M1 Mac First Impressions

The Touch Bar is being removed with a redesign of the MacBook Pro
Expected to be released Mid 2021

I follow this stuff pretty closely, and i haven't seen definite confirmation that it's completely going away. I suspect a slimmed down/reduced one may happen.

After using it for two weeks, I feel like the touchbar isn't ALL bad. The biggest downside is that you can brush it too easily and do things that you didn't mean to do.

With that said, app-specific buttons, utilized correctly, can be a real benefit. Used as it is in most apps, it's just kind of a waste of space that makes controls more complicated(i.e. whether than just hitting volume up/down I have to press the volume button and then move the slider).
 
Windows users always seem to think you need to bump Apple computers memory like they do Windows machines.
Not true.
Windows is a huge do everything operating system, Apple more organized and efficient and focused.

Anyway, the comments for more memory always come from non Apple users whom never owned one.
Apple OS is not Windows and not a memory hog like windows. Anyone who owns a current Apple computer will never have a memory or lack of memory issue if using it for its intended purpose.
Meaning, typical homeowner or college student will never need more then 8 megs in a current apple model, it will blow away windows 8 meg machines and be just as fast and faster then most their friends Windows laptops with 16 megs.

Its laughable to compare the two.

As I said before, it is not the OS but the bloated software these days. If you really USE your machine for work, you will be loaded with a bunch of stuff that your employers want you to install, and in my case I typically have 8GB used before I even open my serious work stuff (those 400MB log files).

You can rely on the OS to swap in and out and compress in between DDR and NVMe SSD. Yes it is much better than years ago when people were using mechanical HDD or SATA SSD. It is still not a "you will never need more than 8GB" as you claimed.

The bigger problem, if you do not realize for now, is that many Mac models have SOLDERED memory. This means you cannot upgrade them after you buy them. If anything I'd bet on the side of more memory just in case. If anything you can buy a 8GB Windows PC and then just go to Crucial to get a guaranteed compatible module to upgrade 5 years down the road.

There is a reason our IT gave out 16GB mac book with 13" screen, instead of 8GB mac book with 15" screen.

BTW, these days Intel were making like 10-15% improvement every generation, it is a waste to throw away a machine after 2-5 years. So far it seems like the OS / Chrome Browser / game engine etc are still supporting 7-10 years old CPU instruction set. Russians and Latin Americans are buying Chinese rebuild of retired server motherboards and slap pull off CPU and RAM on them, still running after 7 years.

I can see people retiring a $300 PC every 3-5 years, but a $1500-2000 mac, it make sense to run it for 7+ years these days.
 
Last edited:
As I said before, it is not the OS but the bloated software these days. If you really USE your machine for work, you will be loaded with a bunch of stuff that your employers want you to install, and in my case I typically have 8GB used before I even open my serious work stuff (those 400MB log files).

You can rely on the OS to swap in and out and compress in between DDR and NVMe SSD. Yes it is much better than years ago when people were using mechanical HDD or SATA SSD. It is still not a "you will never need more than 8GB" as you claimed.

The bigger problem, if you do not realize for now, is that many Mac models have SOLDERED memory. This means you cannot upgrade them after you buy them. If anything I'd bet on the side of more memory just in case. If anything you can buy a 8GB Windows PC and then just go to Crucial to get a guaranteed compatible module to upgrade 5 years down the road.

There is a reason our IT gave out 16GB mac book with 13" screen, instead of 8GB mac book with 15" screen.

BTW, these days Intel were making like 10-15% improvement every generation, it is a waste to throw away a machine after 2-5 years. So far it seems like the OS / Chrome Browser / game engine etc are still supporting 7-10 years old CPU instruction set. Russians and Latin Americans are buying Chinese rebuild of retired server motherboards and slap pull off CPU and RAM on them, still running after 7 years.

I can see people retiring a $300 PC every 3-5 years, but a $1500-2000 mac, it make sense to run it for 7+ years these days.
We all buy what makes us happy, nothing is a waste when that is the case.
I would have no interest at all owning a computer for more then a couple years. $1000 (not $1500 to $2000) for a awesome fast M1 MacBook Air base model with an incredible design, display and beautiful aluminum case works for me. I dont need to expand memory its way more fast then anything I can do with it and a pleasure to use around my home, same goes for my Mac mini.
We have MANY windows desktops and notebooks in our home there is no denying that Windows 10 is far more bloated then Mac BigSur.
Ill never go back to Windows though my wifes work station at home plus her other home desktop computer and new Lenovo Yoga laptop are all Windows and fine machines but no comparison as far as what I personally want out of a computer. I still have another touchscreen HP notebook that the MacBook Air just replaced.

If your a business loading "heavy" software onto a 8gb machine well then that is the businesses poor decisions for outfitting a machine that is not up to the standard it needs to be for its function.
Soldered memory is no disadvantage if you outfit your computer correctly from the start. Most all computers of the future will be soldered as they become more then ever standardized for the consumer. Only the more expensive business machines will have expandable memory because there will be no reason to "upgrade" memory for the consumer, just like there are no replaceable batteries anymore for the standard consumer, its gets old, throw it out buy a new one.

At one time, tube amplifiers were replaceable tubes, along came transistors that I think were replaceable ,,,, ect ,,,ect ,,, Except for the higher 10% ers of computing at home people, many in this forum, most average consumers never ever consider upgrading their computers anymore.

Again, I am not in anyway discounting anyones thoughts on the memory discussion but you guys are above what the average everyday home user of computers are and as the future moves forward, you will become less and less and have to pay more and more as well as compromise maybe a little bit from being more streamlined.
 
At this point, I'm already regretting 8gb somewhat.

Firefox, my preferred browser, has always been a memory hog and had memory leak issues, but after having 16gb in my regularly used systems for a while I'm noticing FF can bog my M1 more than it will in 16gb of RAM.

Despite posts above discounting the "need" for more than 8gb for the average home user, I'd counter that by saying that Firefox with a few tabs open is hardly a taxing use case. I've seen it creep up toward 10gb and my memory pressure end up at 60% or so. Yes, the storage is fast, but swapping is still noticeable.

I still haven't braved Lightroom, but I likely will this afternoon and I'll see what happens.

OS bloat isn't the issue(although Big Sur is worse than say, Mojave, which IMO is the high point of recent OSs)

I'd bought 8gb since, again, I could walk into Bestbuy and buy it off the shelf and I'd been encouraged by reviews saying 8gb behaved well.
 
At this point, I'm already regretting 8gb somewhat.

Firefox, my preferred browser, has always been a memory hog and had memory leak issues, but after having 16gb in my regularly used systems for a while I'm noticing FF can bog my M1 more than it will in 16gb of RAM.

Despite posts above discounting the "need" for more than 8gb for the average home user, I'd counter that by saying that Firefox with a few tabs open is hardly a taxing use case. I've seen it creep up toward 10gb and my memory pressure end up at 60% or so. Yes, the storage is fast, but swapping is still noticeable.

I still haven't braved Lightroom, but I likely will this afternoon and I'll see what happens.

OS bloat isn't the issue(although Big Sur is worse than say, Mojave, which IMO is the high point of recent OSs)

I'd bought 8gb since, again, I could walk into Bestbuy and buy it off the shelf and I'd been encouraged by reviews saying 8gb behaved well.
I was actually surprised even a relatively lean (by today's standard) browser like Firefox is so bloated. How's Safari running with 8GB? You just resonate my point that today's software are the bloat, not the OS. The only real exception to this is the mobile apps, they know people have finite memories and they cannot be bloated to stratospheres like they did on mac or windows.

Which makes me wonder, why even bother with macs these days when you can do everything with a tablet and keyboard? Why not just ditch them all and use a Chromebook with external keyboard / mouse / monitor? I think this is where the future will be once the zoomers grow up with distance learning and work from home. They will be laughing at our debate of 8GB vs 16GB, Mac vs Windows, backward compatibility, etc etc.
 
I was actually surprised even a relatively lean (by today's standard) browser like Firefox is so bloated. How's Safari running with 8GB? You just resonate my point that today's software are the bloat, not the OS. The only real exception to this is the mobile apps, they know people have finite memories and they cannot be bloated to stratospheres like they did on mac or windows.

Which makes me wonder, why even bother with macs these days when you can do everything with a tablet and keyboard? Why not just ditch them all and use a Chromebook with external keyboard / mouse / monitor? I think this is where the future will be once the zoomers grow up with distance learning and work from home. They will be laughing at our debate of 8GB vs 16GB, Mac vs Windows, backward compatibility, etc etc.
The debate over memory is a laugh when talking about the new Macs. Windows is a whole other story and most people "debating" about the amount of memory do not own a current model Mac, they own Window machines and cant comprehend how much more efficient a Mac is over their slopped together Windows Bloat Machine that runs tons of garbage in the background that you never use. (saying this in fun but true)

I say this because of your question, "How's Safari running with 8GB?"
Safari runs fine and will do circles around Windows with Windows having double the memory.
Any Current model Mac runs circles around a Windows Machine with double the memory of the same price class.

So I will be glad to answer your question but first, tell me how many Safari windows do you want me to open and what sites do you want me to go to and get back to you? For the heck of it, I just opened 22 Safari windows (even though I never open more then 6) on my 8Gm of memory Mac mini, I just dont know where to go with all 22 Safari windows open :oops:

and it doesn't just have to be safari, it can be Opera or Firefox or any number of browsers

BTW- my post is not making fun or mean spirited in anyway, I used Windows machines exclusively for 25 Years before I "saw the light"
I used to think the same as you and others. A Notebook/Laptop is a tablet with a keyboard and Apple is a fantastic platform to run on.
A desktop is a work station, desk and comfortable to Computer from. I prefer the Mac mini and my desk but LOVE my MacBook Air for shorter stints sitting on the sofa or kitchen table, sometimes working on my home network too.

Anyway, as far as your questions as to why all this over a Chromebook, well some people will be happy driving a Chevy Spark but others want a different type of vehicle and we pick which one we like the most.
 
Last edited:
The debate over memory is a laugh when talking about the new Macs. Windows is a whole other story and most people "debating" about the amount of memory do not own a current model Mac, they own Window machines and cant comprehend how much more efficient a Mac is over their slopped together Windows Bloat Machine that runs tons of garbage in the background that you never use. (saying this in fun but true)

I say this because of your question, "How's Safari running with 8GB?"
Safari runs fine and will do circles around Windows with Windows having double the memory.
Any Current model Mac runs circles around a Windows Machine with double the memory of the same price class.

So I will be glad to answer your question but first, tell me how many Safari windows do you want me to open and what sites do you want me to go to and get back to you? For the heck of it, I just opened 22 Safari windows (even though I never open more then 6) on my 8Gm of memory Mac mini, I just dont know where to go with all 22 Safari windows open :oops:

and it doesn't just have to be safari, it can be Opera or Firefox or any number of browsers

BTW- my post is not making fun or mean spirited in anyway, I used Windows machines exclusively for 25 Years before I "saw the light"
I used to think the same as you and others. A Notebook/Laptop is a tablet with a keyboard and Apple is a fantastic platform to run on.
A desktop is a work station, desk and comfortable to Computer from. I prefer the Mac mini and my desk but LOVE my MacBook Air for shorter stints sitting on the sofa or kitchen table, sometimes working on my home network too.

Anyway, as far as your questions as to why all this over a Chromebook, well some people will be happy driving a Chevy Spark but others want a different type of vehicle and we pick which one we like the most.

Condescension toward Windows folks aside, I'm sitting here on my Mac looking at the memory footprint of Firefox, which has the least number of browser tabs open (9) of the three browsers I'm using (Chrome, Brave, Firefox) and I see:
Firefox: 832.1MB
Firefox CP Privileged Content: 84.0MB
Firefox CP RDD Process: 25.5MB
Firefox CP Web Content: 82.6MB
Firefox CP Web Content: 288.1MB
Firefox CP Web Content: 533.9MB
Firefox CP Web Content: 219.7MB
Firefox CP Web Content: 291.7MB
Firefox CP Web Content: 177.5MB
Firefox CP Web Content: 24.1MB
Firefox CP WebExtensions: 220.6MB

Total Firefox memory footprint: 2.7GB, more than 1/3rd of your RAM if you only have 8GB.
I'm looking at App Memory and I'm using 22.47GB.
 
Screen shot from earlier on the M1

Screen Shot 2021-02-28 at 1.02.22 PM.jpg


Firefox is a memory hog, and yes I want to be able to use it because, unlike Safari, it allows me to lay out a browser in the way that works most efficiently for me.

I'm not Mac bashing. I've been a Mac user nearly exclusively for close to 10 years now(aside from work stuff that needs Windows, the only one I have is a Dell workstation that's comparable to an MP 5,1 and in fact has a lot of hand-me-down CPUs and RAM from upgrading my 5,1) . I feel like I know Macs decently well. Since going down this path toward Macs, I started building a computer collection and I can claim to currently have at least one computer running every single Mac OS made in some version. Actually, I can't claim that since I don't have anything running AU/X and the only good computer I have that can really run it is a Quadra 700 that I want to keep System 7 running on.

OS X/macOS has great memory management. RAM is still RAM, though, and no amount of tricks can replace actually having the stuff there.

Putting that aside, if you rely on older programs-which I do from time to time-sometimes virualization is the best way out. My main Intel Macs have a Snow Leopard VM so that I can run PowerPC programs. Virtualizing eats RAM, and if you don't understand why you don't understand how computer. Sorry to be blunt, but that's how it is. Funny enough, I may have to "get dirty" with one of the more raw emulators and instead install maybe Leopard and OS 9. Apparently running VMWare in Rosetta 2 takes a big hit, and stacking Rosetta on top of it is just a bad idea. Meanwhile, since ARM and PPC are both RISC, apparently emulation is efficient. That's a project for another day, though.

Folks running Catalina or Big Sur can also be served well by Mojave VM.
 
Both the two posts above are not your typical consumer computer users.

I would say if you were that much of a power user then you need to properly outfit for it which I am sure you guys did.

For the typical homeowner who is asking about a laptop that he/her and family is going to use browsing the web, researching, posting on Bob is the oil guy and shopping is going to be blown away by a $1000 MacBook Air compared to a Windows machine in performance, battery life, reliability, display, operating system, speed and workmanship of the device.

That’s my opinion based on my usage and what I want out of a $1000 device.

Geez I sound like an Apple commercial🙃
 
Last edited:
Geez I sound like an Apple commercial🙃
You do. There is nothing wrong with that though. Just except you assume people questioning your logic is bashing Mac or people bashing Mac cannot comprehend subjects you understand.

Except there are people who worked for Apple and in the industry and could still question the reason of the choices of 8GB only in 2021.

Thanks to bunnspecial and OVERKILL for the data above. I am starting to see what is going on now.

So it seems like the memory is swap in and out of compression in DDR and in and out of SSD by quite a bit. It is OK as along as the DDR is fast (closely connected to CPU due to the trace being short and latency being low), and SSD being very high lane width(M1 if I understand has the integrated SSD controller from Anobit), some benchmark said it peak at 2.8GB/S at read and 3.4GB/S at write. Sony PS5 with 12 nand channel gets 5.5GB/S on read. So basically this means M1 Mac likely has 8 channels of NAND in its internal SSD.

So, basically what Mac OS does is compression and swap, it works if your browser is lean and design for it. It may not store everything in the RAM like other browsers do, but it works well enough if Safari is designed for a slim machine that has fast SSD and low in memory. Windows cannot make that assumption, nor could Linux, nor could Chrome and Firefox. They just assume people are still using HDD and design as such.

Can you get a better all around machine with 16GB than 8GB? Based on the graphs above definitely. This reinforce my believe that we should still buy 16GB if price is reasonable. I still think it make the most sense to get 16GB for Mac because the graphs clearly show 8GB is limping despite limping faster than a typical PC with only dual channel memory.

Sadly most of the time people won't care about how memory is configured these days, many prebuild machines are shipped with just 1 stick of memory and leaving 1/2 the memory bandwidth unused. It is really sad when they are selling 8GB stick of DDR4 3200 at $40 retail, that means OEM really pays only $30 or less.

What's even more sad? The amount Apple and PC builders charge for that extra $30 of 8GB.

p.s. I just bought one such machine for my dad with only 1 stick of 8GB, and found someone else sold their stick on ebay for $25 shipped and bought it. $25 well spend.

I'm going to enjoy my 16GB and let you guys continue the debate of 8GB vs 16GB now, it is good enough for my dad to leave me alone for a few years. I am sure M1 Mac is a wonderful machine, just a bit different than my average user at home. If money is no object I would like to use it once in a while as well.
 
Last edited:
I really hope the rumors of the return of MAG safe are true.

I hope i can get a maxed out 14" without a touch bar.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled program...
 
While I can’t speak for M1 macs or other browsers, I had 9 tabs open in Safari, one playing a 4k YouTube video, and still couldn’t touch 6Gb of RAM usage with <150Mb of Swap. I was using Resource Monitor to see how much was being used since MONIT hasn’t been updated for Big Sur.
 
For the typical homeowner who is asking about a laptop that he/her and family is going to use browsing the web, researching, posting on Bob is the oil guy and shopping is going to be blown away by a $1000 MacBook Air compared to a Windows machine in performance, battery life, reliability, display, operating system, speed and workmanship of the device.
So, basically what Mac OS does is compression and swap, it works if your browser is lean and design for it. It may not store everything in the RAM like other browsers do, but it works well enough if Safari is designed for a slim machine that has fast SSD and low in memory. Windows cannot make that assumption, nor could Linux, nor could Chrome and Firefox. They just assume people are still using HDD and design as such.

Can you get a better all around machine with 16GB than 8GB? Based on the graphs above definitely. This reinforce my believe that we should still buy 16GB if price is reasonable. I still think it make the most sense to get 16GB for Mac because the graphs clearly show 8GB is limping despite limping faster than a typical PC with only dual channel memory.

Just to highlight the above:

For the screenshot I posted, there's really nothing abnormal going on, and I'd call it well within the realm of a home user. What you can't see from the above graph is what all is open:

Left to right across the dock: Safari, Mail, Messages, Calendar, Notes, News, Word, Excel, Slack, and Firefox. Firefox is the obvious memory hog, but I'm not doing anything nuts in it. It's about a dozen tabs, and basically all "normal" sites-some mostly-text stuff I'm referencing or going to read later, online shopping at Menards(was checking what's in stock locally before a trip there), Ebay, a few forums(BITOG and two others also Xenforo based, which is quite heavy IME), the local newspaper's website, and Facebook. Facebook of course is the elephant in the room, but that's what I'd call well within the realm of normal use.

Right now, I have Lightroom open, but in the background and not doing anything. As it sits, it's eating up 4gb of RAM. Lightroom is a semi-niche application-you're probably not going to use it unless you're a step or two past a vacation/happy snap photographer, but it's not exactly exotic.

16gb of RAM would have been smart for me, but I'm past being able to change it without a big financial hit. As I said, I'm going to ride it out, and buy a maxed 14" or 16" in 2-3 years(and I'll have a first gen ARM Mac for my collection).

The performance is good, and often the memory compression/swap isn't particularly noticeable. There are times where it REALLY bogs the system, though. Waking from sleep is one of those times, but even if a browser tab starts to go haywire it can shoot the memory pressure up to 80%+. 16gb would make this a lot more pleasant to use.
 
You do. There is nothing wrong with that though. Just except you assume people questioning your logic is bashing Mac or people bashing Mac cannot comprehend subjects you understand.

Except there are people who worked for Apple and in the industry and could still question the reason of the choices of 8GB only in 2021.
...
Good post, actually everyone in here.
So let me try one last time the point I was making, anyone can re-read my last post as this pertains to that.

Most American consumers, I am a prime example, get along perfectly with a base Model 8Gb MacBook Air, having 16Gb is a waste (unless its something someone just wished to have of course) as it will serve no purpose for someone like me, it will not make the computer faster, so why should I spend the money for more when at this price point it will blow away ANY Windows laptop/notebook for the purposes I use it.

As proof, there are those with the MacBook Pro and 8Gb of memory who is an advanced user and states above he can get by with it for a few years, he uses his counter much more intensely then most average Americans. I would say to him, yeah, maybe the 16 would have been a smarter choice, typical Americans dont use Lightroom. But if you do photo editing I would think a step up of memory is a good thing.

What is so great about this thread is, there are countless people who read through threads without commenting, this one is so night day and its perfect for someone trying to decide the issue or 8 vs 16 in a Mac. (again, my previous post details exactly how I use my computer and I suspect most Americans)
Ok, so here we go, I would go as far to say, there is not a Windows notebook computer with any amount of memory on the market or planet earth that can match the speed of my 8Gb MacBook M1 Air for the same price and what I use it for.(also take into account the other features of the MacAir I outlined in my previous post.
So I would have to question the logic of the "people who worked for Apple" on why there should be more memory on an entry level machine that blows away anything in the Windows world for my purposes and that of most Americans. If you want a machine to do more, then you have to pay for it, its marketing and profit.

I am quite confident that there isnt a commonly available name brand Windows laptop on the USA market at any price and any amount of memory that will be faster in practical use and the way I use my computer which again would be a lot of mainstream users, that could come close to or surpass it in speed. I say this, because it just cant be any faster that would be noticeable. Isnt that a pretty powerful statement for typical day to day family use?

I am not a power user, a power user should step up anything he/she thinks they need above a standard machine of any operating system, its why there are options.
To further this point both the other people are Firefox users, along with other software most typical consumers do not use. They are the 10% with more demanding applications, heck even up to 20% but they are in a class where only less then 8% of USA computer users use Firefox. Im just mentioning that since Firefox is mentioned so much as a criteria in their numbers.

Again, if you want to spend the money, without question go 16Gb if you like, no different then any option in life but to a normal person that uses a computer or computers like my family does you will never notice a difference between 8 and 16 on a Mac M1 computer and for a base machine, no Windows machine will come close to the speed, heck I wouldn't notice it either on my Mac mini i5.

Apple base models are perfectly fine and no slower then upgraded models for typical home usage and that is not many of the people in this thread. The company, so successful because they do not sell machines that people are unhappy with, however, if you are a power user or have specific uses that need more then its up to the buyer to purchase the proper machine and at that level should know better that a base machine wont cut it.
Ok, to be clear, this is a reply to Pandabear. I am not in anyway saying do not buy a 16GB Mac M1. I am questioning the logic of him questioning buying a baseline Mac M1 with 8Gb of memory for someone like me and my previously posted uses.

Every manufacturer has baseline machines, one thing for sure, if you buy a baseline Apple M1 instead of a Baseline Dell, Lenovo Or HP you will never be disappointed with the Apple for my kind of use at the same price point of $1000. I purchased on that assumption for 3 Apple Devices in the last 2 years, Iphone XR, Mac mini and MacAir M1 and held true for me.

So I would question those that "worked for Apple or in the industry" wisdom. You know, when people become ultra rich, how they lose touch with the "common" way of life and clueless what is needed?
I look at that statement the same. Computer elitists (advanced users) who comment with blanket statements like that do not realize the basic functions most typical American families use their computers for. Lucky Apple didnt listen because I would not have spent a penny more for a MacBook Air M1 that I do not use too ofter and would have went to a Windows laptop. Which btw I purchased at the same time we got the MacBook Air this Christmas for my wife. She, still in a the Windows world, I bought her a Lenovo Yoga latest gen i5 with 12 Gb and 512 ssd. Roughly $150 or so less then the MacBook Air. BEAUTIFUL machine for a windows machine and typical home user.
Wow... and I was going to keep this short, crap, now have to rush to work... *LOL*
 
Last edited:
To each their own...

Can anyone on here give typical Chrome RAM data? I refuse to install it, so can't offer it. Chrome has the largest market by a huge margin(60-70% depending on how you cook the numbers) and from past experience is as RAM hungry if not moreso than Firefox.

Also, it's worth mentioning that in the screen shot above, I show 1.12gb from Safari. That's with 1 tab open in one window...
 
To each their own...

Can anyone on here give typical Chrome RAM data? I refuse to install it, so can't offer it. Chrome has the largest market by a huge margin(60-70% depending on how you cook the numbers) and from past experience is as RAM hungry if not moreso than Firefox.

Also, it's worth mentioning that in the screen shot above, I show 1.12gb from Safari. That's with 1 tab open in one window...

Not sure if this counts as "typical", but here's mine:
Screen Shot 2021-03-01 at 10.14.16 AM.jpg


Virtual Memory size shows as 7.09GB. I have 27 tabs open.
 
Virtual Memory size shows as 7.09GB. I have 27 tabs open.

Thanks. Not a fan of Chrome for a couple of reasons, but I know it's insanely popular so I feel like it's a good example/use case.

Bottom line, spin it however you want, but bloated websites in particular cause any browser to gobble memory, and it's to 6+ gb by visiting "normal" websites.

To be fair to Firefox also...or really not fair since since they've had 70-some-odd versions to fix it, for as long as I can remember it's had terrible memory leaks. I'm sitting at close to 9gb now, and after I hit post here I'm going to restart FF. After I repoen the same tabs, useage will likely go to 3gb or so.

One of the things I've been seeing reported is that after M1s have been in circulation for about 4 months now is that the 8gb models in particular seem to be hitting the SSDs alarmingly hard from swapping so much. Since I have a 512gb that's about half full, I hope I have more space to spread swapping out and not consistent use the same NANDs, but it's still there and is a big concern since the drive isn't replaceable.
 
Thanks. Not a fan of Chrome for a couple of reasons, but I know it's insanely popular so I feel like it's a good example/use case.

Bottom line, spin it however you want, but bloated websites in particular cause any browser to gobble memory, and it's to 6+ gb by visiting "normal" websites.

To be fair to Firefox also...or really not fair since since they've had 70-some-odd versions to fix it, for as long as I can remember it's had terrible memory leaks. I'm sitting at close to 9gb now, and after I hit post here I'm going to restart FF. After I repoen the same tabs, useage will likely go to 3gb or so.

One of the things I've been seeing reported is that after M1s have been in circulation for about 4 months now is that the 8gb models in particular seem to be hitting the SSDs alarmingly hard from swapping so much. Since I have a 512gb that's about half full, I hope I have more space to spread swapping out and not consistent use the same NANDs, but it's still there and is a big concern since the drive isn't replaceable.
About SSD swapping. Apple uses their own controller / SSD for M1 (is controller integrated, I haven't followed).

Program / Erase cycle in NAND is a trade off between density, speed, cycle life. If they reserve the typical TLC cell and use it only as SLC then you can go from 5000 cycles to 100K cycles and double or triple the speed. If they have 512GB of SSD and they reserve only 24GB of it for 8GB of SLC swap space then they will almost never wear out the NAND. I do not know the internal mechanism but I trust Apple to design it right and not wear out their SSD by swapping. They can also increase their reliability by reserving more space for wear leveling (typically every 7% increase in reserve space will double the lifespan).

In theory you can achieve the same if you buy a small SLC PCIe 4x SSD (or Intel Optane) and set it to swap drive for Windows, and use it with only 8GB of ram with another TLC SSD drive for normal duty. This would in theory achieve similar speed with similar workload as the Mac. It is a heck of a complication though so people usually just throw in 16GB ram instead.
 
Last edited:
The debate over memory is a laugh when talking about the new Macs. Windows is a whole other story and most people "debating" about the amount of memory do not own a current model Mac, they own Window machines and cant comprehend how much more efficient a Mac is over their slopped together Windows Bloat Machine that runs tons of garbage in the background that you never use. (saying this in fun but true)
So I would question those that "worked for Apple or in the industry" wisdom. You know, when people become ultra rich, how they lose touch with the "common" way of life and clueless what is needed?
I don't know, maybe I'm too cheap to understand all the tricks being used to save $30 of memory like, swapping in and out of SSD and compress and decompress memory in between applications when I can just throw $30 at it and call it a day.

Maybe I'm just too much of an engineer that couldn't see past the sum of all components to understand the beauty of these internal design. I don't know, many people like mechanical watch and to me I see a watch and I like them to be accurate and cheap and efficient instead of complicated. I just couldn't see why they spend $1000 on a Mac and then only give you 8GB when you can buy a $600 machine and slap another $30 worth of memory at it instead. My dad got a $450 Ryzen 7 4700G with 256GB of SSD and 8GB of ram, I throw another $25 worth of 8GB ram on it and now I can sit back and not participate in the debate of fast DDR fast SSD with compression and swapping vs brute force 16GB no swap no compression. I certainly am not the kind of person who would recommend a beautiful mechanical watch for average day to day wearer, I would recommend either keep using their smart phone or a quartz watch like the G Shock.

I don't know, maybe I'm just too dumb or broke to understand it, maybe I'm just not a mechanical watch collector to understand the beauty of all the inner work. I am sure they are worth what they are for a reason and I'm not an average consumer, but it is just weird to me why anyone would not future prove their $1000 purchase with another $30, unless that $30 is really like this? Am I searching it correctly on Amazon? I think for Apple they should really set the baseline to 16GB instead of 8GB, but what is done is done.

1614634720306.png
 
Last edited:
I don't know, maybe I'm too cheap to understand all the tricks being used to save $30 of memory like, swapping in and out of SSD and compress and decompress memory in between applications when I can just throw $30 at it and call it a day.

Maybe I'm just too much of an engineer that couldn't see past the sum of all components to understand the beauty of these internal design. I don't know, many people like mechanical watch and to me I see a watch and I like them to be accurate and cheap and efficient instead of complicated. I just couldn't see why they spend $1000 on a Mac and then only give you 8GB when you can buy a $600 machine and slap another $30 worth of memory at it instead. My dad got a $450 Ryzen 7 4700G with 256GB of SSD and 8GB of ram, I throw another $25 worth of 8GB ram on it and now I can sit back and not participate in the debate of fast DDR fast SSD with compression and swapping vs brute force 16GB no swap no compression. I certainly am not the kind of person who would recommend a beautiful mechanical watch for average day to day wearer, I would recommend either keep using their smart phone or a quartz watch like the G Shock.

I don't know, maybe I'm just too dumb or broke to understand it, maybe I'm just not a mechanical watch collector to understand the beauty of all the inner work. I am sure they are worth what they are for a reason and I'm not an average consumer, but it is just weird to me why anyone would not future prove their $1000 purchase with another $30, unless that $30 is really like this? Am I searching it correctly on Amazon? I think for Apple they should really set the baseline to 16GB instead of 8GB, but what is done is done.

View attachment 47510
I think it’s because most people just want “good enough” and they’re not pushing their computers hard enough to ever really notice the difference between 8gb and 16gb. I do agree with you however, a premium priced machine, even the Mac Mini, should start at 16gb these days.
 
Back
Top