What matters for Macs (CPU/GPU/RAM)

Hi,

I am left with a wonder after the M4 announcement. It seems weird that you can only get the 64gb and 128gb unified ram option with the maxed out M4 Max... You cannot get it with M4 Pro.

It left me with wondering if the ram is that much faster.

After a bit of digging I found that the M4 has LPDDR5X-7500 compared to the M3's LPDDR5-6400. What I couldn't find is what the actual real life performance and comparison is.

So for example, the M4's 48gb is equivalent to the M3's 64gb or 48gb, etc?

I'd love to get your takes.

BTW I am a videographer and use Davinci and having a hard time deciding what is the best configuration

Mac people sure like to do the ''equivalent'' bit.

16GB on an M1 is like 128GB on an Intel!!!

RAM is RAM. 16GB on an M1 is like 16GB on an Intel.

Bottom line is, get the machine with the most RAM and pray you don't swap to disk too often since its soldered and once it goes you'll have a very expensive paperweight.

Also latency of RAM doesn't really matter for video editing so 6400 or 7500 is about the same, maybe a tad more bandwidth that I doubt will make any difference.

Mac people sure like to do the ''equivalent'' bit.

16GB on an M1 is like 128GB on an Intel!!!

RAM is RAM. 16GB on an M1 is like 16GB on an Intel.

Bottom line is, get the machine with the most RAM and pray you don't swap to disk too often since its soldered and once it goes you'll have a very expensive paperweight.

Also latency of RAM doesn't really matter for video editing so 6400 or 7500 is about the same, maybe a tad more bandwidth that I doubt will make any difference.

I assume you are not a "mac people"..

Just for you, allow me to clarify. I wasn't asking about Intel or anything else, but specifically regarding the difference between the Apple Silicon M3 series and the M4 that was announced today.

Mac people sure like to do the ''equivalent'' bit.
16GB on an M1 is like 128GB on an Intel!!!
RAM is RAM. 16GB on an M1 is like 16GB on an Intel.

This is both true and not true.

Due to architecture and the way the OS work whilst 16GB is 16GB on both mac and PC, both PowerPC (the original MAC CPU) and ARM handle memory better than X86. Though the Mac M series are not Arm cores but Apple cores using the Arm instruction set. Which means the M cores are tuned specifically for Apple hardware and OS. Hence they use memory more efficiently and the system is a lot faster.

On top of that the new M series Macs with the memory integrated on to the die are faster than memory that is seperate to the CPU/CPU chip. So yes 16GB on an M mac will perform like a 32GB x86 because some of the the bottlenecks are removed.

Now whist you are saying the M4 is LPDDR5X-7500 and the M3's LPDDR5-6400 memory the speed is going to be down to the CPU/GPU, the caches and pipelining as to which has the edge. Though I suspect you will not notice the difference in normal operation, or for that matter almost any use at all without something to tell you one is 2.5734% faster than the other.

The answer with any Mac, or PC is to get the most memory you can. Especially on the M series MACs because you can't change it later.

The reason on the M macs is the RAM is volatile and designed for an almost infinite number of write-read-re-write cycles. With non volatile memory IE SSD's they have a limit, it used to be around 150K min write-rewrite cycles. This IS a problem if you only have a small amount of RAM because the OS will set up a swap page on the SSD to give you paged or virtual RAM.

The unintended(?) consequence of the very fast on die SSD's on the M parts is that most users don't notice when the Mac is using swap space. This "thrashes" the SSD with lots of write-rewrite cycles rapidly eating into the 150K cycles. Therefore you could get SSD failures much sooner than you would expect. This means an SSD ie CPU/CPU/RAM/SSD failure. In real terms this is a motherboard change....

If money is no object then get 128GB ram on the most powerful M4 you can get. (or wait 3 months for the M5)

The thing is there are a lot more variables than RAM as to which system to go for. Personally I went for a Windows PC where I can swap/upgrade components as and when. (Though I still have my Mac Pro and a couple of Macbooks). This is because I can't justify a high end M4 with all the RAM. If you are a professional earning your living editing etc then it would be worth the money.

So yes 16GB on an M mac will perform like a 32GB x86 because some of the the bottlenecks are removed.

It really doesn't but its ok if you think it does. I'm not gonna try and change your mind.

RAM on ARM or x86 functions the same. The only difference between the usual x86 laptop or desktop and the Apple ones is that there are more memory channels on an Apple system. Its usually dual (2x64bit) or quad channel for x86 laptop / desktop and 128 up to 1024 bit for Apple systems. You get more bandwidth.

You can't cram 2L of water into a 1L bottle...So if you need 32GB then you will start to swap to the NVME...Simple as that.

So essentially for what RAM is, no, 16GB will not perform like 32GB.

Also its memory on package, not on die. Beside being soldered on the package there's no benefit vs ram slots except maybe a tad reduction in latency since its closer to the CPU...

So yes 16GB on an M mac will perform like a 32GB x86 because some of the the bottlenecks are removed.

It really doesn't but its ok if you think it does. I'm not gonna try and change your mind.

I assume you design computers for a living?

So yes 16GB on an M mac will perform like a 32GB x86 because some of the the bottlenecks are removed.

It really doesn't but its ok if you think it does. I'm not gonna try and change your mind.

I assume you design computers for a living?

Why does that matter though? Even if was it won't change the fact that 16GB will not perform as 32GB...no matter how fast the 16GB is or how the OS is "tuned". You run out of RAM, you swap to disk.

This whole unified nonsense has been spreading since the release of M1. Its a fancy term used for memory sharing with the GPU. The same thing happens on Playstation / Xbox and on APUs since quite before the M1.

The main benefit for having it this way is the GPU can access more memory than what's on a traditional videocard. It helps with some scenes and textures for 3D modeling and such. Won't help if the GPU is garbage and will not help the Mac GPU perform as "4x nVidia 4090" or whatever other ridiculous statements are out there on the web.

There is no magic. Sorry.

Why does that matter though? Even if was it won't change the fact that 16GB will not perform as 32GB...no matter how fast the 16GB is or how the OS is "tuned". You run out of RAM, you swap to disk.

I just wondered if you designed computers or were pulling things out of the air.

I've used both systems. M chip's Arm use same memory for GPU and RAM.

So, I recommend you to get 32gb memory, 256gb space. You can buy sandisk or samsung external ssd's for much cheaper too

Just note that with Apple unified memory architecture, VRAM and system RAM is the same space.
This means part of your 16GB of RAM will be dynamically reserved for the GPU since there is no VRAM. The upside to it is supposedly it prevents in some instances when the same data needs to be both on VRAM and system RAM. The downside is obviously if your GPU tasks requires a huge VRAM to accomplish as task - say playback FX with 8K video. That will consume a big part of your M1 RAM.

You don't need to design computers for a living to know how a computer works and to see through the Apple marketing nonsense.

When Intel or AMD or even Apple will come up with a computer that has an APU with octa channel (like the M series) that allows the NVME to be user replaceable (or at least enterprise quality regarding endurance and not the garbage drives they use currently) I'll be the first in line to get it.

Until then 32GB is better than 16GB no matter the platform unless what you do fits in 16GB then the higher speed matters.

You don't need to design computers for a living to know how a computer works and to see through the Apple marketing nonsense..

IT does help to know how they work.

Until then 32GB is better than 16GB no matter the platform

This simply isn't true, except in the simplistic case of the M macs.

You don't need to design computers for a living to know how a computer works and to see through the Apple marketing nonsense..

IT does help to know how they work.

Until then 32GB is better than 16GB no matter the platform

This simply isn't true, except in the simplistic case of the M macs.

You're taking things out of context again.

But then again this was what you did this whole thread.

Good luck with believing 16GB is better than 32GB.

You're the perfect Apple customer.

I'm out.

You don't need to design computers for a living to know how a computer works and to see through the Apple marketing nonsense..

IT does help to know how they work.

Until then 32GB is better than 16GB no matter the platform

This simply isn't true, except in the simplistic case of the M macs.

You're taking things out of context again.

But then again this was what you did this whole thread.

Good luck with believing 16GB is better than 32GB.

You're the perfect Apple customer.

I'm out.

No, I understand how memory works on different architectures.
Generally at a simplistic level 32GB is better than 16GB. (but not always)

I used to be an Apple user but not any more.
I don't like the M series for general purpose computing.

Despite the pig's ear of x86 Architecture I use Windows PCs for video editing.

No, I understand how memory works on different architectures.
Generally at a simplistic level 32GB is better than 16GB. (but not always)

There is no other way than the simplistic way. Given the same number of channels all memory will perform roughly the same on either platform.

And a task that requires 32GB of RAM will not perform better on 16GB ARM because "magic". Not with the speed of today's NVMEs that top out at 12GB/s.

You are oversimplifying the "Apple tuning" and grossly overestimating the x86 overhead.

Once you go over the 16GB of "unified memory" then the 8 channels of Apple "not ARM" don't matter anymore hence 32GB on Intel with its measly dual channel will still be faster than a disk swap.

No, I understand how memory works on different architectures.
Generally at a simplistic level 32GB is better than 16GB. (but not always)

There is no other way than the simplistic way. .

You really don't understand how it works.

Do we get these discussions here now too? It felt good when BM's forum was still relatively free of such.

I'll not comment here, I have spread enough information about RAM in Mx Macs around here to read. That information was based on our own tests with a pretty tough DR benchmark, which colleagues around here ran on both Macs and PCs.
Buy whatever you like and can afford!

Rule of thumb, ignore every Marketing material from a company and always get the best hardware that you can afford.

In editing everything matters, and while Apple loves to use marketing buzzwords remember that the RAM on a MAC is also shared with the GPU so it's not apples to apples when you compare it to a PC which has dedicated GPU VRAM and system RAM.

I won't go into details to which is better and such since the answer is quite complicated, but the rule is simple, get the best that you can afford and remember that on a MAC you cannot upgrade later, you will be stuck with w/e your choice was right now!

You really don't understand how it works.

Then why don't you explain how it works? Explain how this magic happens and how is it different from any other run of the mill APU? How 16GB becomes 32GB or 128GB out of thin air by optimizing the OS.

I was gonna buy an Epyc to access 512GB+ of RAM but 8GB of magic RAM on Apple should suffice.

I'll await eagerly your explanation. It should be a very informative read. And maybe I could learn a thing or two or thirty two.

You really don't understand how it works.

Then why don't you explain how it works? Explain how this magic happens and how is it different from any other run of the mill APU? How 16GB becomes 32GB or 128GB out of thin air by optimizing the OS.

I was gonna buy an Epyc to access 512GB+ of RAM but 8GB of magic RAM on Apple should suffice.

I'll await eagerly your explanation. It should be a very informative read. And maybe I could learn a thing or two or thirty two.

What level are we starting at? Do you have any computing qualifications or experience?

You really don't understand how it works.

Then why don't you explain how it works? Explain how this magic happens and how is it different from any other run of the mill APU? How 16GB becomes 32GB or 128GB out of thin air by optimizing the OS.

I was gonna buy an Epyc to access 512GB+ of RAM but 8GB of magic RAM on Apple should suffice.

I'll await eagerly your explanation. It should be a very informative read. And maybe I could learn a thing or two or thirty two.

What level are we starting at? Do you have any computing qualifications or experience?

Thought so. So far you haven't said anything worthwhile to this topic. I mean how could you. You can't even grasp the difference between memory on die and memory on package.

Based on your post history you're just a big troll.

Come up with the explanation or you're just a troll and you're stalling with non answers. I'm betting on the latter.

How's this to put the cat among the pigeons . . . last year I bought the base model M2 mini with a 256 GB SSD and 8 GB RAM and couldn't care less if it swaps as I have the whole caboodle booted from a £60 USB 3.0 1 TB SSD and it simply flies . . . just as fast as booting from the internal (within 1%), that's measured via Geekbench and real world rendering and exporting etc.
Too many people pay too much attention to numbers!

sssss.jpg (270.58 KiB) Viewed 1107 times

Based on your post history you're just a big troll.
Come up with the explanation or you're just a troll and you're stalling with non answers. I'm betting on the latter.

On the contrary, you have not answered one of my questions and just been evasive and answered with simplistic non answers. A load of hot air so far.

Well, at what lever do I pitch the explanation? That will depend on what level you are at.

How's this to put the cat among the pigeons . . . last year I bought the base model M2 mini with a 256 GB SSD and 8 GB RAM and couldn't care less if it swaps as I have the whole caboodle booted from a £60 USB 3.0 1 TB SSD and it simply flies . . . just as fast as booting from the internal (within 1%), that's measured via Geekbench and real world rendering and exporting etc.
Too many people pay too much attention to numbers!

sssss.jpg

From this guy's video, it doesn't seem like a good idea.

Since I don't have a MAC I can't say about real rendering and exporting. If it works for you, more power to you.

Based on your post history you're just a big troll.
Come up with the explanation or you're just a troll and you're stalling with non answers. I'm betting on the latter.

On the contrary, you have not answered one of my questions and just been evasive and answered with simplistic non answers. A load of hot air so far.

Well, at what lever do I pitch the explanation? That will depend on what level you are at.

Wow, a non answer. Also all your questions were about my credentials. Basically you're gaslighting here. Speaking about hot air...the nerve on some people.

Move along troll.

I watched that video amongst numerous others last year before parting with the huge sum of £578 for the new mini. That guy spends big bucks! My £60 1TB SSD had already been bought a year previously and was pressed into use as a boot drive so I had nothing to lose.
To my surprise and pleasure the whole lot worked perfectly, just as well as the internal drive and without any of the snags that guy mentions.
I must put my cards on the table and state that I do not shoot anything higher than 4K or have more than a dozen stacked tracks of 1080p so it's no surprise I get no dropped frames. If I was shooting 8K or having more than half a dozen tracks of 4K I might run into dropped fames or other problems and have to resort to converting my native footage to ProRes.

Wow, a non answer. Also all your questions were about my credentials. Basically you're gaslighting here. Speaking about hot air...the nerve on some people.

Move along troll.

On the contrary, you have not answered one of my questions and just been evasive and answered with simplistic non answers. A load of hot air so far. you are the only troll here.

Well, at what lever do I pitch the explanation? That will depend on what level you are at.

I watched that video amongst numerous others last year before parting with the huge sum of £578 for the new mini. That guy spends big bucks! My £60 1TB SSD had already been bought a year previously and was pressed into use as a boot drive so I had nothing to lose.
To my surprise and pleasure the whole lot worked perfectly, just as well as the internal drive and without any of the snags that guy mentions.
I must put my cards on the table and state that I do not shoot anything higher than 4K or have more than a dozen stacked tracks of 1080p so it's no surprise I get no dropped frames. If I was shooting 8K or having more than half a dozen tracks of 4K I might run into dropped fames or other problems and have to resort to converting my native footage to ProRes.

I couldn't imagine swapping at 2GB/s while using everything else on the same port. But if it works for you then very nice.

Wow, a non answer. Also all your questions were about my credentials. Basically you're gaslighting here. Speaking about hot air...the nerve on some people.

Move along troll.

On the contrary, you have not answered one of my questions and just been evasive and answered with simplistic non answers. A load of hot air so far. you are the only troll here.

Well, at what lever do I pitch the explanation? That will depend on what level you are at.

You're resorting to spamming the forum? I'm gonna report every single one of this spam from now on.

You had plenty of opportunity to bring anything to this discussion. All you do is spam about my credentials like if I tell you what those are (which would be a total shock to you), will somehow make you come up with an explanation.

And I'm sure you have none.

[Peter Chamberlain]

Let’s leave out the personal debates guys and please stick to topic or refrain from posting.

Let’s leave out the personal debates guys and please stick to topic or refrain from posting.

Thank you!