just going to use it for browsing the web then you don't need anything that's capable as an M1 processor, you're just paying for performance overhead. Just buy a cheap Lenovo. Yeah I know we don't like Windows but it's a well-known operating system and when it inevitably breaks you don't have to go to Apple to fix it. Any random PC repair shop will be able to deal with it.

IamAnonymous ,

Just need to make sure the cheap Lenovo has sufficient RAM. I have a $300 HP laptop and it’s slows down if I have more than 10 tabs open on Firefox.

echodot ,

What you mean more than 8 GB yeah I think we might be able to achieve that.

Shurimal ,

At these prices I'd expect at least 32 GB of RAM. 8 GB is for entry level phones and SOHO 2 to 4 bay NAS boxes.

lengau , (edited )

Oh Timmy... Linux typically uses less RAM than macos and I have 64 gigs in my laptop.

Skelectus ,
@Skelectus@suppo.fi avatar

8 GB non-upgradeable. Not unusable yet, but probably will be in a few years. Then they can sell you a new one.

ABCDE ,

They said that with the release of the M1 Air.

dinckelman ,

They'll continue selling these, purely because of two reasons:

  • On an Air, 8gb is the bare minimum that is realistically viable, for people who don't do anything than browse the web, who they can later upsell, when they get a new machine.
  • They can immediately upsell you for every extra memory tier you would need. This makes them a colossal amount of money.

Practically all of us know that the difference between these memory modules is pocket change, when mass produced like this, but for those extra couple cents, they get an extra 100$ from you

golli , (edited )

I think it's mostly to have a price tag that doesn't immediately turn off people.

Yes, Apple is expensive in general, however people are generally fine with paying a premium. But if they'd come at you immediately with the full price for a reasonably specced machine, it would still turn many people away.

Instead they fix you on with a high, but still somewhat reasonable price and then upsell you in steps for everything. Like sure you could buy the 128gb iPhone pro, but then the storage will fill up fast with photos and videos. A great camera system being the huge selling point of the device.

On a side note I actually find the 256gb non upgradeable/replaceable ssd much more egregious, than the 8gb RAM.

As you say, for people with basic needs (and that is actually a quite large group), it is enough for daily use. Those people just browse the Web, view photos and write short documents in word. However especially if they have an iPhone and take lots of picture/videos, they will still fill up that storage fast. And then it gets really frustrating, unless you maybe pay even more to outsource everything to the icloud and pay monthly.

dinckelman ,

That's just the reality we're in now. All components will eventually ship as a single bundle, and there's nothing you'd be able to do. Obviously there are speed and latency benefits to this, but it comes at a cost of a colossal amount of e-waste with hardcoded serial numbers. This only works in their favor, because the groups of people you've described will just return to the shop, and buy a more expensive model

towerful ,

The low ram and storage are to drive you up 2 tiers.
By the time you go "256gb isn't enough storage, so I'll pay 10% more for something useable", you are pretty much at the stage of "if I'm spending this much, I might as well get the ram upgrade as well". And suddenly you are paying $500 more.

golli , (edited )

Exactly my point. Not sure if there is a better term, but in some way it is a bait-and-switch tactic.

With the "starting at" sticker price of the lowest configuration they get you into the mindset of wanting (and being able to afford) their premium device. And then once you are mentally commited they it's the choice between spending even more or compromising on a premium device (where you really should have to).

sushibowl ,

Practically all of us know that the difference between these memory modules is pocket change, when mass produced like this, but for those extra couple cents, they get an extra 100$ from you

This is called capturing consumer surplus through segmentation. There's a pretty good explanation of it here.

The long and short of it is that some people are just perfectly fine spending more money on a macbook, and apple wants to give them a good enough excuse to do so.

woelkchen ,
@woelkchen@lemmy.world avatar

On an Air, 8gb is the bare minimum that is realistically viable, for people who don’t do anything than browse the web

Thanks to the modern web, web browsing of one of the most RAM intensive tasks. Add a few Electron based apps and you're in hell.

Matriks404 ,

For browsing the web 4 GB is enough, unless you do some multitasking. Still I wouldn't buy a computer with less than 8 GB of RAM nowadays.

woelkchen ,
@woelkchen@lemmy.world avatar

For browsing the web 4 GB is enough, unless you do some multitasking.

Multitasking = more than one tab and the background tabs not immediately put to sleep.

COASTER1921 ,

When they charge many $100s for an extra 8gb the value of the bare minimum 8gb doesn't look so terrible (if only comparing to Apple). Especially considering the performance of swap on a fast SSD.

cmnybo ,

An extra $100 takes you from 8GB to 64GB on a PC if you install it yourself.

ripcord ,
@ripcord@lemmy.world avatar

If you have a laptop that supports that, yeah. Which you should, but definitely isn't always true.

Used to be true on Macs...good ol' days

olympicyes ,

That seems too cheap.

a_wild_mimic_appears ,

not by much; here in central europe a 2 module 64gb kit costs about 125€ (~135$ incl. VAT). not the greatest timings, but very much faster than the swapfile.

olympicyes ,

I do wish Apple had dimm slots for “slow” ram just to get the numbers up. IMO the 8GB model isn’t a serious offer and is to be ignored by anyone who tells the difference. That said, If I had only $200 for upgrades on a Mac I’d spend it on ssd. I had a 32/512 MacBook and I wish I’d paid up for 1TB. 16/1TB would’ve been more useful.

Bonehead ,

Oh come on...640kb is more than enough for everyone...

DdCno1 ,

He never said that, by the way.

Bonehead ,

No, and we all know it, but it's still going to haunt him for the rest of his life.

snownyte ,
@snownyte@kbin.social avatar

This author needs to go back to a time where you had to manage 512MB of memory.

People back then would've killed for 8GB now.

The problem I see though is software developers having a field day with not caring about optimizing and not making their software bloated as possible so that it doesn't require so much memory.

ares35 ,
@ares35@kbin.social avatar

the 'problem' is: you can't upgrade; you're stuck with that 8gb.

want more in a year or two? you have to buy a new mac. and that's apple's goal--sell more product. buyers will be back (because they're hooked on the platform and ecosystem) to buy a new one sooner than they otherwise would have.

snownyte ,
@snownyte@kbin.social avatar

Well that's what you get for being a tool and buying Apple products.

All of us PC users have had the convenience of upgrading anything we want. While Apple users just bitch about the choices they've made where a company decides how much they think they need and whether or not they can upgrade.

Wah wah wah.

ares35 ,
@ares35@kbin.social avatar

it's not just apple anymore. all the major 'pc' makers have non-upgradeable laptops now.. just not across their entire line-up (yet).

xep ,

Yes, no big deal. We can go back to having 640x480 displays too.

Hule ,

1.2 GB hard drives, too.

I had to think twice, it didn't sound right..

billiam0202 ,

The first HDD I ever bought was an 80 GB Maxtor. I have games now that wouldn't even fit on that drive.

a_wild_mimic_appears ,

my first HDD was a whopping 40MB big (you could fit sooo many floppys on that!), weighed 10 pounds and was about the size of a watermelon. when starting wing commander i could determine - by the noises the motors in that thing made - at what point of the loading i was (like an acoustic progress bar lol).

billiam0202 ,

You realize that just because things used to be worse, doesn't invalidate complaints about how things could be better now, right?

snownyte ,
@snownyte@kbin.social avatar

I think the comparison went over your head and I didn't use a word wrong. Try not to think too much into it. Oh wait, you did.

echodot ,

That's a daft take. The reason that software now requires more RAM is because it can do more than in 1998.

snownyte ,
@snownyte@kbin.social avatar

That doesn't excuse the ridiculously high requirements.

echodot ,

Yeah it does because no one in 2024 expects those limitations to exist. You can find software that can run on 15mb of ram but what's the point when 99% of systems won't have that limitation?

Hux ,

I don’t disagree that 8GB is generally less than I would accept for normal usage, but the way this article is written you can tell the author really doesn’t have any reasonable grasp of memory management.

Dirk ,
@Dirk@lemmy.ml avatar

I can't remember when I had such little RAM in a machine I own.

lengau ,

I can! It happened to be the last Mac I owned, which I bought in 2008.

DdCno1 , (edited )

My mid-range 2014 laptop has this little. This was considered the minimum for a productivity-oriented device a decade ago.

Much to my annoyance, it's also one of the first (edit: modern) laptops with non-upgradeable RAM, which I didn't know beforehand. It's still usable, but I'm using Firefox instead of Chrome (so 50 tabs are no issue) and it's never been my primary device.

_sideffect ,

Let's put 100hp in this new apple truck that weighs 9000lbs!

What? Our competitors have 350hp?
It doesn't matter! Our 100hp is very efficient and performs just as well!*

*only when compared to light usage and not towing or driving on inclined roads

deranger ,

A more apt analogy would be to use the truck bed size. Horsepower is more akin to the CPU speed.

Most people don’t fill their truck bed just like most people don’t fill their RAM. I’ve had no issues with my family users who just do typical light laptop tasks on 8GB RAM. I think the memory upgrades need to be much, much cheaper, but 8GB works absolutely fine IME. I would like 16GB but it’d be a waste for the other users in my household.

_sideffect ,

You're in the minority actually.

Why buy an overpriced Mac and not use it to its full potential?

Just for the logo on the back?

deranger ,

How do you know I’m in the minority when I didn’t say how I use my laptop? I don’t get it. I do use it to its potential, and there’s no logo on the back. It’s in a case.

Also not overpriced with the base model, which is what I have.

_sideffect ,

You just said you never utilize all of your ram, so it's apparent that you don't heavily utilize your machine

deranger , (edited )

I did not say that. I said I’d actually like 16GB. It’s my family users (normal, non nerds) who have no issue with 8GB RAM and having 30+ tabs and two dozen apps running. Memory management handles multitasking very smoothly, and I’ve not found many apps that are limited by 8GB. I’d like 16 for the few times I edit on laptop, typically I use my desktop.

_sideffect ,

Fine, so why buy them an overpriced Mac if they don't fully utilize it?

My original question is still valid

deranger ,

I disagree it’s overpriced. The base model Air at $850 is great, meets their needs, and decreases the amount of family sysadmin tasks I’d have to do for them if they had Windows or Linux laptops.

_sideffect ,

Everyone decides what's worth it to them, but to me, a sub $400 windows laptop would have been equivalent for your family, as if you know windows you can lock it down for them so they can only use what they need

deranger ,

Sub $400 windows laptops have disgusting trackpads, plastic outer cases, washed out uncalibrated screens, and poor battery life compared to an M1 MBA. Not even remotely an option.

_sideffect ,

No they don't, that's a very generalist view. But hey, if that's what you saw for that price, that's what you saw.

Like I said, everyone pays for what they think is of value to them.

I can live with a plastic case (which I've never seen btw), if I know I'm getting it for a much cheaper price

Dragxito OP ,

Less is more, removing features is a innovation
- apple

Rooki ,
@Rooki@lemmy.world avatar

and selling it with an extra apple logo is the newest thing.

billiam0202 ,

removing features is innovation courage.

cmgvd3lw ,

This option kind of make sense. For those using laptops for very light use, such as basic web browsing, Document editing, replying to emails and want to have a Mac could buy them.

If apple could sell 16GB variant at the price of 8GB, then that would be the best.

jkozaka ,
@jkozaka@lemm.ee avatar

but for the price...

orclev ,

If that's all you're doing you could save a $1000+ and just get a cheap Chromebook. Or if you want to be sustainable and reduce e-waste you could spend around the same amount on a framework laptop that's upgradeable and then spend a tiny fraction of that every few years keeping it up to date, rather than going the Apple approach and chucking the whole thing in the trash every few years and buying a brand new one.

No matter how you slice it, an 8GB macbook is a crap deal.

cmgvd3lw ,

I said, want to have a Mac. Anyways you are right.

PraiseTheSoup ,

Indeed, many people must have a mac as it is a fashion accessory.

NoisyFlake ,

Some people prefer a Mac because it integrates nicely with the rest of the Apple ecosystem.

PraiseTheSoup ,

Some people prefer a Mac because it integrates nicely with the rest of the Apple ecosystem. matches the rest of their overpriced wardrobe.

Jestzer ,

I think a lot of people buy Macs because they think the only other choice is a computer running Windows.

magiccupcake ,

This stuff is almost ewaste.

This is just not enough memory to make a computer last, especially since you can't upgrade.

Websites and apps that a lot of people use just aren't really expecting to only have 8gb ram available. Any kind of multitasking could easily run out of ram

echodot ,

I'm fairly sure my computer uses more than 8 GB of RAM every time I much as look at the Chrome icon.

ForgotAboutDre ,

Macbooks, even these low spec ones tend to outlive other laptops substantially. The better build quality and higher resale value keeps them in use much longer.

The argument these devices are e-waste doesn't make sense and doesn't track.

Dariusmiles2123 ,

8GB is enough as that’s what I have on my 2019 Surface Go.

But that’s a device I bought 399.- (almost the same as dollars) 5 years ago.

So I don’t think it’s okay to sell a new laptop with Pro in its name for a high price in 2024. Especially because it wouldn’t cost them much to upgrade the RAM.

It’s like buying a 30bhp car in 2024. Yeah it’s enough, but not for the price of a normal car.

lurker8008 ,

I'm other words, base config is good for people needing a Chromebook but want an Apple device.

echodot ,

And wanting a macbook is a perfectly acceptable reason for getting a MacBook. I just get annoyed when people try to argue that it's an actually sensible decision.

Ginger666 ,

But but the memory is more efficient, 8 is actually 16!

LMAOOOOOOO 🤡

disguy_ovahea , (edited )

UM on an SoC is not the same thing as RAM on a PC with a CPU and GPU. It’s purely a storage liaison, since data is passed directly from core to core.

It’s not that it’s more efficient, it’s simply used less than in conventional PC architecture.

MacOS is also designed specifically to leverage the hardware, so practical use is the only legitimate comparison to a PC.

Maybe PC Gamer isn’t the most informed reviewer of technology outside of PCs.

RogueBanana ,

Guessing you haven't rear the article. That quote is from apple not author, he is actually 100% against it throughout the article.

magiccupcake ,

This is a truly terrible article.

Like why not test these things? This just sounds like ai generated garbage.

That being said, 8gb is an abysmally low amount of ram in 2024. I had a mid range surface in 2014 that had that much ram. And the upcharge for more is quite ridiculous too.

I know it's pc ram but I bought 64gb of ddr4 3600mhz for like $130. How on earth is apple charging $200 for 8!!!!

Shadywack ,
@Shadywack@lemmy.world avatar

Looks like you didn't read the article either.

Overall, I'm using 12.5GB of memory and the only application I have open is Chrome. Oh, and did I mention I'm typing this on a 16GB MacBook Air? I used to have an 8GB Apple silicon Air and to be frank it was a nightmare, constantly running out of memory just browsing the web.

Earlier it's mentioned that they have 15 tabs open. I don't like a lot of things they do in "gaming journalism" but on this article they're spot on. Apple is full of shit in saying 8GB is enough by today's standards. 8GB is a fuckin joke, and you can't add any RAM later.

magiccupcake ,

Oh no I read the article, I just don't consider that testing.

It's not really apt to compare using ram on a browser on one computer and extract that to another, there's a lot of complicated ram and cache management that happens in the background.

Testing would involve getting a 8gb ram Mac computer and running common tasks to see if you can measure poorer performance, be it lag, stutters or frame drops.

Shadywack ,
@Shadywack@lemmy.world avatar

You do have a point, but I think the intent of the article is to convey the common understanding that Apple is leaning on sales tactics to convince people of a thing that anyone with technical acumen sees through immediately. Regardless of how efficient Mach/Darwin is, it's still apples to apples (pun intended) to understand how quickly 8GB fills up in 2024. For those who need a fully quantitative performance measurement between 8 and 16GB, with enough applications loaded to display the thrashing that starts happening, they're not really the audience. THAT audience is busy reading about gardening tips, lifestyle, and celebrity gossip.

ABCDE ,

That doesn't make sense. I have the 8GB M2 and don't have any issues with 20+ tabs, video calling, torrents, Luminar, Little Snitch, etc open right now.

Shadywack ,
@Shadywack@lemmy.world avatar

15 tabs of Safari, which is demonstrably a better browser by some opinions due to its efficiency and available privacy configuration options. What if you prefer Chrome or Firefox?

I will argue in Apple's defense that their stack includes very effective libraries that intrinsically made applications on Mac OS better in many regards, but 8GB is still 8GB, and an SoC isn't upgradeable. Competition has far cheaper 16GB options, and Apple is back to looking like complete assholes again.

ABCDE ,

I'm using Chrome.

adam ,
@adam@doomscroll.n8e.dev avatar

The fact you got downvoted for someone else's assumption (that was upvoted) makes me chuckle. There's some serious Apple hating going on here*.

*sometimes deserved. Not really in this case.

ABCDE ,

It's very odd, I've had the weirdest downvotes.

disguy_ovahea ,

That’s because PC people try to equate specs in dissimilar architecture with an OS that is not written explicitly to utilize that architecture. They haven’t read enough about it or experienced it in practice to have an informed opinion. We can get downvoted together on our “sub standard hardware” that works wonderfully. lol

pivot_root ,

The only memory-utilization-related advantage gained by sharing memory between the CPU and GPU is zero-copy operations between the CPU and GPU. The occasional texture upload and framebuffer access is nowhere near enough to make 8 GiB the functional equivalent of 16 GiB.

If you want to see something "written explicitly to utilize [a unified memory] architecture," look no further than the Nintendo Switch. The operating system and applications are designed specifically for the hardware, and even first-party titles are choked by the hardware's memory capacity and bandwidth.

disguy_ovahea ,

The Tegra is similar being an SoC, however it does not possess nearly as many dedicated independent processing cores designed around specialized processes.

The M1 has 10-core CPU with 8 performance cores and 2 efficiency cores, a 16-core GPU, a 16-core Neural Engine, and all with 200GB/s memory bandwidth.

pivot_root ,

The M1-3 is still miles ahead of the Tegra, I don't disagree. My point was that software designed specifically for a platform can't make up for the platform's shortcomings. The SOC itself is excellently designed to meet needs well into the future, but that 8 GiB of total system memory on the base model is unfortunately a shortcoming.

Apple's use of memory compression stops it from being too noticeable, but it's going to become a problem as application memory requirements grow (like with the Switch).

disguy_ovahea ,

Sure, but no one is saying 8GB is good enough for everyone. It’s a base model. Grandma can use it to check her Facebook and do online banking. It’s good for plenty of basic users. I have an M1 Mini with 8GB that I use as a home server. It works great, but I need my M2 MBP with 16GB UM to use FCP, PS, and Logic Pro. With that, I can master 4K HDR in FCP from an unmastered source in Logic Pro without high memory pressure, let alone swap. There’s no way I’d have the same performance from a PC with 16GB of RAM in Adobe Premiere and Pro Tools. I’ve been there before.

8GB really is a suitable low-end configuration, and most Mac users would agree. I’m not surprised a magazine dedicated to PC gaming hardware thinks otherwise.

fuckwit_mcbumcrumble ,

Your 64 gigs of ram probably uses 10x the power and takes up significantly more space than the single memory chip that's on the M1-M3s die. And yet it still has less bandwidth than the M1, and on top of that the M1 utilizes it more efficiently than a "normal" desktop or laptop can since there's one pool of memory for RAM RAM and VRAM.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_M1#:~:text=While%20the%20M1%20SoC%20has%2066.67GB/s%20memory%20bandwidth

Chat GPT guestimates 57GB/s for dual channel DDR4 at 3600mhz

$1000 for 8 gigs of RAM in the Air is whatever. $1200 for 8 gigs of ram in the Pro was not great. But 1600 for 8 gigs of ram in the new M3 MBP is really awful.

pivot_root ,

the M1 utilizes it more efficiently than a "normal" desktop or laptop can since there's one pool of memory for RAM RAM and VRAM.

That's not how it works, unfortunately.

A UMA (unified memory architecture) enables zero-copy texture uploads and frame buffer access, but that's not likely to constitute notable memory savings outside games or GPU-accelerated photo editing. Most of the memory is going to be consumed by applications running on the CPU anyway, and that's not something that can be improved by sharing memory between the CPU and GPU.

And yet [your 64 gigs of ram] still has less bandwidth than the M1

It's by necessity that the M1 has higher memory bandwidth. UMA comes with the drawback of the GPU and CPU having to share that memory, and there's only so much bandwidth to go around. GPU cores are bandwidth hungry, which is mitigated by either using a pile of L2 cache or by giving the system better memory bandwidth.

freeman ,

Memory bandwidth is useless if you run out of memory and need to swap.

GPU not having it's own pool of memory is really going to help to.

Pigs fly in apple land.

adam ,
@adam@doomscroll.n8e.dev avatar

Written by someone who apparently has no understanding of virtual memory. Chrome may claim 500MB per tab but I'll eat my hat if the majority of that isn't shared between tabs and paged out.

If I'm misunderstanding then how the fuck is chrome with it's 35+ open tabs functioning on my 16GB M1 machine (with a full other application load including IDE's and docker (with 8GB allocated)

magiccupcake ,

I have plenty of understanding of what virtual memory memory is. For one, virtual memory is orders of magnitude slower than physical RAM.

My point still stands, 8gb is fine if all you do is light web browsing and writing documents which is basically nothing, but at that point you don't need a 2024 Macbook anything, you could use a older M1 Macbook and be perfectly happy.

All web browsers will use up as much ram as possible, that doesn't mean they need it.

Even you don't have a device with 8gb of memory, just because it's usable doesn't mean that's it's optimal, or that it's not a ripoff to charge $200 for another 8gb.

orclev ,

What a load of nonsense. You've got no idea how a computer works. RAM isn't just used for passing data between cores. If anything that's more the role of cache although even that isn't strictly accurate.

Whether a system has a discrete GPU or not doesn't really factor into the discussion one way or another, although even if it did having more RAM would be even more important without a discrete GPU because a portion of the system RAM gets utilized as VRAM.

Shadywack ,
@Shadywack@lemmy.world avatar

It’s not that it’s more efficient, it’s simply used less than in conventional PC architecture.

It's not that you're wrong from a philosophical perspective with that, it's that you're factually incorrect. Memory addresses don't suddenly shrink or expand depending on where they exist on the bus or the CPU. Being on the SoC doesn't magically make RAM used less by the OS and applications, as the mach kernel, Darwin, and various MacOS layers still address the same amount of memory as they would on traditional PC architecture.

Memory is memory, just like glass is glass, and glass will still scratch at a level 7 just like 8GB of RAM holds the same amount of information as.....8GB of RAM.

The article actually quantitatively tests this too by pointing out their memory usage with Chrome and different numbers of tabs open.

Looks like you didn't read the article.

disguy_ovahea ,

You should familiarize yourself with the architecture before commenting. The GPU is broken into several cores of the SoC, along with the roles of the CPU. The UM is not part of the SoC. However, data is passed from what could be referred to as the CPU to what could be referred to as the GPU without interacting with UM.

Shadywack ,
@Shadywack@lemmy.world avatar

I'm actually deeply familiar with the architecture, and how caches, memory, and UM's work. I understand all of that. None of that changes the storage available. Having high memory bandwidth to load/unload memory addresses doesn't fix the issue of the environment easily exceeding 8GB. I also understand the caching principles and how you actually want RAM utilization to be higher for faster responsiveness. 8GB is still 8GB, and a joke.

disguy_ovahea ,

Use your experience and analyze Apple’s M SoC before we continue this conversation.

Shadywack ,
@Shadywack@lemmy.world avatar

A weeklong battery life, efficient cores, rapid response time, and great software environment make it a great choice......at 16GB for my needs. I will not recommend 8GB to any user at all going forward. It's marketing malarkey with no future proofing, degrading the viable longevity of the machine.

There's no conversation to continue. Glass is glass, and 8GB is 8GB, as well as being a joke.

disguy_ovahea ,

If it’s great for your needs, the base model isn’t for you. You can stream video with have 30 tabs open in Safari and only use 4.6GB of UM on an M1 Mac. I just verified for you.

Shadywack ,
@Shadywack@lemmy.world avatar

"Your powers are quaint, you must be popular with the children"

disguy_ovahea ,

That’s on my M1 Mac Mini that I use as a server. I use an M2 with 16GB of UM for FCP, PS, and Logic Pro.

tahoe , (edited )

To be fair I had an 8Gb M1 Mac mini for about a year and never even once felt like it was lacking memory. I could open as many things as I wanted and it didn’t slow down, so I can kinda see where they were going with this. Not saying it makes that situation much better though.

I think the current base iPhones with 4Gb or 6Gb suffer way more from lack of memory than the 8Gb Macs, and people aren’t taking about this enough.

datavoid ,

I needed a cheap laptop for audio, so i decided to pick up a second hand m1 air a couple months ago.

It is honestly pretty impressive for the price, I generally don't have issues either. Everything is snappy, and it handles multitasking fine. Its even faster than my $2000+ PC at several things, which frustrates me greatly.

However... When running ableton live (or presumably anything that involves heavy image, video, or audio editing), 8gb of ram is honestly not enough. If you push it too hard, it hangs for a second, then the offending app will just close.

Also there is a weird delay in factorio, absolutely unacceptable.

natebluehooves ,

Yeah, audio and video workloads really need the ram. The base model is fine for content consumption though.

pineapplelover ,

A 2k pc can game. You can't really game on mac

umbrella ,
@umbrella@lemmy.ml avatar

faster than my $2000+ PC

tell me you run windows without telling me you run windows

dependencyinjection ,

Linux till I die, am I right.

This place is yawn at times.

datavoid ,

Ya it's kind of silly.

I dual boot if you were concerned

umbrella , (edited )
@umbrella@lemmy.ml avatar

yes, actually. windows could be nice if they let us remove all the bullshit, but since they dont, you get a slow 2k pc.

still beats me how this is acceptable and windows users even hate to hear it, but it is what it is i guess.

olympicyes ,

You didn’t even ask which several things OP was referring to.

olympicyes ,

Base 8GB MacBooks also tend to have base storage, meaning a single NVMe controller instead of dual. If you’re relying on virtual memory then it would make sense to get the Mac that has double the SSD bandwidth. I bought a base M1 Mac Mini for the kids and it’s pretty good for their needs, but they tend to prefer the old i3 win 10 PC connected to the same monitor. The M1 Mini could run Intel Civ 6 faster than my 32GB i7 MacBook Pro could, which surprised me.

TheProtector0034 ,

I have a old HP Elitebook with 8GB ram with Windows 10 and even on Windows I don’t notice slowdowns for daily tasks. Yes the machine swaps but because of the SSD you don’t notice much performance decrease. However, because it’s constant swapping the lifetime of the SSD will decrease and that’s exactly the problem of 8GB machines these days. Yes the machine stays fast (Windows or OSX it really does not matter) but there is extra load on the SSD.

Don’t believe Apple marketing bullshit that 8GB is enough because of the “super duper advanced memory management” of OSX. If it really was enough then Apple would not release MacBooks with 16+ GB ram. The only reason that the 8GB MBP still exists is to sell more 16+ GB machines.

billiam0202 ,

I have an old 8GB Toshiba laptop that I threw an SSD into and slapped Pop_OS! on for fun. There are plenty of lightweight Linux distros that can breathe life into older hardware if you want to tinker with them. If nothing else, my old Toshiba is good for just basic Internet usage.

disguy_ovahea ,

People are, just not PC spec heads that like to compare numbers. Practical use is the only real comparison.

olympicyes ,

Some of the YouTubers comparing the new MacBook found that the 16GB Air smoked the 8GB version for creative tasks and rendering, but they found no difference between 16 GB and 24GB. Seems like Apple could up the RAM to 12 GB and see a big improvement.

Crashumbc ,

Actually the opposite is true for a basic spec. like RAM. People may not understand CPU/GPU naming conventions. BUT they understand something simple like 16>8.

They also understand their "old slow" PC probably had 8gb and they want to UPGRADE so when they see this "new" mac with same amount of ram they immediately think slow whether it is or not...

ulterno ,
@ulterno@lemmy.kde.social avatar

To be honest, I can still do most of my work on my old Core2Quad 4GB DDR2 PC, when using Linux.
And as long as I setup my swap properly, I can also keep as many Firefox tabs open as I want , as I tend to forget tabs (running out of brain memory) before I run out of RAM.

But I just like my 64GB RAM.

olympicyes ,

Increasing swap on Linux is a great way to save money on cloud servers btw. One nice thing on Mac is that there is no swap file that you need to manage. System handles it transparently. Firefox (and really all modern browsers) require a ridiculous of RAM if you use them like you and I do.

AtariDump ,

Core2Quad?

That thing is a space heater that can do some math.

ulterno ,
@ulterno@lemmy.kde.social avatar

My point being, "I can work on it", can be used even on a space heater.
Same for the IBM R52, which I no longer turn on, because a Pi would be better.

gravitas_deficiency ,

The thing you didn’t notice is that you significantly decreased the service life of the permanent storage on the device, because it ABSOLUTELY dips into swap far more frequently than models with more memory, and all high-speed SSD technologies that I’m aware of have limited lifetime write capacity before performance and fidelity start to degrade.

The MBPs (MBAs too in my opinion, but that’s more debate as it’s the “entry level” laptop) should have a minimum ram config of 16gb. 8gb MBP is honestly a really dumb spec level to purchase anyways - if you want something with that little RAM in laptop form, get the MBA.

tahoe ,

People have proven that this problem was massively exaggerated. I wouldn’t be surprised if in 10-15 years the SSDs of the vast majority of these computers will be perfectly fine (but only time will tell)

scorpious ,

To be fair

NO! No fair.

I delivered a season of 4k animations for a network show using Motion, AE, C4D, Ps, AI…all using a base model M1 Mini (8/256), with zero problems.

Of course more would be better, but unless you’ve actually used one, it’s hard to imagine how well it works. I tried mentioning this in another post, but it’s all Apple hate all the way down here

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • technology@lemmy.world
  • incremental_games
  • meta
  • All magazines
    •