How Much RAM Is Enough?
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
by Charles W. Moore
In my profile of the new MacBook revision last week, I mused that "The doubling of the RAM ceiling to 4 GB is nice to have available, but I wonder how many MacBook users will actually ever install more than the 2 GB that the previous models supported. I would assume that anyone who really needed 4 GB of RAM would be buying a MacBook Pro anyway."
As you will see in the mailbag section below, some readers took issue with that assumption, and on sober second thought, I'm inclined to think they are right.
Ad: Scan MacBook RAM prices from several vendors at Mac Prices.
My current number one notebook, a 17" PowerBook G4, currently has 1.5 GB of RAM installed, and it's no more than adequate for my needs, and a lot of the time the computer would definitely be more comfortable with 2GB. Since the MacIntel platform is even more memory-hungry than the G4, plus the fact that the MacBook's Intel GMA X3100 integrated video chip bleeds off 144 MB of system RAM for graphics support, I can see that for the sort of use I put my notebook through, the new MacBook would be struggling a bit with "just" 2 GB of RAM, so the new 4 GB ceiling is good news.
It's a matter of mentally adjusting.
My first Mac, a 1987 Mac PLus, cam loaded up with a princely 1 MB of RAM, and I recall that it cost me in the neighborhood of Can$100 to have it upgraded to a more expansive 2.5 MB. I couldn't quite justify going whole hog and ponying up for the maximum 4 MB that machine would support. Having 2.5 MB meant that System 6's "MultiFinder" feature actually became useful, and I was able to run Microsoft Word and HyperCard simultaneously without having to quit one in order to run the other. That was cool.
My next Mac, an AIO LC 520, came with 8MB of RAM, which seemed luxurious by comparison, but I eventually upgraded to 20 MB, My first PowerBook, a 5300, also shipped with 8MB of RAM, but I quickly upgraded it to 24 MB with a 16 MB module (which I think cost about Can$240 at the time, which was enough to let me create a RAM disk and run more quickly and in dead silence with the hard drive spun down. A 16 MB RAM disk was sufficient for a stripped-down System 7.5.x System Folder, a minimum install of Microsoft Word 5.1, my GlobalFax software (this was before the Internet reached this neck of the woods), and room for whatever files I had on the go.
When I bought my next PowerBook, a 233 MHz WallStreet, I ordered it with a 64 MB RAM upgrade, for a total of 96 MB, which proved adequate until OS 9 came along, at which point it was necessary to take it up a notch to 128 MB, which is what that machine, still in use my my wife, has today.
The Pismo PowerBook G3 that succeeded the WallStreet as my main production machine came with 256 MB of RAM in the form of two 128 MB sticks in the two RAM slots. That was more than ample for running OS 9, but when OS X became a factor, I upgraded to 640 MB by pulling one of the 128 MB sticks and replacing it with a 512 MB module. I'm still using that configuration in the Pismo running OS 10.4 Tiger, bit it really wants a full gigabyte.
When I bought my 700 MHx G3 iBook at New Years 2003, I immediately ordered a 512 MB RAM upgrade, which maxed out that machine at 640 MB. It does very well running Tiger, but it would be better with more RAM if that were possible.
As noted, my 17" PowerBook has 1.5 GB of RAM installed, which I figured would be way more than ample when I bought the machine in February, 2005, but it hasn't turned out to be.
So yes, the critics are no doubt correct. 2 GB of RAM in a MacBook is likely the bare minimum you need for more than basic computing, and folks who buy this latest MacBook revision would indeed be well-advised to go with the full 4 GB that it now supports.
I guess the bottom line here is that the old axiom about buying the most RAM you can afford (or maxing out your machine's RAM support ceiling) still holds.
On to the mailbag.
Santa Rosa MacBook
New MacBooks
New MacBook and RAM
Re: New MB
Leopard
New cat
From David Walker
Charles,
The new MacBooks only run Leopard and, in fact, only run their own special version of Leopard. The retail version doesn't install on them.
So maybe it's time for you to pick up a refurbished early 2007 MacBook.
David
Thanks David;
Urk! What's this about the retail version of Leopard not installing?
That sounds unacceptably kludgy.
Think I'll bide my time for a while yet. Hopefully a firmware update will unblock the install issue.
Charles
Re: Santa Rosa MacBook
From David Walker
Charles,
This isn't a new situation. New Macs have often come with their own version of the OS that's newer than the retail one. When the iMacs came in bright colours many of them came with OS 9.0.3, a version completely unique to them. It wasn't even possible to update 9.0 to 9.0.3 via an updater. This is the same thing. The Santa Rosa based MacBook needs a newer version of Leopard than you can buy on the shelf.
David
Hi David;
Good point. People who buy these MacBooks will want to keep their software install disks in a safe place if the generic Leopard install disk won't work!
Charles
From Chris;
Hello Charles.
Thank you for your insights in your article on the new Macbooks.
I am high on them too and am highly recommending them to friends looking for a new laptop.
One point I have to disagree with you on is your statement that... "The doubling of the RAM ceiling to 4 GB is nice to have available, but I wonder how many MacBook users will actually ever install more than the 2 GB that the previous models supported. I would assume that anyone who really needed 4 GB of RAM would be buying a MacBook Pro anyway."
I think that much the same thing was said a year or so ago about upgrading to 2GB of RAM on the previous generations of Macbooks. Your thinking is probably connected with the idea that 4GB of RAM is very expensive... which it was a year ago. But what about today? Well, 4GB today (2 x 2GB matching banks from a reputable vendor like OWC) costs $155, which almost seems to be a misprint, but I just checked and it's true. And that is about the same price as ONE bank of 1GB RAM for the Macbooks cost about 1 year ago.
As to "really needing" 4GB of RAM, I tend to adhere to the simplistically effective thinking that you should buy as much RAM for your Mac as you can afford at the time. That said, I think a new Macbook with 4GB of RAM (at $155 + shipping) is fantastic value. It also "future-proofs" you for ever more RAM-hungry applications, including running Windows on your Mac. The Macbook also has one of my favorite Mac portable features (which the Macbook Pro unfortunately lacks): being able to easily upgrade your hard disk yourself; this too is a nice feature to future-proof your Macbook. Like the 4GB of RAM, when prices on enormous 2.5" drives starts to fall in a year or so, you can upgrade to heretofore impossible (and impossibly expensive) drive sizes, say, 300GB for $150 (though maybe even less). And not only does the Macbook make upgrading RAM and HD easy, you can also save a lot of money and get a longer warranty (compared to Apple's prices). The 4GB RAM you get from OWC or almost any other store has a lifetime warranty, and many top-brand 2.5" hard drives have warranties of 3 or 5 years, if I remember correctly.
All the best.
Chris
Hi Chris;
Yeah, I hear you. When I bought this 17" PowerBook in February, 2006, I figured 1.5 GB of RAM would be extravagantly ample. It wasn't long before I was wishing I had more.
On the other hand, I'm currently running Tiger 10.4 on my two G4 550 MHz upgraded Pismos with 640 MB and 578 MB of RAM respectively, and my G3 iBook with 640 MB as well (in that instance the maximum it will support), and getting along reasonably well, although I do notice a distinct difference between even the 578 MB and 640 MB.
With the MacBook, that 144 MB bled off by the Intel GMA X3100 integrated video chip also has to be accounted for, so on sober second thought, you're probably right; 2 MB may not be enough.
Charles
From Mike Perlman
I don't agree with you about the RAM. I'm planning to buy a new MacBook and I'm going to load it with 4GB and a 200MB 7200RPM hard disk. I would like to see a speed test with this config. comparing it to a MacBook Pro with the regular config 2GB RAM and 5400 rpm hard disk.
Hi Mike;
That's a benchmark I'd like to see as well.
As I noted in my reply to Chris above, I'm coming around to your way of thinking about the 4 GB of RAM issue.
Charles
From Mike Perlman
Two points to remember:
1. The Intel machines need more RAM
2. Costs of RAM have continued to plummet. The 4Gb MacBook costs about the same as last year's 2GB MacBook.
Mike
Hi Mike;
Excellent points both.
Charles
From Oliver Starkey
Leopard is quite an improvement over Tiger in my estimation. Much faster.n I have the first iteration of the Macbook. If you can live with the temporary application incompatibilities I wouldn't hesitate to go to Leopard.
Oliver Starkey
Hi Oliver;
My copy of Leopard is at this writing somewhere in the postal system making its way from California to Nova Scotia, so I hope I'll be finding out first-hand soon.
I keep two systems installed on separate partitions of my hard drive, so I intend to have Tiger still there as a known-dependable backup for the foreseeable future while I'm getting to know the new cat.
Charles
Hi Charles,
I look forward to your review in an upcoming column. I suspect that since a lot of your work is related to your income you might stay in Tiger for a while. Nonetheless I feel you'll eventually make a happy transition to Leopard.
I believe Appleinsider is reporting an Apple subcompact coming up in January. Reportedly it has flash storage and no optical drive. If you remember my correspondence with you a long time ago this was something I speculated might happen in laptops. We'll see if it comes true.
I see the iTouch can now enter calendar events. With that deficiency resolved I'm going to have to start debating if that is going to be my Xmas present to myself.
Cheers
O.S.
Hi Oliver;
I'm definitely going to keep Tiger locked and loaded on my second hard drive partition for the foreseeable future, and I anticipate using OS 10.4 on my Pismos for years yet to come.
The scuttlebutt from AppleInsider, as well as Piper Jaffrey's Gene Munster who says he's 75% certain an ultralight MacBook "or possibly an entirely new product" will be coming in January at Macworld Expo, is exciting, and unless some stupendous deal were ti materialize, I'm now going to wait and see before making any hardware move. This old G4 PowerBook is still doing a superb job.
Charles
Note: Letters to 'Book Mystique Mailbag may or may not be published at the editor's discretion. Correspondents' email addresses will NOT be published unless the correspondent specifically requests publication. Letters may be edited for length and/or context.
Opinions expressed in postings to PowerBook Mystique MailBag are owned by the respective correspondents and not necessarily shared or endorsed by the Editor and/or PowerBook Central management.
If you would prefer that your message not appear in 'Book Mystique Mailbag, we would still like to hear from you. Just clearly mark your message "NOT FOR PUBLICATION," and it will not be published.
CM
Note: Letters to PowerBook Mystique Mailbag may or may not be published at the editor's discretion. Correspondents' email addresses will NOT be published unless the correspondent specifically requests publication. Letters may be edited for length and/or context.
Opinions expressed in postings to PowerBook Mystique MailBag are owned by the respective correspondents and not necessarily shared or endorsed by the Editor and/or PowerBook Central management.
If you would prefer that your message not appear in PowerBook Mystique Mailbag, we would still like to hear from you. Just clearly mark your message "NOT FOR PUBLICATION," and it will not be published.
CM