Apple made the claim that 8GB of memory, RAM, on one of their Apple Silicon-powered Macs is like 16GB of memory on a PC. It’s a huge claim. The idea is that, because Apple makes the hardware and the software that runs on a Mac, as well as the memory management optimizations on the chip, Apple’s devices can run with less memory than their Windows-based PC counterparts.
A rather simple experiment by Max Tech showed that more RAM is better than less RAM, even for macOS. In fact, in some scenarios, the PC used less memory than the Mac, but it always outperformed it, especially when multitasking or working on large projects.
As someone who regularly uses 32Gb of memory, often more, I’d be hard-pressed using a 16GB Mac, let alone one with 8GB. Still, Apple sells their MacBook Pro with an M3 processor and a measly 8GB of RAM for a whopping $1,599. That’s hundreds more than similarly-spec’d Intel-based PCs. On top of that, users can upgrade their Windows PCs on their own, and for far less than Apple charges for their built-in memory, which can’t be upgraded.
When Apple says their computers perform as well as PCs, are they basing it on anything, or is it just marketing fluff? One test seems to suggest Apple’s performance promises are flat-out untrue.
What Did Max Tech’s Test Show?
The big question here isn’t whether or not the Intel-based PC is faster than the M3-based Mac. It is. What’s being tested is whether or not the Mac is slowed down when it’s multitasking. We can also take a look at how much memory each process uses. Apple claims Macs with their processors require less memory. This would be a combination of more efficient processes and faster access to SSD storage.
In the tests, both machines used roughly the same memory. In the photo export tests, they both used 10GB of memory. However, the Windows machine had 16GB of memory. The Mac had to instead rely on SSD storage, slowing the task down.
To test performance under normal multitasking, he loaded up 10 websites in Google Chrome, a notorious memory hog. The Windows machine used less memory here, and the Mac made use of SSD storage for memory before the test even began.
The tests consistently showed that the machine with 16GB of memory saw little to no slowdowns, often running faster, while the Mac with only 8GB of memory had dramatic slowdowns.
8GB isn’t enough memory to multitask with a browser open. Imagine if it included everything else you were working on. These Macs can’t even keep up with basic tasks.
Making PCs an Easier Buy
Apple’s 14-inch MacBook Pro with 8GB of memory starts at $1,599. You can’t upgrade the memory or the storage after purchase either, as you can for many Windows PCs. Those, however, come with 16GB or more memory at this price point. A Asus Vivobook Pro, with a 16-inch display, comes with 16GB of memory, an Intel i7 processor, and dedicated Nvidia graphics for $1,499. Lenovo has a Thinkpad with an i7, Nvidia graphics, and 32GB of memory for $1,599. That’s four times what Apple offers, for the same price.
Apple has powerful processors. These machines can’t keep up with even less expensive Windows PCs thanks to their memory constraints. Apple shouldn’t waste customers’ money with broken promises of efficiency, they need to offer their MacBook Pro models with at least enough memory for “Pro” tasks. This is getting ridiculous. Even modern Android phones have more memory than this.
Source: Max Tech