7 ms·

I was skeptical about the m1 processors, specifically around performance on something like a desktop where you expect snappy performance. I have definitely cha

by genmud 6y ago

I was skeptical about the m1 processors, specifically around performance on something like a desktop where you expect snappy performance. I have definitely changed my thoughts and if apple can solve getting more ram in their systems (it’s pretty shameful that in 2021 you max out at 16gb on a MacBook Pro), I feel like they are going to knock it out of the park with their new architecture.

dylan604 6y ago
It wasn't until 2017ish before getting 32GB in a MacBook Pro. So the fact that they have 16GB in the first gen seems about right. According to Apple's propaganda and blogospere, the M1 is much more efficient not "needing" the extra RAM. That's just too much for my old dog to wrap my mind around.
- cyberpunk 6y ago
  I’m using one as a daily driver (red teaming) and it easily handles a couple busy vms, term, few services, editor, obsidian, slack/teams/whatever and browser.. I stopped even bothering carrying the charger with it.. Sometimes I look at activity monitor and it is swapping a bit but I don’t notice any perf degradation so I stopped thinking about it.. shrug
  - genmud 6y ago
    I'm sure that swapping isn't a huge deal, but the big issue is around longevity of the SSD. If you have workloads that use more than 16gb of ram, swapping a lot will prematurely wear the SSD, which isn't replaceable.
    - cyberpunk 6y ago
      I think this has been largely debunked by now, early SSDs had these problems but newer ones? not so much..; I mean, here's what smart says about the drive in my Mac atm: Percentage Used: 0% Data Units Read: 12,515,207 [6.40 TB] Data Units Written: 13,202,995 [6.75 TB] Host Read Commands: 264,092,805 Host Write Commands: 158,635,815 Controller Busy Time: 0 Power Cycles: 188 Power On Hours: 223 The % used is (I think) the lost capacity due to wear, I've fairly hammered it so far and it's not even at 1%.. I'm pretty sure I'll get at least a few years out of it based on that..
      - dylan604 6y ago
        Hopefully, the keyboard lasts as long as the SSD. Previous gens spectacularly did not.
        cyberpunk 6y ago
        Ha, seems to be a bit better. I kinda hate working on the laptop keyboard tho so I tend to use an external magic keyboard :}
        gtm1260 6y ago
        If you care about the keyboard longevity, I'd get the macbook air or wait for the new macbook refresh when they bring the air keyboard over to the pro.
        Reason077 6y ago
        The MacBook Air keyboard is exactly the same as the Pro keyboard, except for the Touch Bar. Any problems with the Touch Bar are UX issues: I don't think anyone has questioned its longevity/reliability.
      - genmud 6y ago
        Uhh, that may be what apple is reporting but most SSDs only last for about 100-200TB of write, so I would take that percentage used with a grain of salt. They are probably counting wear leveling percentage used. On the low end assuming 200TBW that means you have used about 3.3% of the life of your SSD and on the high side you have used 6.75%. Lets say you got your M1 on release in November, that would mean you are using about 1.68%/month on the high end and .84%/month on the low end. Assume it lasts 200TBW, which I don't think they will, you would be on track for a 8 year lifespan of the SSD. Otherwise 4 years on the low end, assuming the write amount stays the same (which won't likely happen), which would imply you are using the same or less swap. Every year, I find that I use about 1-2gb more on average, so for me/my usage patterns I almost find the 16gb of memory in the MBPs to be a slap in the face. I have a 13'' and a 16'' MBP with 32/64gb respectively and I don't think I would find anything less acceptable. Right now, my typical memory usage is around 30-40gb when I run docker, vscode, chrome, slack, zoom, etc. I am not even running any VMs(other than the docker vm), I typically will spin those up elsewhere. For reference, this is my 16'' daily MBP after nearly a year (4.84TB write) and I typically pull down lots of logs/data. Available Spare: 100% Available Spare Threshold: 99% Percentage Used: 0% Data Units Read: 4,406,559 [2.25 TB] Data Units Written: 9,454,881 [4.84 TB] Host Read Commands: 183,307,692 Host Write Commands: 406,821,556
  - jclardy 6y ago
    I replaced my i9 16” MBP with a 13” Air. Performance with Xcode is either the same or better on the Air. Battery life is the true game changer though. When I went out with the 16” I had to make sure I had 100% charge, if I wanted to use it for ~3-4 hours while out. With the Air I can grab it with 25% battery left and be fine for the same amount of time. The “actual” pro machines with M1 derivatives are going to be incredible…so long as apple doesn’t make another Touchbar/butterfly keyboard-esq mistake.
    - deergomoo 6y ago
      I also replaced a 16" (although i7) with a 13" Air. Best computing purchase I've ever made. I was lucky if I could even make it to 4 hours battery on the 16", but the real killer for me was heat and noise. It was like sitting in front of a little aeroplane all day long, and because the video out is wired up through the dedicated GPU, just plugging it into an external monitor added an extra 20W to dissipate. It also had weird sleep issues the entire time, if I left it connected to a monitor overnight I'd often sit down at my desk the next morning to find it burning hot, fans blasting, with the lid closed. So happy to see the back of that piece of crap. It got reasonable reviews at the time, I can only imagine that either no-one tested it with external monitors, or because it was the first model to drop the butterfly keyboard people just gave it a pass on everything else.
  - omniscient_oce 6y ago
    I got the Air and when I was compiling Nodejs to install it the chassis got really hot. I read a lot about it barely ever getting warm but I guess those reviews were a little exaggerated.
- whatever1 6y ago
  Honestly the SSD is so fast, that for everyday workload you will not notice the lack of RAM even in an 8GB system (I am coming from a system with 32GB or RAM). But RAM is RAM, and using swap memory that aggressively can reduce the life span of the SSD very fast.
  - EricE 6y ago
    Not true. I desperately wanted to keep my M1 MBA, but with Cities:Skylines I have enough mods and assets where I really do need 32GB of RAM. When you really need it, there is no substitute for RAM. When I loaded up a new game with minimal assets (it easily fit with the 16GB of RAM I had) the MBA played C:S smoother than my i7/1080ti gaming machine. I think if I can get a laptop with at least 32GB of RAM I won't have to maintain a Windows gaming machine and will be able to consolidate everything onto an M powered MacBook Pro. Now if Apple would just produce a 5K external monitor life would be perfect :)
- genmud 6y ago
  They say that because the SSD is fast and the performance hit for hitting swap isn't that big of a deal. Without mentioning that the SSD is soldered to the motherboard and is a wear item. The fact you can't swap hard drives is silly, almost like having a car with tires that can't be changed.
  - EricE 6y ago
    SSD is NOT as fast as RAM. If you really need more RAM, do yourself a favor and wait until they come out with a machine that has more RAM. I'm waiting, rather impatiently. It was hard to return my M1 MBA but I think it will be well worth it in the long run.
- coldtea 6y ago
  >It wasn't until 2017ish before getting 32GB in a MacBook Pro. And that's on special customization option, that a handful of hardcores ever got...
  - dylan604 6y ago
    And as soon as 32GB became available, those same hardcores where asking where the 64GB options were. I had workflows on desktops with only 32GB of RAM that would choke, but it was a Hackintosh, so I was able to bump up to 64GB and the issues went away. Which is why 16GB max is so hard for me to wrap my head around
    - josephg 6y ago
      Can you give some examples of workflows that need that much ram? I stay away from docker and VMs, and I really struggle to think of everyday situations where more than 16gb of ram is going to be worth it for me.
      - rsj_hn 6y ago
        IME if you are not doing video editing, it will be docker and VMs. So it makes sense that devs would want the 32g (standard at my work, too). When I got my own personal laptop. 16G was fine, and I haven't had issues.
      - dylan604 6y ago
        I shoot lots of timelapse on a full frame dslr RAW. I import my image sequences into after effects at full image size at 16bit color (the RAW is 14bit native). Exporting those 1:1 image size would choke on 32GB. Upping to 64GB saw the errors go away.
  - minhazm 6y ago
    I'm not so sure it's so hardcore. The standard laptop that new engineers at LinkedIn get is the 16in Macbook Pro with Core i9 and 32 GB of RAM. I'm sure we're not the only ones issuing this spec, and it's not even the maxed out 64GB spec. For work the $400 difference between 16GB and 32GB is pretty negligible over the course of 3 yrs. Consider the cost of each engineer and $400 / 3yrs for even a tiny improvement in productivity is worth it.
- GeekyBear 6y ago
  >According to Apple's propaganda and blogospere, the M1 is much more efficient not "needing" the extra RAM. Marcan recently found custom instructions to handle memory compression / decompression in hardware. https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1362450439845781505 https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1362450439845781505
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    These are not new and have been part of Apple’s ISA extensions for several years. For some reason marcan decided to blackbox them, but they’re fairly easy to find if you open the kernel in a disassembler so I’m not sure why he did.
    - mrkstu 6y ago
      New to Mac, new audience. People are used to iPhones being parsimonious with RAM, it’s new on Mac.
      - saagarjha 6y ago
        It's basically the same processor; it stands to reason that the instructions are the same (but maybe not used in the same way).
- ksec 6y ago
  >That's just too much for my old dog to wrap my mind around My theory is that Apple has specific hardware for much faster and better memory compression and decompression. macOS has always had memory compression but I think those are done with Software on CPU. You may also get some additional memory from Unified Memory. ( Not sure how it worked previously on macOS, so this is a reference from PC perspective. ) But Yes generally I agree, That's just too much for my old dog to wrap my mind around.
- Reason077 6y ago
  > ”According to Apple's propaganda and blogospere, the M1 is much more efficient not "needing" the extra RAM.” The M1 Macs come with very fast SSDs. I think what’s really going on here is that, with write speeds exceeding 2GB/s, macOS can use NVM almost as if it is RAM with little performance penalty. It works. With 8GB, my MacBook Air feels as if it has a lot more RAM than it does. The downside is increased wear on the SSD. My 512GB SSD has accumulated 7 TB of writes in the few weeks I’ve owned it.
- skunkworker 6y ago
  Wasn't the 32gb Macbook Pro infeasible (for battery life) initially because Intel kept on recycling their memory controller and it wasn't until the 8th gen processors where LPDDR4 was officially supported [1]. It appears that Apple gave up trying to do LPDDR4 on the 15/16inch [2] and released it with DDR4, while on the 13 inch they released a 32gb version using 3733MHz LPDDR4X [3]. [1] https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/05/17/intels-first-10nm-cannon-lake-processor-with-32gb-lpddr4-ram-support-ships https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/05/17/intels-first-10nm... [2] https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/07/12/apple-refreshes-macbook-pro-with-six-core-processors-32gb-of-ram https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/07/12/apple-refreshes-m... [3] https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/macbook-pro/13-inch-space-gray-2.0ghz-intel-core-i5-quad-core-processor-with-intel-iris-plus-graphics-1tb# https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/macbook-pro/13-inch-space...
  - dylan604 6y ago
    So it was intel’s fault apple could not release a laptop with more than 16gb? Then why were PC laptops available with 32GB?
    - skunkworker 6y ago
      It was Intel's fault that there was no low power memory controller that would work with 32gb for a laptop. There were definitely PC laptops available with 32gb of ram, but the wired powered consumption doubles from ~6 to ~11/12 watts [1] [2] Reviews of pc laptops at the time (eg: Skylake) with 32/64gb of ram showed some detrimental battery life and it appears in Apple's case it wasn't a tradeoff they were willing to make. To me it seems as though Apple gave up and just put DDR4 into their laptop anyway and also increased the battery W-h from 76Wh in the 2016 model [3] to 83.6Wh in the 2018 [4] thus offsetting some of the battery life issues but there may have been other hardware improvements that reclaimed some battery life. As for the 13 inch MBP, the 2020 model was the first to include LPDDR4X and could allow the bump to go to 32gb but is much more battery constrained at 58Wh. [5] [1] https://macdaddy.io/macbook-pro-limited-16gb-ram/ https://macdaddy.io/macbook-pro-limited-16gb-ram/ [2] https://www.crucial.com/support/articles-faq-memory/how-much-power-does-memory-use https://www.crucial.com/support/articles-faq-memory/how-much... [3] https://support.apple.com/kb/SP749?locale=en_US https://support.apple.com/kb/SP749?locale=en_US [4] https://support.apple.com/kb/SP776?locale=en_US https://support.apple.com/kb/SP776?locale=en_US [5] https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-13/specs/ https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-13/specs/
derefr 6y ago
I'm pretty sure the MBP line won't actually "max out at 16GB"; they just haven't released the higher-specced MBP configurations yet. Think of it as a "some configurations are experiencing shipping delays" but where those "shipping delays" are ~1yr.

by genmud 6y ago

dylan604 6y ago

It wasn't until 2017ish before getting 32GB in a MacBook Pro. So the fact that they have 16GB in the first gen seems about right. According to Apple's propaganda and blogospere, the M1 is much more efficient not "needing" the extra RAM. That's just too much for my old dog to wrap my mind around.

cyberpunk 6y ago
I’m using one as a daily driver (red teaming) and it easily handles a couple busy vms, term, few services, editor, obsidian, slack/teams/whatever and browser.. I stopped even bothering carrying the charger with it.. Sometimes I look at activity monitor and it is swapping a bit but I don’t notice any perf degradation so I stopped thinking about it.. shrug
- genmud 6y ago
  I'm sure that swapping isn't a huge deal, but the big issue is around longevity of the SSD. If you have workloads that use more than 16gb of ram, swapping a lot will prematurely wear the SSD, which isn't replaceable.
  - cyberpunk 6y ago
    I think this has been largely debunked by now, early SSDs had these problems but newer ones? not so much..; I mean, here's what smart says about the drive in my Mac atm: Percentage Used: 0% Data Units Read: 12,515,207 [6.40 TB] Data Units Written: 13,202,995 [6.75 TB] Host Read Commands: 264,092,805 Host Write Commands: 158,635,815 Controller Busy Time: 0 Power Cycles: 188 Power On Hours: 223 The % used is (I think) the lost capacity due to wear, I've fairly hammered it so far and it's not even at 1%.. I'm pretty sure I'll get at least a few years out of it based on that..
    - dylan604 6y ago
      Hopefully, the keyboard lasts as long as the SSD. Previous gens spectacularly did not.
      - cyberpunk 6y ago
        Ha, seems to be a bit better. I kinda hate working on the laptop keyboard tho so I tend to use an external magic keyboard :}
      - gtm1260 6y ago
        If you care about the keyboard longevity, I'd get the macbook air or wait for the new macbook refresh when they bring the air keyboard over to the pro.
        Reason077 6y ago
        The MacBook Air keyboard is exactly the same as the Pro keyboard, except for the Touch Bar. Any problems with the Touch Bar are UX issues: I don't think anyone has questioned its longevity/reliability.
    - genmud 6y ago
      Uhh, that may be what apple is reporting but most SSDs only last for about 100-200TB of write, so I would take that percentage used with a grain of salt. They are probably counting wear leveling percentage used. On the low end assuming 200TBW that means you have used about 3.3% of the life of your SSD and on the high side you have used 6.75%. Lets say you got your M1 on release in November, that would mean you are using about 1.68%/month on the high end and .84%/month on the low end. Assume it lasts 200TBW, which I don't think they will, you would be on track for a 8 year lifespan of the SSD. Otherwise 4 years on the low end, assuming the write amount stays the same (which won't likely happen), which would imply you are using the same or less swap. Every year, I find that I use about 1-2gb more on average, so for me/my usage patterns I almost find the 16gb of memory in the MBPs to be a slap in the face. I have a 13'' and a 16'' MBP with 32/64gb respectively and I don't think I would find anything less acceptable. Right now, my typical memory usage is around 30-40gb when I run docker, vscode, chrome, slack, zoom, etc. I am not even running any VMs(other than the docker vm), I typically will spin those up elsewhere. For reference, this is my 16'' daily MBP after nearly a year (4.84TB write) and I typically pull down lots of logs/data. Available Spare: 100% Available Spare Threshold: 99% Percentage Used: 0% Data Units Read: 4,406,559 [2.25 TB] Data Units Written: 9,454,881 [4.84 TB] Host Read Commands: 183,307,692 Host Write Commands: 406,821,556
- jclardy 6y ago
  I replaced my i9 16” MBP with a 13” Air. Performance with Xcode is either the same or better on the Air. Battery life is the true game changer though. When I went out with the 16” I had to make sure I had 100% charge, if I wanted to use it for ~3-4 hours while out. With the Air I can grab it with 25% battery left and be fine for the same amount of time. The “actual” pro machines with M1 derivatives are going to be incredible…so long as apple doesn’t make another Touchbar/butterfly keyboard-esq mistake.
  - deergomoo 6y ago
    I also replaced a 16" (although i7) with a 13" Air. Best computing purchase I've ever made. I was lucky if I could even make it to 4 hours battery on the 16", but the real killer for me was heat and noise. It was like sitting in front of a little aeroplane all day long, and because the video out is wired up through the dedicated GPU, just plugging it into an external monitor added an extra 20W to dissipate. It also had weird sleep issues the entire time, if I left it connected to a monitor overnight I'd often sit down at my desk the next morning to find it burning hot, fans blasting, with the lid closed. So happy to see the back of that piece of crap. It got reasonable reviews at the time, I can only imagine that either no-one tested it with external monitors, or because it was the first model to drop the butterfly keyboard people just gave it a pass on everything else.
- omniscient_oce 6y ago
  I got the Air and when I was compiling Nodejs to install it the chassis got really hot. I read a lot about it barely ever getting warm but I guess those reviews were a little exaggerated.
whatever1 6y ago
Honestly the SSD is so fast, that for everyday workload you will not notice the lack of RAM even in an 8GB system (I am coming from a system with 32GB or RAM). But RAM is RAM, and using swap memory that aggressively can reduce the life span of the SSD very fast.
- EricE 6y ago
  Not true. I desperately wanted to keep my M1 MBA, but with Cities:Skylines I have enough mods and assets where I really do need 32GB of RAM. When you really need it, there is no substitute for RAM. When I loaded up a new game with minimal assets (it easily fit with the 16GB of RAM I had) the MBA played C:S smoother than my i7/1080ti gaming machine. I think if I can get a laptop with at least 32GB of RAM I won't have to maintain a Windows gaming machine and will be able to consolidate everything onto an M powered MacBook Pro. Now if Apple would just produce a 5K external monitor life would be perfect :)
genmud 6y ago
They say that because the SSD is fast and the performance hit for hitting swap isn't that big of a deal. Without mentioning that the SSD is soldered to the motherboard and is a wear item. The fact you can't swap hard drives is silly, almost like having a car with tires that can't be changed.
- EricE 6y ago
  SSD is NOT as fast as RAM. If you really need more RAM, do yourself a favor and wait until they come out with a machine that has more RAM. I'm waiting, rather impatiently. It was hard to return my M1 MBA but I think it will be well worth it in the long run.
coldtea 6y ago
>It wasn't until 2017ish before getting 32GB in a MacBook Pro. And that's on special customization option, that a handful of hardcores ever got...
- dylan604 6y ago
  And as soon as 32GB became available, those same hardcores where asking where the 64GB options were. I had workflows on desktops with only 32GB of RAM that would choke, but it was a Hackintosh, so I was able to bump up to 64GB and the issues went away. Which is why 16GB max is so hard for me to wrap my head around
  - josephg 6y ago
    Can you give some examples of workflows that need that much ram? I stay away from docker and VMs, and I really struggle to think of everyday situations where more than 16gb of ram is going to be worth it for me.
    - rsj_hn 6y ago
      IME if you are not doing video editing, it will be docker and VMs. So it makes sense that devs would want the 32g (standard at my work, too). When I got my own personal laptop. 16G was fine, and I haven't had issues.
    - dylan604 6y ago
      I shoot lots of timelapse on a full frame dslr RAW. I import my image sequences into after effects at full image size at 16bit color (the RAW is 14bit native). Exporting those 1:1 image size would choke on 32GB. Upping to 64GB saw the errors go away.
- minhazm 6y ago
  I'm not so sure it's so hardcore. The standard laptop that new engineers at LinkedIn get is the 16in Macbook Pro with Core i9 and 32 GB of RAM. I'm sure we're not the only ones issuing this spec, and it's not even the maxed out 64GB spec. For work the $400 difference between 16GB and 32GB is pretty negligible over the course of 3 yrs. Consider the cost of each engineer and $400 / 3yrs for even a tiny improvement in productivity is worth it.
GeekyBear 6y ago
>According to Apple's propaganda and blogospere, the M1 is much more efficient not "needing" the extra RAM. Marcan recently found custom instructions to handle memory compression / decompression in hardware. https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1362450439845781505 https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1362450439845781505
- saagarjha 6y ago
  These are not new and have been part of Apple’s ISA extensions for several years. For some reason marcan decided to blackbox them, but they’re fairly easy to find if you open the kernel in a disassembler so I’m not sure why he did.
  - mrkstu 6y ago
    New to Mac, new audience. People are used to iPhones being parsimonious with RAM, it’s new on Mac.
    - saagarjha 6y ago
      It's basically the same processor; it stands to reason that the instructions are the same (but maybe not used in the same way).
ksec 6y ago
>That's just too much for my old dog to wrap my mind around My theory is that Apple has specific hardware for much faster and better memory compression and decompression. macOS has always had memory compression but I think those are done with Software on CPU. You may also get some additional memory from Unified Memory. ( Not sure how it worked previously on macOS, so this is a reference from PC perspective. ) But Yes generally I agree, That's just too much for my old dog to wrap my mind around.
Reason077 6y ago
> ”According to Apple's propaganda and blogospere, the M1 is much more efficient not "needing" the extra RAM.” The M1 Macs come with very fast SSDs. I think what’s really going on here is that, with write speeds exceeding 2GB/s, macOS can use NVM almost as if it is RAM with little performance penalty. It works. With 8GB, my MacBook Air feels as if it has a lot more RAM than it does. The downside is increased wear on the SSD. My 512GB SSD has accumulated 7 TB of writes in the few weeks I’ve owned it.
skunkworker 6y ago
Wasn't the 32gb Macbook Pro infeasible (for battery life) initially because Intel kept on recycling their memory controller and it wasn't until the 8th gen processors where LPDDR4 was officially supported [1]. It appears that Apple gave up trying to do LPDDR4 on the 15/16inch [2] and released it with DDR4, while on the 13 inch they released a 32gb version using 3733MHz LPDDR4X [3]. [1] https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/05/17/intels-first-10nm-cannon-lake-processor-with-32gb-lpddr4-ram-support-ships https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/05/17/intels-first-10nm... [2] https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/07/12/apple-refreshes-macbook-pro-with-six-core-processors-32gb-of-ram https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/07/12/apple-refreshes-m... [3] https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/macbook-pro/13-inch-space-gray-2.0ghz-intel-core-i5-quad-core-processor-with-intel-iris-plus-graphics-1tb# https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/macbook-pro/13-inch-space...
- dylan604 6y ago
  So it was intel’s fault apple could not release a laptop with more than 16gb? Then why were PC laptops available with 32GB?
  - skunkworker 6y ago
    It was Intel's fault that there was no low power memory controller that would work with 32gb for a laptop. There were definitely PC laptops available with 32gb of ram, but the wired powered consumption doubles from ~6 to ~11/12 watts [1] [2] Reviews of pc laptops at the time (eg: Skylake) with 32/64gb of ram showed some detrimental battery life and it appears in Apple's case it wasn't a tradeoff they were willing to make. To me it seems as though Apple gave up and just put DDR4 into their laptop anyway and also increased the battery W-h from 76Wh in the 2016 model [3] to 83.6Wh in the 2018 [4] thus offsetting some of the battery life issues but there may have been other hardware improvements that reclaimed some battery life. As for the 13 inch MBP, the 2020 model was the first to include LPDDR4X and could allow the bump to go to 32gb but is much more battery constrained at 58Wh. [5] [1] https://macdaddy.io/macbook-pro-limited-16gb-ram/ https://macdaddy.io/macbook-pro-limited-16gb-ram/ [2] https://www.crucial.com/support/articles-faq-memory/how-much-power-does-memory-use https://www.crucial.com/support/articles-faq-memory/how-much... [3] https://support.apple.com/kb/SP749?locale=en_US https://support.apple.com/kb/SP749?locale=en_US [4] https://support.apple.com/kb/SP776?locale=en_US https://support.apple.com/kb/SP776?locale=en_US [5] https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-13/specs/ https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-13/specs/

derefr 6y ago

I'm pretty sure the MBP line won't actually "max out at 16GB"; they just haven't released the higher-specced MBP configurations yet. Think of it as a "some configurations are experiencing shipping delays" but where those "shipping delays" are ~1yr.