Subscribe and COMMENT to enter the Giveaway! Announcing the winner on Tuesday! Get your Squarespace site FREE Trial ➡ squarespace.com/maxtech You should DEFINITELY be buying this Macbook Pro model ➡ geni.us/IT5U9 20% OFF our Merch with Promo Code: "M1Pro" ➡ max-tech-store.creator-spring.com Like these MacBook Wallpapers? Download them here ➡ bit.ly/2WNc6Qw Links to the new MacBook Pros on Amazon ⬇ NEW 14" MacBook Pro 2021 ➡ geni.us/qYardlV NEW 16" MacBook Pro 2021 ➡ geni.us/OuBRWv
I love that he wanted to test out the ram by having 5 tabs open in safari, calling it "typical usage". Meanwhile i am watching this while having 70 tabs open in chrome.
Just for clarity here. Working in 1 application at a time is not memory intensive. You can definitely use 16GB and it would be fine. Modern OSs are very good at swapping memory as needed and modern SSDs are super fast. Even switching applications is not a huge pressure on memory. it is more intensive but not huge. As an application goes out of focus the system will compress the memory it was holding. If it stays out of focus long enough, it will dump memory to the SSD clearing the space for in focus apps. You won't lose anything, the place where the memory is stored just changed, that is all. If you run multiple applications side by side (in focus) or with external monitors, that is where memory pressure will come in. So you can wrap things up like this: 1) If you will be working on 1 application at a time (in focus) on your Macbook then 16GB is good. 2) If you plan on real multitasking (multiple apps open and in focus) either on the Macbook screen or with external monitors, 32GBs is the way to go. It is very important to understand CPU and Memory with the M1 SOC arch. You can't just swap in more memory you have to trade up for a whole new system. Know your work patterns and invest in the right size for now and the future. This was a good video but it was just showing 1 work pattern that is NOT memory intensive. You could triple the number of background things and the results would have been the same. The system will compress and dump any application not in focus. You want to really test it. Get two external monitors with each running 1-2 applications in focus. Play some music, have a video rolling and play a small game on another while doing some work related activities. That work pattern will definitely need a 32GB model.
I have a tendency to do research by opening dozens of Chrome tabs at the start and work through gathering what I need. I have noticed that my Macbook Pro (yes an older one) will slow to a crawl and even closing tabs will not help so I end up doing a restart and then it is back to speed even with all those tabs reopening at least for a little while before slowing down to a crawl again. When I open 30-40 tabs is that what you are referring to as in Focus applications( as most of those tabs have some active content in them)? If so would getting 32GBs address the Chrome beat down?
Hey, I’ve seen Reddit forums that 16 gb with virtual machines choke? I’m thinking of upgrading to 32gb but man, it’s $400 considering I’m buying from the education store. I’m caught in a loop and I need this mbp soon prolly end of May. I’ll use the vm’s for my Windows related work and when I’m not, I’ll use it with Adobe Premier apps: LR, AP, Ae and Photoshop. Any suggestion? Thanks I’d really appreciate it, I don’t want to make bad decisions. 🥹
Another really useful test, thanks Max! It confirms what I suspected, that the 16 would obviously hit the swap more than the 32 BUT that the SSD is now so fast, it's barely noticeable if at all in real-life situations. You've pretty much covered all the apps I used, so saved me from investing in the 32GB model. I agree, I think the more important thing is to get a decent-sized SSD from day-one, so 1TB / 16GB for me. PS - I think there might be some more significant differences between 16 and 32 for the 3D / VFX / modelling / AE folks out there, but that doesn't affect me!
Elated to find you in max’s channel 😄 Reminds me of a Swahili saying that goes “Kinyozi hajinyoi” (a barber doesn’t shave themselves) You’re my go to guy when it comes to camera reviews Gordon, no one does it better than you! But even you, came to Max for the geeky tech. We all know before you buy any piece of tech you have to come to MAX tech!!! It’s a MAD LINK UP!
Very impressive! I still wish to see a more developer-oriented test, though - Docker in the background with 2 or 3 containers (nothing crazy), plus two IDEs open at a time and an iPhone simulator or Android emulator. This is a very plausible setup for a full-stack developer doing cross-platform work.
You should check out alexander ziskind’s youtube page. He has these and is a developer. He does a ton of tests that apply to software engineers rather than content creators
@@nagimohsen98 Thanks for the recommendation! From a quick look, it seems like he hasn't specifically compared different specs (RAM or number of CPU/GPU cores) yet, right? I'll have a look at what he already has to say, though.
@@danielnum9564 yeah not much between cpu/gpu core models but more so he shows preformance of dev tools on newer devices compared to older ones, etc. but maybe he has more videos in the works. I just came accross his channel recently.
This was the proof I needed that the 16GB model is good enough for me! I’ve been waffling so long that everything is sold out, but I’m so used to the Windows mindset. Thanks, again, for the thorough and creative vids. And thanks for getting help in creating benchmarks that aren’t your forte. It’s much appreciated!
Watched this one and some others because as Windows user I didn’t feel comfortable with 16GB. Was going back and forth, but finally decided to go with 32. Just took a couple of days to find out that 16GB is to less when using external monitor (something nobody on YT making these comparisons is testing). Because MacOS windows manager is eating up RAM even more when using a 4K display - you’ll end up with 18 or 20 GB easily. And when I noticed that I didn’t had any ‚creative software‘ opened. Bottom line: eat that frog and spend the money.
I would say a big yes. I just got the Max with 32gb. Got a great deal off FB marketplace. I monitor my ram and I use almost 50% just when Lightroom and photoshop and a few chrome are open. I’m even swapping ram when exporting in Lightroom. Any person looking for decent power and long term reliabiality 100% go with 32gb
When you've reached the point of grasping for tasks to overburden the machines and the performance differences are so incremental, it's time to get excited for the smaller RAM but larger SSD option. Very entertaining and saves me $ !
he's working on one application at a time in full screen. it's an unrealistic workflow to justify 32gb ram. if he were to hook the laptop up to multiple external monitors and multitask several apps we might get a better picture.
@@muaar That's true but for many people, this is pretty much enough. I personally don't use multiple displays and I'm a music producer I'll mostly be working in my DAW for a long time before even opening another app, so bigger SSD upgrade will be fine for a person like me.
Well, SSDs degrade over time. If the SSD died in your macbook, you'd be screwed since they're not replaceable. Writing a lot of swap to disk definitely does contribute to a quicker degradation of the SSD. The development workflow is also very unrealistic in many ways. Many devs use Docker for containers, which uses a lot of ram. Say you have your dev DB, a backend and frontend container for your project, you'd already be using a lot of memory.
@@urmomsdealer I not the author of comment but I have been using the basic model 14 M1 Pro 16/512 for about a year, it meets all my needs as a programmer, when I use a docker running in a vm that took 8 GB of RAM, and chrome with 30+ tabs with jetbrains IDE, I have no problems, I see no reason to buy the 32 GB version for people who will not make money on this machine
Some thoughts… OK, memory and storage are expensive - but securing good function over time is also valuable… More memory - less load on SSD (longer functional lifetime), more disk - one singular storage unit to make backups on and the performance is high over time… The cost of the computer is sunk costs - just as well to safeguard long, functional lifespan and use...
Really impressed how fast the SSD cache swaps are. I’m still glad I ordered the 32GB. As a software engineer even small increases in compile time add up when you do it dozens of times a day every day.
Note that swap is by definition your least used memory. It's unsurprising that the swap doesn't affect performance much. In order for it to hurt performance a lot, it needs to be used for memory which actively used.
Great video, but I’d love to see a developer specific test for memory. I’m glad to see an Xcode stress test make the video, but I’d like to see another comparison assessing a developer’s every day experience. 200+ chrome (or Firefox) tabs across 10 windows, Spotify, Xcode or even better, a memory intensive IDE like IntelliJ, plus excel, outlook, and slack. I’d be willing to bet you’d have 100X the number of people with that workflow compared to (imaginary) people editing audio, video, and images simultaneously! Food for thought!
You’ve convinced me to stick with my base model 16. I was thinking about returning and getting a maxed out stock model (max with 32 cores, 32gb, 1TB) but now I think I will stick with what I got
Would love to see more software developer focused tests as well (maybe team up with another TH-camr?). Things like code compile, docker builds (arm + x86 images)
We need some tests for the software devs who run multiple VMs on the laptop at the same time. I often need to run three VMs simultaneously and do compile and run on at least two of them. Since VMs require a lot of dedicated RAM it would be interesting to see how swap affects them. Any way for you to do this dev-specific test?
What sort of VMs would you run? You can't virtualise Windows x86 / x64 on M1. You can only virtualise ARM operating systems like Windows ARM and Linux ARM. Docker for M1 might be a good test / bench though. Definitely agree that more "developer" focused reviews and benchmarks are needed. I'm waiting on Snazzy Labs for that.
I have the scenario working with three Linux VMs with 4-6GB of RAM on a 16“ Intel MBP/32GB. I am testing Ansible and Puppet code via Vagrant against these VMs. I know it is hard to test. I would be worried with just 16GB of RAM, but Max‘s test is really impressive!
I would love to see more thrown at it from a programmer perspective. These laptops are clearly for pro multimedia editors but programmers is another “pro” sector that is largely ignored by TH-cam reviewers (understandable since you’re all editors). Please look into this - and stick out from your competition :p
If you are a programmer, you already know how much ram you would use daily…. And i assume you will see no difference whether you use it as editor’s perspective or programmer’s perspective
@@tshd4B2ZNWS its not he same thing on these. They r 10 cores with 10 threads, not 8 with 16 like intel cpus. The unified memory is less used/core too. From what i have seen on programmers/developers testing these each thread consumes less and the ssd speed/usage make 32 unified memory the same as 64 on intel x86. 16 should be fine for developing. Btw video editing is the most annoying benchmark u could see. Its hardly what buyers of 3k laptops r aimed at - that is doing 10 minutes of talking youtube videos thats aimed for mobile phones in 1080p. Most sane people use these for dåevelopment, programming, research, architecture/3d, photography. Not youtube.
Extremely confusing results 😅 Basically swapping is so incredibly efficient on these systems, so more RAM is generally not needed, unless in extreme multi threaded cases, like maxed out music production? Perhaps you could test post production compositing software stress test? Apple Motion. Blackmagic Fusion. After Effects? Other popular platforms? And create semi complex comps with very high resolution layers, zooms and masks, 3D cameras, tracking etc?
I have the impression that music production is much easier on RAM and CPU. There is one video with M1 Mac mini and ridiculous amount of tracks with no problem. CPU almost on idle. Even with 32 tracks with WAV playing the "ssd" is suitable for the job.
Do SSD still slow down as they age and go through 100s of R/W cycles? Might see a bigger difference if the controller have to erase old data first before freeing up the memory cells as swap space.
Any boost in performance is just icing on the cake. These are both excellent machines, apple is crushing the laptop market right now. Thanks for this review!
Wonderful stuff. Most people don't need these laptops. Most of those buying are not buying for the RAM, but for the overall improvements of the macbook. Want these laptops but want to futureproof? Don't get the 32 gig if you don't need it, buy what you can and save up. The macbooks in 3/4 years time should be so much better. Ask yourself if having 32 gig as a futureproof going to prevent you from upgrading to a macbook with face id, faster ports, better battery, lighter and 120hz oled without downsides?
This is mindblowing! Amazing how Apple silicone and architecture is changing the entire game! Thank you Intel, without your laziness of innovation, none of these will happen!
As someone who's spent every minute since launch announcement worrying which config to get right to own for a few years, you've made that choice so easy for me - thanks Max!
More accurately, the SSD is a fraction of the speed of main RAM, but enough processing in a streaming manner takes long enough that the swapping time is hidden almost entirely, as the SoC is doing active processing while the SSD controller is reading and writing the data at a rate that can keep the SoC pegged for various types of processing. Change the type of processing to sustained random memory access patterns where you need 32 GB RAM to keep the data in main memory and you’ll see major performance drops on the 16 GB RAM machine in comparison. For what Max demonstrated, it shows Apple optimized the systems for those tasks for throughout very well.
@@strictnonconformist7369 Great point! It may be worth while to get the 32 after all. Apple's careful memory optimization may not be universal or eternal. After some time memory management is neglected "because we all have more ram anyway". I've already been through this cycle 5 or 6 times. AND perhaps also TWO Tera to slow down wear? I used my previous Mac for 10 years BY both "future proofing" and upgrading. It was cost effective and saved a lot of hassle. Since we can't upgrade now... we might as well get the 2 Tera.
It seems like more RAM is really only needed for “future proofing” reasons. Workloads now don’t really take advantage of the extra RAM but for those of us who keep our MacBooks for 5+ years the extra RAM and potential less stress on the SSD might be worth the extra $ up front. Even then, more SSD would probably be more useful to me in the long run than more RAM.
Bear in mimd that statement only truly applies to processing that is able to be done in a streaming manner, which all of the examples in this video demonstrate. In this case, Apple has largely matched the SSD speeds to the amount of processing that can have data streamed in and out of main memory and through the SoC in general, so that’s why this works so well, with Xcode being the biggest practical difference, in that it’s not as perfect of a streaming situation as all the others. If you do processing on a large enough data set to use 32 GB RAM that has random access characteristics and a large part of the data won’t fit in the 16 GB RAM machine, with sustained processing with random access patterns, you WILL see meaningful performance differences: as fast as the SSDs in these beasts are, main memory is still hugely faster than swapping stuff in and out from/to an SSD. So, if you’re doing video or audio processing as Max shows, he’s demonstrated Apple has created stream-processing monsters that are incredibly well-balanced for the tasks (other than Xcode being the outlier, and not audio/video/photography at all) where the SSD is able to keep up despite swapping being required. Note: I’ve been a developer for decades, and do developer support for an OS ;)
Yeah. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the newer software that comes out in the next few years can take advantage of the greater RAM. And, there's virtual machines if you run them...
This amazing result makes me wonder even more what the point of a Pro with 32Gb is when, once you go there, it's only $200 more for Max. Who would stop at Pro/32 in that case? With this pricing scheme, it seems like Apple didn't expect too many people to stay with Pro at 32Gb. Maybe asking to much to do a Pro vs Max - both at 32gb comparison? Thanks, Max!
@@AV84USA Yes, the battery life would be a factor for some. I believe the 24-core GPU is $200 whereas it's the all-out 32-core GPU that's $400 - both after adding the 32Gb RAM. Thank you for pointing out the difference.
@@AV84USA the battery life is still a question, especially if you’re referring to the godawful verge comparison where two different people doing potentially vastly different tasks. This is why I really want either these guys or LTT to do a direct battery comparison between max and pro of otherwise same setups
Wow, usually 2 times more RAM in any laptop makes a significant difference (especially between 16 and 32 gigs and in RAM intensive tasks) but these SSDs in MacBooks are insanely good.
Wow - cool! This is exactly the comparison I needed to see. This helped me out a lot! $400 is a LOT for just 16GB of extra RAM in one of these (and I can't believe I was about to pay it too). Thanks for the "Max" recommendation!
I got the 16 gb and 32 gb for music production. I use tons of plugins and midi notes on all tracks. Lots of work with orchestra sample vsts. And sadly I had to keep the 32 gb because it was definitely more powerful. More tracks and without problems. I just couldn’t see myself sticking with what can do less.
I did want to save the money and buy a monitor instead but that didn’t work out. The power is there for a reason. Sadly music is the thing that does require more power
Nice to see an indepth RAM comparison between the two builds. It would be great if you could compare the performance of the new M1 max and M1 pro chips wrt NVIDIA GPUs for Machine learning tasks in your future videos.
These help a ton when making a purchasing decision. I feel like a lot of people will go for higher configuration only to never put all those resources to any use.
I love these types of vids comparing memory differences. Almost no on else does this and it answers that question I’ve had for a long time, without making a huge money mistake.
Thanks for the rundown. All in the 32GB just reduces the likeliness of a SSD cache swap so all in it might extend the life of the SSD storage. Outside of that just run wild. Love it.
Honestly unified memory is insane. I remember two years ago when I got the intel MacBook Air with 8gb of ram, even just a few tabs of TH-cam would begin to slow things down. Now with my M1 MacBook Air's 8Gb, I could open everything single app on my computer at once and it would only pause for maybe a minute or so and then everything would run as if nothing's happened.
I’d be interested to see how this would perform with each loaded (as in the video) and also supporting two high resolution displays (I think the memory is shared for video too right?).
That’s because the SSDs are super fast. When the RAM gets full, the OS switches to swapping data from SSD. The difference between 16 and 32 GB would be that SSD on the 32 GB ram model will last longer, because it’s TBW will fill up less quickly.
@@stariqa2 If this is true then I am not as upset going with the 32. I plan on using this beast for many more years than my usual 3 year upgrade cycle, Ty!
having had an M1 Air for a while now.. the memory management on the Apple Silicon systems is MUCH better than it was in the Intel Macs. 16GB is our base config for Macs and PCs these days.. even for Administrative systems because we're buying devices to run for 3-5 years but I prefer 24-32GB for so-called 'power users' and obviously more for boxes doing data analysis of other compute-heavy work (I work at a Research University). 16GB works very well for me in our M1 Air though.. and it's often painfully insufficient in the x86 MBP laptop I'm also using. More RAM is always better.. but it's less critical with the new architecture than its been in the past. This all may seem counter-intuitive because the RAM in the M1 systems is shared between the CPU and GPU. Sure, there's huge performance benefits to having a unified memory space but you do need to split that unified memory between the CPU and GPU (for trivial stuff like frame buffering) but the end result is, a 16 GB M1-based system runs much better than a MBP with 16GB of system RAM and dedicated GPU w/ it's own VRAM. The diff is big enough that we've been wondering if Apple reworked it's memory management for the new hardware but never back-ported the new code to the x86 systems.
Very interesting to see how efficient swapping has become with these fast SSDs. I am assuming this would be true for other software, like DAWs in using multiple plugins over multiple channels. Good work Max Tech, as ever!
Fascinating! It really does seem that for the vast majority of typical use, 16GB RAM is the “sweet spot” for extraordinary performance, after which more RAM is diminishing returns for a considerable cost.
I feel vindicated on my decision to go 16GB, however one test that may have been worth doing is to use large files greater than 200GB and manipulate that. This would saturate the storage bandwidth and we should see the 32gb model pull ahead allot more.
I want an M1 Mac with the sort of longevity that Macs used to be known for. So glad to have confirmation that 32GB RAM will reduce SSD activity. The 16GB limitation is definitely steering me toward the Pro. It’s nice that speed is unchanged vs 16GB, but that’s not the whole story.
Desperate attempt to balance price/features. 2021 MacBookPro18,1. Poor eyesight dictated 16". Not compiling video, so base M1 Pro (10-core CPU/16 GPU), 16GB RAM. 4TB SSD, so I could keep everything onboard with at least 40% free space long-term. Still over $4K USD with business discount, big charger, apple care, etc. Took a while for Monterey to mature, but it's been consistently fast and stable ever since. I guess we'll see about longevity...@@sophierybalov5905
Awesome video. Thank you for the well done comparison. I am very curious to see how will VS Code, Slack, Chrome and Docker would have performed, all at the same time. I am a developer and Docker almost killed my iMac, so I stopped using Docker but I still will see delays when having Chrome, VS Code and Slack open. Moving to an M1 is much faster, but there is still room for improvement.
This is unbelievable performance. I think the ssd and the swapping algorithm must be really good. Most likely the os read ahead capabilities for swapping are so good such that pages need for compute are swapped into mem well ahead of use. It must be the operating system that is so good to get the same level of performance despite huge memory differences.
My biggest concern is the SSD health with all the swapping. Short term the extra ram doesn't seem worth the money, but long term, I wonder if the lower strain on the SSD might improve longevity.
It depends on your workload and how long you are planning to use the Mac. Based on other video's I've seen, you would need to write a lot of GB's on average each day for the SSD lifespan to be possibly become a problem. Perhaps if you plan to use the Mac longer than 10 years (or longer than 7 years if you've a heavy workload) it makes sense to invest extra in keeping the SSD healthier longer. I believe there was a good video about this subject on the Constant Geekery channel.
This clears up all my doubts , better to go for 16 gb with better SSD size . One thing I noticed that ur using thunderbolt charger rather than megsafe in ur right model ??? Is it safe to use this way ??
This is super interesting and super informative! And I agree with the conclusion. I would've thought "get more RAM, and then get bigger SSD if you can afford it," but these results strongly suggest "get bigger SSD, and then get more RAM if you can afford it." Lovely!
Very interesting results. And I like how you focused on usability and daily functionality and not just benchmarking utils. Nice video. Keep up the great content! 😊
So interesting! I was set on getting a 32gb ram M1Pro but now debating if the 16gb will get the job done. Does anyone have concerns about the wear down of the SSD due to swapping?
I can say that on my 2016 macbook pro 15 inch, which I used a lot, I have only degraded 1% of my ssd. It really takes a lot more than people might have you think to destroy an ssd by writing on it
So I've just ordered a m2 pro 16gn RAM and 512ssd. Using external drives for photo storage but after reading threads online, some are suggesting that it may not be enough. I can't imagine why. I'm using a lenovo c940 i5 8gb ram 😂 and it does ok.
but how does SWAP writing affect SSD deterioration in the long term? In this case, it might be worth the extra 400 to avoid losing your 1tb ssd in a year
True. His argument that "you would use swap anyway" is hardly convincing. It's not about whether you are using swap at all, but how many pages are written to disk over what time. Very fast swapping means you could be swapping a lot more without noticing.
I was thinking of the same thing but could also use that money to upgrade the storage to 2TB. Might be a better option for most people as 2x storage would be more useful on a day to day basis. I doubt the swap writing would wear the SSD down too much for the vast majority of people unless we're talking about some power users that do hq content production day in day out.
@@steved5376 Well, it is a MacBook PRO. PRO users should IMO get the right amount of RAM and not rely so much on swap. Casual users can get away with occasionally abusing their macs.
@@travis1240 Sure, but there are different kinds of PRO users out there and I would argue that processing power is more important and extra storage more useful for most.
Just picked up a M1 Pro 16gb 2tb on eBay for sub $1500. I’m coming from a 2012 MacBook Pro 1tb 16gb and the difference is amazing. My old Mac was still doing its thing but damn I was living in the Stone Age.
Your test macBooks are fresh stock, I wonder if you draw the same conclusion once these machines are well-seasoned, say a year later after daily considerable use...
This was the test I've been waiting for. I've been going back and forth with whether or not I should get the 32GB M1 Pro over the 16GB version. My decision has been made a lot easier. Thanks!
"Lets export photos at the same time, just incase you are absolutely insane" HAHAHAH
2 ปีที่แล้ว +2
Thanks to your video I just cancelled my order of the 14" Macbook with 32 gb of RAM and placed a new one for a 14" Macbook with 16 gb of RAM. Not always bigger means better ;-)
Best comparison test yet! The amount of hard work you’re putting into these videos doesn’t go unnoticed, keep it up! 👍 I can't wait to see gaming performance on these.
Great explanation! For the everyday user there's no question in my mind. Further to this, in South Africa there isn't even an option of 32GB MacBook Pro's yet. I can only imagine the horrendous cost for double the RAM capacity when it eventually gets here. Your video will put many a mind at ease when ordering the 16GB models. Thank you for providing a service to those of us in SA who don't have the strongest currency but want the best "bang for buck".
20% difference in xcode build times sounds worth to me, I wonder the build times difference between the 16 GB and the 64 GB model, because I am looking for a 14" model and they don't sell 32 GB at the store, only 16 and 64, with a huge price jump between them (2500 vs 4100). And it's common to have lots of things open at once while building code, so your test represents me very well.
This is impressive - I just think that there is still a reason to get more RAM (and SSD) - especially considering how freaking fast the MacBooks have gotten - you want to be future proofed. And if more RAM will allow to keep your MacBook for much longer time then it makes lot of sense.
It makes more sense to take advantage of Apple resale value and just get a new, most likely much more performant base model in another 2-3 revs instead of spending money on uber expensive options. $400 to upgrade to 32gb is just not worth it unless you have a very valid use case in the here and now.
This video definitely helped me a lot in quantifying the RAM differences. These MacBooks don’t need any additional future proofing by increasing RAM, so really money is better used for increasing storage, upgrading to M1 Max, or even buying accessories out investing them.
I traded in my 14" M1 Max for a 16" 16gb/1tb. I bought a second machine to test which had 32GB and 2TB. The machine with higher ram/storage performed close to 20% better on Geekbench CPU and Cinebench. Graphics differences we marginal. The combination of extra ram and the higher speeds of the 2TB seemed to be the differentiator here.
Thank you for this. I'm now leaning toward getting the 14" M1 Pro MBP, with 16GB RAM, a 1TB internal drive, and that I will go higher than the minimum on the CPU/GPU options.
I would think sample libraries/soft synths you would need 32gb since they are real-time. 64gb might be a stretch... depending on how many samples you load per session.
@@josteinnordheim8810 My friend went ahead and got the M1mac, 64gb model. will be very curious to see if it's overkill for him or not. although he does like to use large orchestral libraries.
This is very interesting! But I want to understand better. The 16 Gig model is as fast as the 32 gig model because the ssd is faster than ever (workes as good as RAM) . But what if the the ssd gets fragmented, after 1 year or so? Will 16 gigs still be sufficient? Further question: in case I buy more gpu like 10 instead of the basic 8. How does this influence the performance? And will the bigger gpu will have profit from the bigger RAM?
That's the question... I have bought the PRO model 16" 10CPU, 16GPU, 16gb, 1SSD and It's 👌🏻 but I am doubting if it should have gone up to 32gb. I use Photoshop, Final Cut, and the memory reaches 10GB... I hope I will not regret it in a short time, but another issue is the price, let's be serious, it's crazy. ✌🏻
I'd be interested to see stress testing in Logic Pro with lots of plugins. Track counts in sessions can easily get into 100+ tracks, so I'm interested to see what happens when resource intensive plugins get added to the mix.
If it can render 8k streams while doing all those background tasks, unless you have the ability to accurately listen, comprehend, and act on multiple tracks at once, no amount of VST’s, or plugins could cause you RAM issues.
@@Seanalbertt i don't know, i know basically nothing about unified ram, but if you got a lot of kontakt instruments with big samples i am not sure what would happen. any idea?
@@Seanalbertt I I am not sure. most current vsts need a lot of ram to run. some projects need to store 64 GB of Ram to be able to operate in real time. the power of the processors does not change anything. i buy a mac mini m1 and still have the same issues when i need to store a large amount of ram
@@Seanalbertt with VSTi‘s and sample based plugins (eg. Acustica Audio) you can very quickly run into RAM problems, not to speak of CPU capacity, very quickly, and your statement „no amount of VST‘S, or plugins could cause you RAM issues.“ is just preposterous, from where or which experience do you have your information from?
Why? The MAX is the exact same CPU, so there is no performance difference in that respect. If you need the video encoders then you do gain that, but most people won't benefit from that too much. The Max has 2x the channels to the RAM as the Pro, so there may be an improvement there, but at that point, if you are really needing that kind of performance, going to the 32GB of RAM seems to make a lot of sense anyway.
@@EricLBanks I’m right here with you. I gotta base max with 32gb of Ram. I think For the first time I think I overdid my order and I’m debating canceling my order and picking up a standard configuration 16gb pro at the store.
@@willeymunda I ordered the 14in 24core gpu max. But I returned it and stuck with the 14in 16gpu pro with 16gb of ram. Honestly unless your sending rockets to the moon, or working with VR graphics or something in the realm of crazy needs, it's totally unnecessary to spend the extra cash. I tried playing pc games to justify my purchase even though I hardly play games, and most of them don't work the new mac. And most of the mac software still isn't optimized to take make use of all that GPU power.
“RAM intensive” lol yeah pretty much most apps that involve graphics (not for GPU specifically) but just simply browsing a cache of images or video for a project. Thanks for this doing research on the new M2’s vs the M1 macs and it’s definitely important to not bother with 16gb ram
Your channel is my all time favourite because no other channel has been as comprehensive as you guys. I said to myself that I would wait for your in-depth test before buying and you delivered as always! More power to you guys! Hoping that you reach the one million subscribers before the year ends!
Thanks for this video! It is nice to know that "living in swap" doesn't make as much difference now days because of the better memory bandwidth and SSD speeds. However I would like to know more about the SSD life times because of an earlier video you did on the M1 macbooks where some users were experiencing large numbers of SSD capacity loss due to the high use because they were overloading their system. So for the "heavy duty" users I would still go 32gb over 16 not because of performance but for the lifetime of the SSD. Edit: Just caught the end of the video after I saved. You make a good point about the endurance of the newer SSDs but I have to agree to disagree here. If you are a power user that does alot of ram hungry tasks you should still go for the ram level that allows you to work without swap over 95%+ of the time as if you are constantly running in your SSD it is a matter of time before you start losing capacity. And part of that is that some users do keep their laptops around for a long time. I am currently writing this on a 2009 macbook! It's my "carry" laptop, my main machine is a maxed out 2018 mac mini, but for me lifetimes are a factor in my decision.
Awesome review I was actually thinking about this yesterday when looking at the new Mac pros to see which one would be better for me so I can start my own loan signing business, finally quit my 9-5 and start learning to code. Thanks man
Wow. Since we have unified memory and swap with ssd 16gb performance is unreal 🔥. This made 32gb ram nearly useless. Also great that evey model comes with 16gb base. Again great comparison
I have watched about 10 of your videos to decide which MacBook to purchase. Thank you very much for such quality videos. 2021 MacBook Pro m1 with 1TB SSD is my pick thanks to you guys.
These machines are both incredible! Though I would be interested to see the coding performance while 100+ tabs are open on chrome/safari. Thanks for the detailed video!
Theoretically, if your SSD starts running low on space (i.e. less than 16GB remaining), would that impact the computer's ability to swap? Or will the SSD have a set amount of "unusable" space partitioned for swapping purposes?
Subscribe and COMMENT to enter the Giveaway! Announcing the winner on Tuesday!
Get your Squarespace site FREE Trial ➡ squarespace.com/maxtech
You should DEFINITELY be buying this Macbook Pro model ➡ geni.us/IT5U9
20% OFF our Merch with Promo Code: "M1Pro" ➡ max-tech-store.creator-spring.com
Like these MacBook Wallpapers? Download them here ➡ bit.ly/2WNc6Qw
Links to the new MacBook Pros on Amazon ⬇
NEW 14" MacBook Pro 2021 ➡ geni.us/qYardlV
NEW 16" MacBook Pro 2021 ➡ geni.us/OuBRWv
like always liked and commented
Hey guys, loving the videos. Subscriber since 2018. Very interested in the Giveaway. These Macs are incredible.
I already bought a bag for this MacBook Pro which you guys are goanna give me… 😂🤣🤩
Great comparison!
I have been waiting on this comparison!!!
I love that he wanted to test out the ram by having 5 tabs open in safari, calling it "typical usage". Meanwhile i am watching this while having 70 tabs open in chrome.
Now that is a ram test!
Your case it's not a typical usage, that's typical only for few ones.
10 to 20 chrome tabs is pretty normal for me, lol!
Only 70?
My iPads and iPhone keep warning me about the 500 tab Safari limit! 🤣🤣🤣
@@strictnonconformist7369 ._. loool
Just for clarity here. Working in 1 application at a time is not memory intensive. You can definitely use 16GB and it would be fine. Modern OSs are very good at swapping memory as needed and modern SSDs are super fast. Even switching applications is not a huge pressure on memory. it is more intensive but not huge. As an application goes out of focus the system will compress the memory it was holding. If it stays out of focus long enough, it will dump memory to the SSD clearing the space for in focus apps. You won't lose anything, the place where the memory is stored just changed, that is all.
If you run multiple applications side by side (in focus) or with external monitors, that is where memory pressure will come in. So you can wrap things up like this:
1) If you will be working on 1 application at a time (in focus) on your Macbook then 16GB is good.
2) If you plan on real multitasking (multiple apps open and in focus) either on the Macbook screen or with external monitors, 32GBs is the way to go.
It is very important to understand CPU and Memory with the M1 SOC arch. You can't just swap in more memory you have to trade up for a whole new system. Know your work patterns and invest in the right size for now and the future. This was a good video but it was just showing 1 work pattern that is NOT memory intensive. You could triple the number of background things and the results would have been the same. The system will compress and dump any application not in focus.
You want to really test it. Get two external monitors with each running 1-2 applications in focus. Play some music, have a video rolling and play a small game on another while doing some work related activities. That work pattern will definitely need a 32GB model.
I have a tendency to do research by opening dozens of Chrome tabs at the start and work through gathering what I need. I have noticed that my Macbook Pro (yes an older one) will slow to a crawl and even closing tabs will not help so I end up doing a restart and then it is back to speed even with all those tabs reopening at least for a little while before slowing down to a crawl again. When I open 30-40 tabs is that what you are referring to as in Focus applications( as most of those tabs have some active content in them)? If so would getting 32GBs address the Chrome beat down?
@@MarkBadia Same. I got a 16GB ram Macbook pro 2019 and the mac will just slow down and sometimes freeze when I have more then 40 tabs open
tottaly true and right thank you i write same then delete when see yours
Hey, I’ve seen Reddit forums that 16 gb with virtual machines choke? I’m thinking of upgrading to 32gb but man, it’s $400 considering I’m buying from the education store. I’m caught in a loop and I need this mbp soon prolly end of May. I’ll use the vm’s for my Windows related work and when I’m not, I’ll use it with Adobe Premier apps: LR, AP, Ae and Photoshop. Any suggestion? Thanks I’d really appreciate it, I don’t want to make bad decisions. 🥹
Perfect comment for my questions that this video could not show off... Thanks so much Tony!!!!!
Max, thank you.
I just cancelled my 32 gb and got the 16 gb with 1tb ssd. You saved me $250 (CAD) and doubled my drive!
Nice work! 😀✌🏻
Still happy with your decision?
Another really useful test, thanks Max! It confirms what I suspected, that the 16 would obviously hit the swap more than the 32 BUT that the SSD is now so fast, it's barely noticeable if at all in real-life situations. You've pretty much covered all the apps I used, so saved me from investing in the 32GB model. I agree, I think the more important thing is to get a decent-sized SSD from day-one, so 1TB / 16GB for me. PS - I think there might be some more significant differences between 16 and 32 for the 3D / VFX / modelling / AE folks out there, but that doesn't affect me!
i will save that 400$ for 16 inch M1 max instead of upgrade 32gb ram
@@dmt99vn that would be wise except that m1 max requires minimum ram of 32gb. That’s how apple makes money.
Getting more storage than the ram is definitely the better choice...
@@wli4796 yes i mean 400$ for 16 inch instead of 14 inch
Elated to find you in max’s channel 😄
Reminds me of a Swahili saying that goes “Kinyozi hajinyoi” (a barber doesn’t shave themselves)
You’re my go to guy when it comes to camera reviews Gordon, no one does it better than you!
But even you, came to Max for the geeky tech.
We all know before you buy any piece of tech you have to come to MAX tech!!!
It’s a MAD LINK UP!
Very impressive! I still wish to see a more developer-oriented test, though - Docker in the background with 2 or 3 containers (nothing crazy), plus two IDEs open at a time and an iPhone simulator or Android emulator. This is a very plausible setup for a full-stack developer doing cross-platform work.
Unless you’re spending 8 hours a day compiling, cutting out that extra snack and coffee break will be a lot cheaper and more time saving. 😉
You should check out alexander ziskind’s youtube page. He has these and is a developer. He does a ton of tests that apply to software engineers rather than content creators
@@nagimohsen98 Thanks for the recommendation! From a quick look, it seems like he hasn't specifically compared different specs (RAM or number of CPU/GPU cores) yet, right? I'll have a look at what he already has to say, though.
@@danielnum9564 yeah not much between cpu/gpu core models but more so he shows preformance of dev tools on newer devices compared to older ones, etc. but maybe he has more videos in the works. I just came accross his channel recently.
yeah emulators are going to crush 16gb ram.
This was the proof I needed that the 16GB model is good enough for me! I’ve been waffling so long that everything is sold out, but I’m so used to the Windows mindset. Thanks, again, for the thorough and creative vids. And thanks for getting help in creating benchmarks that aren’t your forte. It’s much appreciated!
ram so much better on mac it’s crazy
Watched this one and some others because as Windows user I didn’t feel comfortable with 16GB. Was going back and forth, but finally decided to go with 32. Just took a couple of days to find out that 16GB is to less when using external monitor (something nobody on YT making these comparisons is testing). Because MacOS windows manager is eating up RAM even more when using a 4K display - you’ll end up with 18 or 20 GB easily. And when I noticed that I didn’t had any ‚creative software‘ opened. Bottom line: eat that frog and spend the money.
Yes, using external drive and second monitor is a great factor not considered in this video. Bravo, think I will stick with getting 32
@@jkahn923 I plan on using an external monitor, is 32GB really a game changer ?
I would say a big yes. I just got the Max with 32gb. Got a great deal off FB marketplace. I monitor my ram and I use almost 50% just when Lightroom and photoshop and a few chrome are open. I’m even swapping ram when exporting in Lightroom. Any person looking for decent power and long term reliabiality 100% go with 32gb
@@jkahn923 great thanks 🙏. I think I will go with M1 Max 14" 1TB and 32GB used. Weirdly finding M2 Max used is quite hard here.
When you've reached the point of grasping for tasks to overburden the machines and the performance differences are so incremental, it's time to get excited for the smaller RAM but larger SSD option. Very entertaining and saves me $ !
he's working on one application at a time in full screen. it's an unrealistic workflow to justify 32gb ram. if he were to hook the laptop up to multiple external monitors and multitask several apps we might get a better picture.
@@muaar That's true but for many people, this is pretty much enough. I personally don't use multiple displays and I'm a music producer I'll mostly be working in my DAW for a long time before even opening another app, so bigger SSD upgrade will be fine for a person like me.
Well, SSDs degrade over time. If the SSD died in your macbook, you'd be screwed since they're not replaceable. Writing a lot of swap to disk definitely does contribute to a quicker degradation of the SSD. The development workflow is also very unrealistic in many ways. Many devs use Docker for containers, which uses a lot of ram. Say you have your dev DB, a backend and frontend container for your project, you'd already be using a lot of memory.
Perfect, now I’m more confused 😬
Just sell your car and get the 32 gb version. It's that easy!
@@MrShroombot on it!
Haha. In the same boat.
@@sashakolsky sell your boat, then... duh? /s
@@UniGuyOfficial @Saad and Tyson
Take the 16" entry level one and push the SSD to 2Tb. That 's the sweet spot!
Yes, because the fastest advertized SSD speeds are only available with 2TB SSDs & larger.
@@derekbaker3279 "Your MacBook Pro comes standard with 1TB of blazing-fast SSD storage,³ with up to 7.4GB/s sequential read speed.⁹"
Was a bit worried about my 16gb order, but after watching this I’m fully satisfied with it. This was a fantastic video
Hey so now after a year of use was 16 the way to go?
@@urmomsdealer I not the author of comment but I have been using the basic model 14 M1 Pro 16/512 for about a year, it meets all my needs as a programmer, when I use a docker running in a vm that took 8 GB of RAM, and chrome with 30+ tabs with jetbrains IDE, I have no problems, I see no reason to buy the 32 GB version for people who will not make money on this machine
@@DenysHona thats true, people which need more that 16gb of ram are knowing that they need it. If you dont know it, you dont need it
Some thoughts… OK, memory and storage are expensive - but securing good function over time is also valuable… More memory - less load on SSD (longer functional lifetime), more disk - one singular storage unit to make backups on and the performance is high over time… The cost of the computer is sunk costs - just as well to safeguard long, functional lifespan and use...
Really impressed how fast the SSD cache swaps are. I’m still glad I ordered the 32GB. As a software engineer even small increases in compile time add up when you do it dozens of times a day every day.
Note that swap is by definition your least used memory. It's unsurprising that the swap doesn't affect performance much. In order for it to hurt performance a lot, it needs to be used for memory which actively used.
Great video, but I’d love to see a developer specific test for memory. I’m glad to see an Xcode stress test make the video, but I’d like to see another comparison assessing a developer’s every day experience.
200+ chrome (or Firefox) tabs across 10 windows, Spotify, Xcode or even better, a memory intensive IDE like IntelliJ, plus excel, outlook, and slack.
I’d be willing to bet you’d have 100X the number of people with that workflow compared to (imaginary) people editing audio, video, and images simultaneously!
Food for thought!
You’ve convinced me to stick with my base model 16. I was thinking about returning and getting a maxed out stock model (max with 32 cores, 32gb, 1TB) but now I think I will stick with what I got
Would love to see more software developer focused tests as well (maybe team up with another TH-camr?). Things like code compile, docker builds (arm + x86 images)
I hope that they post one soon, meanwhile this guy does good tests from devs perspective: th-cam.com/users/d3vtec
We need some tests for the software devs who run multiple VMs on the laptop at the same time. I often need to run three VMs simultaneously and do compile and run on at least two of them. Since VMs require a lot of dedicated RAM it would be interesting to see how swap affects them. Any way for you to do this dev-specific test?
What sort of VMs would you run? You can't virtualise Windows x86 / x64 on M1. You can only virtualise ARM operating systems like Windows ARM and Linux ARM. Docker for M1 might be a good test / bench though. Definitely agree that more "developer" focused reviews and benchmarks are needed. I'm waiting on Snazzy Labs for that.
@@KrisHyman Two Ubuntu VMs and one Windows 10 via Parallels.
I have the scenario working with three Linux VMs with 4-6GB of RAM on a 16“ Intel MBP/32GB. I am testing Ansible and Puppet code via Vagrant against these VMs. I know it is hard to test. I would be worried with just 16GB of RAM, but Max‘s test is really impressive!
@@grenzlaeufer vagrant is no way for m1, at least unless virtualbox will start to support arm
Do you mean docker?
Or virtual box VMs?
It's absolutely amazing that there's so little difference between 16 & 32 GB from a performance standpoint.
I would love to see more thrown at it from a programmer perspective. These laptops are clearly for pro multimedia editors but programmers is another “pro” sector that is largely ignored by TH-cam reviewers (understandable since you’re all editors). Please look into this - and stick out from your competition :p
If you are a programmer, you already know how much ram you would use daily…. And i assume you will see no difference whether you use it as editor’s perspective or programmer’s perspective
This is the place for programmers. He does a great job testing machines for several flavors of coding. th-cam.com/users/AlexanderZiskind
Just mentioned this some minutes ago, too. ^^
@@tshd4B2ZNWS its not he same thing on these. They r 10 cores with 10 threads, not 8 with 16 like intel cpus. The unified memory is less used/core too. From what i have seen on programmers/developers testing these each thread consumes less and the ssd speed/usage make 32 unified memory the same as 64 on intel x86. 16 should be fine for developing. Btw video editing is the most annoying benchmark u could see. Its hardly what buyers of 3k laptops r aimed at - that is doing 10 minutes of talking youtube videos thats aimed for mobile phones in 1080p. Most sane people use these for dåevelopment, programming, research, architecture/3d, photography. Not youtube.
try starting a bunch of docker containers and the 32 gb will flex its muscles
Extremely confusing results 😅 Basically swapping is so incredibly efficient on these systems, so more RAM is generally not needed, unless in extreme multi threaded cases, like maxed out music production? Perhaps you could test post production compositing software stress test? Apple Motion. Blackmagic Fusion. After Effects? Other popular platforms? And create semi complex comps with very high resolution layers, zooms and masks, 3D cameras, tracking etc?
Of course Cuckoo shows up 😜
Was wondering if you were going to ditch the 15” intel w/ touchbar
Swapping isnt good for ssd lifetime;)
@@ch3vr0n123 If you got a 1TB or larger SSD, their lifespan TBW should be high enough so that you don't need to worry about it.
I have the impression that music production is much easier on RAM and CPU. There is one video with M1 Mac mini and ridiculous amount of tracks with no problem. CPU almost on idle.
Even with 32 tracks with WAV playing the "ssd" is suitable for the job.
Do SSD still slow down as they age and go through 100s of R/W cycles? Might see a bigger difference if the controller have to erase old data first before freeing up the memory cells as swap space.
Any boost in performance is just icing on the cake. These are both excellent machines, apple is crushing the laptop market right now. Thanks for this review!
This dude is sponsored
Wonderful stuff. Most people don't need these laptops. Most of those buying are not buying for the RAM, but for the overall improvements of the macbook. Want these laptops but want to futureproof? Don't get the 32 gig if you don't need it, buy what you can and save up. The macbooks in 3/4 years time should be so much better. Ask yourself if having 32 gig as a futureproof going to prevent you from upgrading to a macbook with face id, faster ports, better battery, lighter and 120hz oled without downsides?
This is mindblowing! Amazing how Apple silicone and architecture is changing the entire game! Thank you Intel, without your laziness of innovation, none of these will happen!
Yes, thanks Intel 😂😂😂
As someone who's spent every minute since launch announcement worrying which config to get right to own for a few years, you've made that choice so easy for me - thanks Max!
Did you end up getting the 16g?
@@renziii1080 Yeah - but it's like 3 weeks shipping time :(
The swap being practically as fast as the RAM is amazing. I wonder if that will lead to a noticeable shortening of life of the SSD though.
Yeah. That’ll be the real difference. Longevity.
More accurately, the SSD is a fraction of the speed of main RAM, but enough processing in a streaming manner takes long enough that the swapping time is hidden almost entirely, as the SoC is doing active processing while the SSD controller is reading and writing the data at a rate that can keep the SoC pegged for various types of processing.
Change the type of processing to sustained random memory access patterns where you need 32 GB RAM to keep the data in main memory and you’ll see major performance drops on the 16 GB RAM machine in comparison.
For what Max demonstrated, it shows Apple optimized the systems for those tasks for throughout very well.
@@strictnonconformist7369 Great point! It may be worth while to get the 32 after all.
Apple's careful memory optimization may not be universal or eternal. After some time memory management is neglected "because we all have more ram anyway". I've already been through this cycle 5 or 6 times.
AND perhaps also TWO Tera to slow down wear?
I used my previous Mac for 10 years BY both "future proofing" and upgrading.
It was cost effective and saved a lot of hassle.
Since we can't upgrade now...
we might as well get the 2 Tera.
I was wondering what the fan rpm/ noise situation was between the two machines? Especially important for DAW users. Thanks for all your hard work!
It seems like more RAM is really only needed for “future proofing” reasons. Workloads now don’t really take advantage of the extra RAM but for those of us who keep our MacBooks for 5+ years the extra RAM and potential less stress on the SSD might be worth the extra $ up front. Even then, more SSD would probably be more useful to me in the long run than more RAM.
thanks for that man, I was just thinking the same, of going up to 2TB instead of upgrading to 32gb
@Ron Terry exactly the either apps aren't taking advantage of it or the CPU is still the bottle necking the allocation of resources
You mean, to prevent the memory swap issue ?
Bear in mimd that statement only truly applies to processing that is able to be done in a streaming manner, which all of the examples in this video demonstrate.
In this case, Apple has largely matched the SSD speeds to the amount of processing that can have data streamed in and out of main memory and through the SoC in general, so that’s why this works so well, with Xcode being the biggest practical difference, in that it’s not as perfect of a streaming situation as all the others.
If you do processing on a large enough data set to use 32 GB RAM that has random access characteristics and a large part of the data won’t fit in the 16 GB RAM machine, with sustained processing with random access patterns, you WILL see meaningful performance differences: as fast as the SSDs in these beasts are, main memory is still hugely faster than swapping stuff in and out from/to an SSD.
So, if you’re doing video or audio processing as Max shows, he’s demonstrated Apple has created stream-processing monsters that are incredibly well-balanced for the tasks (other than Xcode being the outlier, and not audio/video/photography at all) where the SSD is able to keep up despite swapping being required. Note: I’ve been a developer for decades, and do developer support for an OS ;)
Yeah. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the newer software that comes out in the next few years can take advantage of the greater RAM. And, there's virtual machines if you run them...
This amazing result makes me wonder even more what the point of a Pro with 32Gb is when, once you go there, it's only $200 more for Max. Who would stop at Pro/32 in that case? With this pricing scheme, it seems like Apple didn't expect too many people to stay with Pro at 32Gb. Maybe asking to much to do a Pro vs Max - both at 32gb comparison? Thanks, Max!
@@bujin5455 Yes, surely agree. Which is why it seems odd anyone would not spend $200 to go for Max if they're already going for the 32Gb.
@@AV84USA Yes, the battery life would be a factor for some. I believe the 24-core GPU is $200 whereas it's the all-out 32-core GPU that's $400 - both after adding the 32Gb RAM. Thank you for pointing out the difference.
@@AV84USA the battery life is still a question, especially if you’re referring to the godawful verge comparison where two different people doing potentially vastly different tasks. This is why I really want either these guys or LTT to do a direct battery comparison between max and pro of otherwise same setups
Wow, usually 2 times more RAM in any laptop makes a significant difference (especially between 16 and 32 gigs and in RAM intensive tasks) but these SSDs in MacBooks are insanely good.
Wow - cool! This is exactly the comparison I needed to see. This helped me out a lot!
$400 is a LOT for just 16GB of extra RAM in one of these (and I can't believe I was about to pay it too). Thanks for the "Max" recommendation!
I got the 16 gb and 32 gb for music production. I use tons of plugins and midi notes on all tracks. Lots of work with orchestra sample vsts. And sadly I had to keep the 32 gb because it was definitely more powerful. More tracks and without problems. I just couldn’t see myself sticking with what can do less.
I did want to save the money and buy a monitor instead but that didn’t work out. The power is there for a reason. Sadly music is the thing that does require more power
Nice to see an indepth RAM comparison between the two builds. It would be great if you could compare the performance of the new M1 max and M1 pro chips wrt NVIDIA GPUs for Machine learning tasks in your future videos.
These help a ton when making a purchasing decision. I feel like a lot of people will go for higher configuration only to never put all those resources to any use.
I love these types of vids comparing memory differences. Almost no on else does this and it answers that question I’ve had for a long time, without making a huge money mistake.
Thanks for the rundown. All in the 32GB just reduces the likeliness of a SSD cache swap so all in it might extend the life of the SSD storage. Outside of that just run wild. Love it.
Honestly unified memory is insane. I remember two years ago when I got the intel MacBook Air with 8gb of ram, even just a few tabs of TH-cam would begin to slow things down. Now with my M1 MacBook Air's 8Gb, I could open everything single app on my computer at once and it would only pause for maybe a minute or so and then everything would run as if nothing's happened.
I’d be interested to see how this would perform with each loaded (as in the video) and also supporting two high resolution displays (I think the memory is shared for video too right?).
Wow, I can’t believe that the 2 MacBooks have the results are very close. It count by seconds
Best comparison test yet!
That’s because the SSDs are super fast. When the RAM gets full, the OS switches to swapping data from SSD.
The difference between 16 and 32 GB would be that SSD on the 32 GB ram model will last longer, because it’s TBW will fill up less quickly.
Cool guys! I like yr channel!
@@stariqa2 If this is true then I am not as upset going with the 32. I plan on using this beast for many more years than my usual 3 year upgrade cycle, Ty!
@@FlorianCortese based on the video, it looks like that. No swap data on the 32 gb model on the first two tests.
having had an M1 Air for a while now.. the memory management on the Apple Silicon systems is MUCH better than it was in the Intel Macs. 16GB is our base config for Macs and PCs these days.. even for Administrative systems because we're buying devices to run for 3-5 years but I prefer 24-32GB for so-called 'power users' and obviously more for boxes doing data analysis of other compute-heavy work (I work at a Research University). 16GB works very well for me in our M1 Air though.. and it's often painfully insufficient in the x86 MBP laptop I'm also using. More RAM is always better.. but it's less critical with the new architecture than its been in the past.
This all may seem counter-intuitive because the RAM in the M1 systems is shared between the CPU and GPU. Sure, there's huge performance benefits to having a unified memory space but you do need to split that unified memory between the CPU and GPU (for trivial stuff like frame buffering) but the end result is, a 16 GB M1-based system runs much better than a MBP with 16GB of system RAM and dedicated GPU w/ it's own VRAM.
The diff is big enough that we've been wondering if Apple reworked it's memory management for the new hardware but never back-ported the new code to the x86 systems.
Very interesting to see how efficient swapping has become with these fast SSDs. I am assuming this would be true for other software, like DAWs in using multiple plugins over multiple channels. Good work Max Tech, as ever!
Fascinating! It really does seem that for the vast majority of typical use, 16GB RAM is the “sweet spot” for extraordinary performance, after which more RAM is diminishing returns for a considerable cost.
I feel vindicated on my decision to go 16GB, however one test that may have been worth doing is to use large files greater than 200GB and manipulate that. This would saturate the storage bandwidth and we should see the 32gb model pull ahead allot more.
I want an M1 Mac with the sort of longevity that Macs used to be known for. So glad to have confirmation that 32GB RAM will reduce SSD activity. The 16GB limitation is definitely steering me toward the Pro. It’s nice that speed is unchanged vs 16GB, but that’s not the whole story.
What did you end up getting?
Desperate attempt to balance price/features. 2021 MacBookPro18,1. Poor eyesight dictated 16". Not compiling video, so base M1 Pro (10-core CPU/16 GPU), 16GB RAM. 4TB SSD, so I could keep everything onboard with at least 40% free space long-term. Still over $4K USD with business discount, big charger, apple care, etc. Took a while for Monterey to mature, but it's been consistently fast and stable ever since. I guess we'll see about longevity...@@sophierybalov5905
Awesome video. Thank you for the well done comparison. I am very curious to see how will VS Code, Slack, Chrome and Docker would have performed, all at the same time. I am a developer and Docker almost killed my iMac, so I stopped using Docker but I still will see delays when having Chrome, VS Code and Slack open. Moving to an M1 is much faster, but there is still room for improvement.
Yes, that's why I went with 32GB. I can see IntelliJ already grabbing 3+GBs and my current total usage is 19GB.
This is unbelievable performance. I think the ssd and the swapping algorithm must be really good. Most likely the os read ahead capabilities for swapping are so good such that pages need for compute are swapped into mem well ahead of use. It must be the operating system that is so good to get the same level of performance despite huge memory differences.
My biggest concern is the SSD health with all the swapping. Short term the extra ram doesn't seem worth the money, but long term, I wonder if the lower strain on the SSD might improve longevity.
It depends on your workload and how long you are planning to use the Mac. Based on other video's I've seen, you would need to write a lot of GB's on average each day for the SSD lifespan to be possibly become a problem. Perhaps if you plan to use the Mac longer than 10 years (or longer than 7 years if you've a heavy workload) it makes sense to invest extra in keeping the SSD healthier longer. I believe there was a good video about this subject on the Constant Geekery channel.
Thanks for doing real world tests. Way more helpful than benchmarks. 16gb is a no brainier!
This clears up all my doubts , better to go for 16 gb with better SSD size . One thing I noticed that ur using thunderbolt charger rather than megsafe in ur right model ??? Is it safe to use this way ??
I literally cannot believe how much the 16gb kept up with the 32gb 😂
There's not much of difference between the two and that wasn't expected at all. Definitely 16GB is more value for money product than the 32GB
It’s because the swap memory using disk is pretty fast
@@BRBallin1 Right and that's why 16GB variant makes more sense.
This unified memory is so impressive ! Combined with new ssd Apple really nailed it ! Thanks max for this awesome video !
This is super interesting and super informative! And I agree with the conclusion. I would've thought "get more RAM, and then get bigger SSD if you can afford it," but these results strongly suggest "get bigger SSD, and then get more RAM if you can afford it." Lovely!
Mindboggling, right?
Me: "These new machines would really make my uni work a breeze"
Bank account: *_cries in poor_*
Very interesting results. And I like how you focused on usability and daily functionality and not just benchmarking utils. Nice video. Keep up the great content! 😊
So interesting! I was set on getting a 32gb ram M1Pro but now debating if the 16gb will get the job done. Does anyone have concerns about the wear down of the SSD due to swapping?
Same, how's your experience been?
I can say that on my 2016 macbook pro 15 inch, which I used a lot, I have only degraded 1% of my ssd. It really takes a lot more than people might have you think to destroy an ssd by writing on it
So I've just ordered a m2 pro 16gn RAM and 512ssd. Using external drives for photo storage but after reading threads online, some are suggesting that it may not be enough. I can't imagine why. I'm using a lenovo c940 i5 8gb ram 😂 and it does ok.
The base model just seems as powerful as most people would actually need, amazing test⚡️
I must say, I’m not shocked at all, especially with those speeds. Glad to see that 16gbs will be enough for the majority. Keep these tests coming!
but how does SWAP writing affect SSD deterioration in the long term? In this case, it might be worth the extra 400 to avoid losing your 1tb ssd in a year
100% !
True. His argument that "you would use swap anyway" is hardly convincing. It's not about whether you are using swap at all, but how many pages are written to disk over what time. Very fast swapping means you could be swapping a lot more without noticing.
I was thinking of the same thing but could also use that money to upgrade the storage to 2TB. Might be a better option for most people as 2x storage would be more useful on a day to day basis. I doubt the swap writing would wear the SSD down too much for the vast majority of people unless we're talking about some power users that do hq content production day in day out.
@@steved5376 Well, it is a MacBook PRO. PRO users should IMO get the right amount of RAM and not rely so much on swap. Casual users can get away with occasionally abusing their macs.
@@travis1240 Sure, but there are different kinds of PRO users out there and I would argue that processing power is more important and extra storage more useful for most.
Just picked up a M1 Pro 16gb 2tb on eBay for sub $1500. I’m coming from a 2012 MacBook Pro 1tb 16gb and the difference is amazing. My old Mac was still doing its thing but damn I was living in the Stone Age.
Loved the in-depth comparison. It would be great if you guys can test how 64 gig will stack up there. Is it worth to upgrade to 64 gig for VM stuff?
It supports arm virtualization only. It doesn’t make much sense to me. What would you run?
As usual you guys deliver exactly what this senior citizen needs to know, as I try and keep up with the ever changing tech world. Thanks!
Your test macBooks are fresh stock, I wonder if you draw the same conclusion once these machines are well-seasoned, say a year later after daily considerable use...
This was the test I've been waiting for. I've been going back and forth with whether or not I should get the 32GB M1 Pro over the 16GB version. My decision has been made a lot easier. Thanks!
what was your decision?
@@jasonhahnfilms if his decision has been easier after this video, it’s definitely the 16GB option
"Lets export photos at the same time, just incase you are absolutely insane" HAHAHAH
Thanks to your video I just cancelled my order of the 14" Macbook with 32 gb of RAM and placed a new one for a 14" Macbook with 16 gb of RAM. Not always bigger means better ;-)
Best comparison test yet! The amount of hard work you’re putting into these videos doesn’t go unnoticed, keep it up! 👍
I can't wait to see gaming performance on these.
Great explanation! For the everyday user there's no question in my mind. Further to this, in South Africa there isn't even an option of 32GB MacBook Pro's yet. I can only imagine the horrendous cost for double the RAM capacity when it eventually gets here. Your video will put many a mind at ease when ordering the 16GB models. Thank you for providing a service to those of us in SA who don't have the strongest currency but want the best "bang for buck".
20% difference in xcode build times sounds worth to me, I wonder the build times difference between the 16 GB and the 64 GB model, because I am looking for a 14" model and they don't sell 32 GB at the store, only 16 and 64, with a huge price jump between them (2500 vs 4100). And it's common to have lots of things open at once while building code, so your test represents me very well.
This is impressive - I just think that there is still a reason to get more RAM (and SSD) - especially considering how freaking fast the MacBooks have gotten - you want to be future proofed. And if more RAM will allow to keep your MacBook for much longer time then it makes lot of sense.
It makes more sense to take advantage of Apple resale value and just get a new, most likely much more performant base model in another 2-3 revs instead of spending money on uber expensive options. $400 to upgrade to 32gb is just not worth it unless you have a very valid use case in the here and now.
This video definitely helped me a lot in quantifying the RAM differences. These MacBooks don’t need any additional future proofing by increasing RAM, so really money is better used for increasing storage, upgrading to M1 Max, or even buying accessories out investing them.
I traded in my 14" M1 Max for a 16" 16gb/1tb. I bought a second machine to test which had 32GB and 2TB. The machine with higher ram/storage performed close to 20% better on Geekbench CPU and Cinebench. Graphics differences we marginal. The combination of extra ram and the higher speeds of the 2TB seemed to be the differentiator here.
Another great video Max, I will definitely be getting the 16gb and spend the extra money for bigger ssd!
Agree
me three 2TB here I come
@@TerryMaplePoco me four , 16 gb 1 tb
@@phun9uyen nice, i literally just put in my order. This vid pushed me to confidence (+ their vid on RAM + Learn Color Grading’s video on Davinci)
@@phun9uyen 16 inch ? 14 inch ?
Thank you for this. I'm now leaning toward getting the 14" M1 Pro MBP, with 16GB RAM, a 1TB internal drive, and that I will go higher than the minimum on the CPU/GPU options.
I was very confused wondering if I should go for 32gb of ram or 1tb of space. This helped me a lot. I think the best decision is 16gb of ram and 1tb.
Makes me wonder is swap faster than ram then?
@@williamhill3751 SSD swapping is much slower, but as both swap and RAM speeds have increased massively, latency is less noticeable.
Oooo! Now I’ve been waiting for this one. I’m even more curious about the M1Max, 32gb vs 64gb of ram as a logic pro user with large sample libraries.
I would think sample libraries/soft synths you would need 32gb since they are real-time. 64gb might be a stretch... depending on how many samples you load per session.
@@BlackMan614 Sorry you mean 32gb might be better and faster than 64gb under this circumstances?
@@josteinnordheim8810 My friend went ahead and got the M1mac, 64gb model. will be very curious to see if it's overkill for him or not. although he does like to use large orchestral libraries.
@@josteinnordheim8810 No
This is very interesting! But I want to understand better. The 16 Gig model is as fast as the 32 gig model because the ssd is faster than ever (workes as good as RAM) . But what if the the ssd gets fragmented, after 1 year or so? Will 16 gigs still be sufficient? Further question: in case I buy more gpu like 10 instead of the basic 8. How does this influence the performance? And will the bigger gpu will have profit from the bigger RAM?
That's the question...
I have bought the PRO model 16" 10CPU, 16GPU, 16gb, 1SSD and It's 👌🏻 but I am doubting if it should have gone up to 32gb. I use Photoshop, Final Cut, and the memory reaches 10GB...
I hope I will not regret it in a short time, but another issue is the price, let's be serious, it's crazy. ✌🏻
I'd be interested to see stress testing in Logic Pro with lots of plugins. Track counts in sessions can easily get into 100+ tracks, so I'm interested to see what happens when resource intensive plugins get added to the mix.
Do you only have audio tracks in logic? You need to run virtual instruments and plugins using sampling technology to see the RAM stress
If it can render 8k streams while doing all those background tasks, unless you have the ability to accurately listen, comprehend, and act on multiple tracks at once, no amount of VST’s, or plugins could cause you RAM issues.
@@Seanalbertt i don't know, i know basically nothing about unified ram, but if you got a lot of kontakt instruments with big samples i am not sure what would happen. any idea?
@@Seanalbertt I I am not sure. most current vsts need a lot of ram to run. some projects need to store 64 GB of Ram to be able to operate in real time. the power of the processors does not change anything. i buy a mac mini m1 and still have the same issues when i need to store a large amount of ram
@@Seanalbertt with VSTi‘s and sample based plugins (eg. Acustica Audio) you can very quickly run into RAM problems, not to speak of CPU capacity, very quickly, and your statement „no amount of VST‘S, or plugins could cause you RAM issues.“ is just preposterous, from where or which experience do you have your information from?
“If you want a chance to win”
Me: “There’s hope!”
Now I wish they offered 16 GB with the M1 Max after watching this video
Why? The MAX is the exact same CPU, so there is no performance difference in that respect. If you need the video encoders then you do gain that, but most people won't benefit from that too much. The Max has 2x the channels to the RAM as the Pro, so there may be an improvement there, but at that point, if you are really needing that kind of performance, going to the 32GB of RAM seems to make a lot of sense anyway.
Then you don’t need m1 max bruh ….. just get m1 pro
Then whats the difference between m1pro and m1max😂
I’m waiting for the M1 Pro v M1 Max test, I video edit a lot and time is of the essence.
Also waiting for this.
@@EricLBanks I’m right here with you. I gotta base max with 32gb of Ram. I think For the first time I think I overdid my order and I’m debating canceling my order and picking up a standard configuration 16gb pro at the store.
@@brandonspies did you order the 16”
@@EricLBanks 16”?
@@willeymunda I ordered the 14in 24core gpu max. But I returned it and stuck with the 14in 16gpu pro with 16gb of ram. Honestly unless your sending rockets to the moon, or working with VR graphics or something in the realm of crazy needs, it's totally unnecessary to spend the extra cash. I tried playing pc games to justify my purchase even though I hardly play games, and most of them don't work the new mac. And most of the mac software still isn't optimized to take make use of all that GPU power.
“RAM intensive” lol yeah pretty much most apps that involve graphics (not for GPU specifically) but just simply browsing a cache of images or video for a project. Thanks for this doing research on the new M2’s vs the M1 macs and it’s definitely important to not bother with 16gb ram
Your channel is my all time favourite because no other channel has been as comprehensive as you guys. I said to myself that I would wait for your in-depth test before buying and you delivered as always! More power to you guys! Hoping that you reach the one million subscribers before the year ends!
it's astonishing the level of performance this SOC achieves with "only" 16 gigs of RAM... there are phones out there with that amount of RAM 🤣
Thanks for this video! It is nice to know that "living in swap" doesn't make as much difference now days because of the better memory bandwidth and SSD speeds. However I would like to know more about the SSD life times because of an earlier video you did on the M1 macbooks where some users were experiencing large numbers of SSD capacity loss due to the high use because they were overloading their system. So for the "heavy duty" users I would still go 32gb over 16 not because of performance but for the lifetime of the SSD.
Edit: Just caught the end of the video after I saved. You make a good point about the endurance of the newer SSDs but I have to agree to disagree here. If you are a power user that does alot of ram hungry tasks you should still go for the ram level that allows you to work without swap over 95%+ of the time as if you are constantly running in your SSD it is a matter of time before you start losing capacity. And part of that is that some users do keep their laptops around for a long time. I am currently writing this on a 2009 macbook! It's my "carry" laptop, my main machine is a maxed out 2018 mac mini, but for me lifetimes are a factor in my decision.
Nice but how much Core does it have in the test
16-core ; 24-core or 32-core ??
16-core as it is a M1 Pro, which only has 14- or 16-core and because it's the 16" model, it has to be 16-core. So, 10-core CPU and 16-core GPU
I am new to this channel, and I have to say that this is high quality rigorous testing. Densely packed information with a nice flow. Great work!
Awesome review I was actually thinking about this yesterday when looking at the new Mac pros to see which one would be better for me so I can start my own loan signing business, finally quit my 9-5 and start learning to code. Thanks man
I can’t believe the RAM upgrade costs more than going from base M1Pro to maxed out M1Pro
ewveryone is comparing normal ram weith M1 Pro and M1 max ram. this is unified memory which goes up to 400gbps. DDR4 goes up 25gbps. its a difference
Hello. Is it still wise to buy the 16gb/1tb or should I upgrade to 32gb/1tb if I intend to use the laptop for more than 6 years?
Wow. Since we have unified memory and swap with ssd 16gb performance is unreal 🔥. This made 32gb ram nearly useless. Also great that evey model comes with 16gb base. Again great comparison
Thank you for the tip/observation regarding larger SSDs having longer life spans
This information is exactly what I wanted before I made my purchase. You guys are killing it. Thanks so much for making these comparisons.
what did you get
I have watched about 10 of your videos to decide which MacBook to purchase. Thank you very much for such quality videos. 2021 MacBook Pro m1 with 1TB SSD is my pick thanks to you guys.
These machines are both incredible! Though I would be interested to see the coding performance while 100+ tabs are open on chrome/safari. Thanks for the detailed video!
Loving these comparisons videos! It’s nice to see it in the real world and how it performs.
Thanks guys!
That was unreal! Never thought I would see that kind of performance from a laptop. Thanks for such a great comparison.
Theoretically, if your SSD starts running low on space (i.e. less than 16GB remaining), would that impact the computer's ability to swap? Or will the SSD have a set amount of "unusable" space partitioned for swapping purposes?
Yeah, it would. But you shouldn't fill up an SSD (or even an HDD) that much if you can help it.