Specc'ing up a new MacBook Pro, and I'm debating just throwing extra hundred$ and going from 32GB to 64GB. Is that just burning cash for nothing? I do not do video editing. But I do keep laptops for the long haul. So it would be a future proofing measure only. To keep it running well as the resource loads of new OS and applications increase over time.

I assume that it'd be many years before it would provide any advantage (if ever), and that it will just consume power until then. But I thought I'd check in with the more knowledgeable engineering types here to check myself.

Anyone here ever try high-RAM builds? Thoughts?

As a personal belief, I max out memory and storage each time I build a computer.

This computer has too much ram said no one ever.

You can always upgrade RAM a few years later if you get into something that requires such high memory usage. It will likely be a lot cheaper than the $400 upgrade Apple is asking for to go from 32 to 64GB RAM.

I built a gaming PC a year ago. Told the wife I wanted 32GB & Needed x2 16GB sticks. She heard x4 16GB sticks. So you can do the math.

Do I need it? I don't know.... But I have it just incase.

64GB here, maxed out the motherboard. Darned good thing too, as there is only 4GB free at the moment.

My experience has been that with all the processes and applications running at the same time (198 processes running as I type this, with only 6 programs' windows active) you cannot have too much RAM.

Programmers hate for their programs to load slowly, or not be automatically checking for updates, or otherwise dormant. So they set them up to load at boot, and do their things in the background. Soaking up processor time, RAM usage and sometimes network bandwidth.

If you want some for your actual programs, you know, the ones you yourself click on, well, those come after.

And, if you run out of RAM, then the OS will swap stuff to your virtual disc. Meaning, still more CPU usage to put it in and out of slower storage to share the scarce RAM. Slow, slow, slow.

So, my advice has been and remains...unless RAM prices are astronomical, max out what your system supports.

Caveat: If your system is upgradeable, and if RAM prices are astronomical, the advice changes to, 'buy a couple RAM sticks of the highest capacity your system supports to get you by until prices moderate, and fill it up then."

I'm in Win7-land, rather than MacOS-land, but I don't think that matters very much here.

The new MacBooks are not post-purchase upgradable (since like 2015??). All the RAM is soldered in place.

Granted the new M1 chip MBPs are super RAM efficient but Id pay for the increased RAM now if you think you'll need it later. Plus I think it will extend the usable life of the computer. I like Apple as you can usually keep them running well for about 5 years.

quote:

Originally posted by Gunfan:
You can always upgrade RAM a few years later if you get into something that requires such high memory usage. It will likely be a lot cheaper than the $400 upgrade Apple is asking for to go from 32 to 64GB RAM.

I'm currently typing this on a Mac Pro with 48gb of RAM.
I just recently ordered the top tier MBP with 64gb of RAM.

I didn’t realize post-2015 Mac RAM is not upgradable. I guess the maxed out specks is the way to go.

quote:

Originally posted by SpinZone:
As a personal belief, I max out memory and storage each time I build a computer.

This computer has too much ram said no one ever.

Pretty much what I do also.

I use 32GB. If you can afford the extra cost 64GB will never be a wrong choice.

However, The OS was once the factor driving the need for more RAM. That is no longer the case. The OS has topped out at resource requirements.

16GB is the minimum I would recommend 32 is more than enough and 64 is overkill but if you can afford overkill, why not?

quote:

Originally posted by Gunfan:
You can always upgrade RAM a few years later if you get into something that requires such high memory usage. It will likely be a lot cheaper than the $400 upgrade Apple is asking for to go from 32 to 64GB RAM.

This isn't neccesarily so. "Standard" memory specs change over time, e.g. SIMM -> DIMM -> DDR2 -> DDR3 -> DDR4 -> ????, these are usually not backwards compatible, and vendors generally only build to the most recent spec. So if you want to upgrade down the road, you cannot count on the parts being available, or particularly cheap.

WRT to "is it too much RAM?" The biggest factor is how the OS you are running uses memory. Some OS's can use unallocated memory far more effectively than others. But it certainly isn't going to hurt in any case. One argument for having plenty of RAM is if you ever intend to run VM guests on the machine under a hypervisor. In most cases, each guest will require a certain amount of RAM dedicated to its operating image, and thus unavailable to the host system. I'd be surprised if this isn't the case with most container orchestrations as well.

My Lenovo is from 2016 and has 16GB RAM, but it also has a 256GB SSD. It is still lightning fast.

Might want to factor that option in.

Since, the newer Macbooks are not upgradeable, max out as much RAM and storage you can afford; otherwise, go with 32gb and plan on selling the MB in a couple of years to fund a new one.

We always have 64Gb RAM in our work machines. I am an architect and often have multiple graphics-intensive applications open... Revit, Autocad, Bluebeam, Lumion, etc.

Not being a gamer or a cutting edge graphics/photo manipulator, I never felt the need to add beaucoup RAM. I'm running 8GB on the motherboard plus another 2GB in a graphics card.

Apples way up up selling their hardware. Do the cost analysis for yourself. If it’s $10 you have your decision.

"640K ought to be enough for anybody."
-Bill Gates 1981


(maybe...)

I'm a sort of wannabe photographer, I wanted to run Photo Shop and Lightroom on a new laptop. So a couple years ago I bought an MSI game machine on Amazon that was upgraded by a third party (CPU King) to 64GB RAM, SSD 2TB, HDD 2TB. Has been outstanding in every way. I also use it daily to surf the web.

I would say if you do calculation intensive spreadsheets (which I do) or graphics-intensive applications like YellowJacket does, then more is better.

I have 16 GB on a 2017 Laptop with a i7-7500U CPU. The times when I wish I had a faster CPU and more memory is during first start up of the day and when I'm running an Excel macro that processes 98,700 rows by 35 columns of data which I continually add about 200 rows just about 3 times a week if not more. The file itself is 40 MB in size. I've normally worked on 80 MB sized files.

I track my CPU and memory usage and the limiting factor has been my CPU. My memory usage never goes above 46%.

I suggest you open up task manager if Mac OS has the equivalent app and track how much memory you are actually using in your current set up.

Not a Mac user, but windows isn't known for RAM efficiency & I've never felt like I "had" to have more RAM with 16GB. The VM I'm typing from has 6GB allocated & does light CAD, some handbrake encoding, etc. I didn't realize I dropped it from 10GB until I just checked. I have 64 on the server & the only reason I bumped it from 16 is that I got a deal on faster RAM & had a use for 2x 8GB sticks.

in the WinXP era, I'd say RAM was a limiting factor. Newer processors & especially SSDs have made that less true. I have an older laptop with 4th Gen i5 & 8GB - it could benefit from more RAM on CAD/3d rendering, but the proc is the limiting factor there as well.

If you're counting pennies, 32->64 is not where to spend, IMO. If you don't care about the $100, it won't hurt you.