Current RAM Situation

My primary computer has:


  • Total voters
    172
  • Poll closed .

ProMacUser

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,023
[lots of stuff]

Hope that helps.
Honestly, I understood all that stuff. What I didn't get is the particulars from vm_stat, because the man page would say something like "Pages free: the total number of free pages in the system." which doesn't really clarify "pages free."

EDIT: It's like that for pretty much every value:

Pages purged

the total number of pages that have been purged.

File-backed pages

the total number of pages that are file-backed (non-swap)
 

japtor

Ars Legatus Legionis
14,010
I got a 32GB MBP M1. My 3D cad app brings it to its knees on the reg. I weep rage silently to myself about saving what was it ±400$?
Hmm do you know how much of that is RAM vs general CPU/GPU performance? And how complex is your modeling? I plan to get into learning 3D modeling for printing stuff, my 16GB M2 MBA has been vaguely ok enough once I turn settings down, figured things would be significantly better with the M4 Pro and 24GB...didn't think I'd need 48 and would like to save that $400 or whatever.
 

gabemaroz

Ars Tribunus Militum
1,704
Honestly, I understood all that stuff. What I didn't get is the particulars from vm_stat, because the man page would say something like "Pages free: the total number of free pages in the system." which doesn't really clarify "pages free."
Yeah, I wasn't sure how far down the lack of clarity went. None of that stuff is very useful without something to compare it to, and even more it's all a function of uptime as well. Hence the BLUF – just watch memory pressure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: continuum
This topic has now made me wonder… If the model for Apple Intelligence takes up 7GB as rumoured, does this mean that most of the new “extra” 8GB in base model Macs will be effectively spoken for? (I.e. not available for other non-AI tasks)

No; if it's barely used it'll get swapped out and loaded on demand. That load time will be very efficient.

It'll swap it out on an as-needed basis, not as a single large block. Chances are much of the model won't change either, so the first thing will be to load it, the second will be to persist that memory image to storage.

If you use it extensively then sure, the model will be constantly busy, but otherwise that memory will be readily available for something else if needed.

The level of efficiency of mapping memory into linear address blocks on a 64bit machine is crazy.
 

gabemaroz

Ars Tribunus Militum
1,704
It'll swap it out on an as-needed basis, not as a single large block. Chances are much of the model won't change either, so the first thing will be to load it, the second will be to persist that memory image to storage.

If you use it extensively then sure, the model will be constantly busy, but otherwise that memory will be readily available for something else if needed.
This is what I’m seeing. I ran the summary function on some emails yesterday.

About 1GB of additional RAM usage in WindowServer with a brief five second or so CPU spike and a delay in response for the first run. Each subsequent run was nearly instant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sleepcountry

eas

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,313
This topic has now made me wonder… If the model for Apple Intelligence takes up 7GB as rumoured, does this mean that most of the new “extra” 8GB in base model Macs will be effectively spoken for? (I.e. not available for other non-AI tasks)
Where did that rumor come from? Apple said it was, what, a 3-billion parameter parameter model and, by my reading, was quantized to ~3.5bits/parameter. That's not going to take up 7GB. They've said that the adapters used to specialize the model for specific tasks are in the 10s of megabytes each.


No; if it's barely used it'll get swapped out and loaded on demand. That load time will be very efficient.

It'll swap it out on an as-needed basis, not as a single large block. Chances are much of the model won't change either, so the first thing will be to load it, the second will be to persist that memory image to storage.

If you use it extensively then sure, the model will be constantly busy, but otherwise that memory will be readily available for something else if needed.

The level of efficiency of mapping memory into linear address blocks on a 64bit machine is crazy.
The model is trained with a kajillion hours of GPU time. It's not changed on your Mac. Because it doesn't change, it'll be a memory mapped read-only file. Because it's a memory mapped read-only file it won't be swapped out at all, the needed memory will just be zeroed and mapped into another processes space. When needed again it'll be paged back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert

Aeonsim

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,259
Subscriptor++
I had 16GB in my work M1 Mac Pro, it was barely enough when I was mainly doing remote work via SSH and web-browsing (4-5GB of Swap constantly), but would have issues with any decent sized local data analysis (R, Jupyter notebooks etc). Switched to a project that required a lot more software development (Visual Studio Code, Scala, Rust and Python) and local data analysis (Python, Polars and PyTorch) and it was not sufficient was getting "you have run out of memory errors every couple of days (maxed out swap)", or when ever I ran a decent sized analysis.

Switched to a 32GB M2 Pro, and that is sufficient for most things, I've not hit the out of memory error since, but there are points with moderate data analysis, a couple of IDE's and Jupyter notebooks open were it is tight (10-16GB Swap).

Desktop is 64GB + 12GB VRAM and that's much nicer, never any memory problems and if I'm looking at datasets that need more than 64GB of RAM they're typically hungry for more CPU/GPU compute than my 7900 can deliver, so at that point they get transferred to to a AWS VM (128-256GB RAM) or one of our HPC servers (512-1024GB RAM, 64+ cores).

Partner was running a 32GB desktop, but that wasn't sufficient for GIS workloads and heavy stats modelling, so bumped her to 96GB which has solved the problem (probably only needs ~64GB, given the typical workloads).
 
  • Like
Reactions: continuum

leet

Ars Praefectus
3,069
Subscriptor++
I am new at the platform, but the activity monitor information confuses me a little bit, it seems MacOS just takes most of what is available even with very light work being done like browsing with a few tabs open.
Yes, that is by design. Anything loaded in to RAM stays there until the memory is needed for something else. Which makes sense, because unused RAM is wasted RAM, and if you go back to what you were doing it's orders of magnitude faster if it's in RAM vs. storage. Pay no attention to Memory Used, Swap Used will tell you if you are using more memory than you have.
 
Yes, this is easy to show on linux with the "free" command, you simply go by the available column, which adds free memory to memory used for buffers/cache. For example in the LXC below, of the 8Gi RAM allocated, 6.2Gi is actually usable by programs, even though only 1.5Gi is technically "free".

Code:
11:29:53 root@src:~# free -h
               total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
Mem:           8.0Gi       1.8Gi       1.5Gi       0.0Ki       4.6Gi       6.2Gi
Swap:          512Mi          0B       512Mi

This is shockingly difficult to replicate on MacOS in the CLI but in the GUI Activity Monitor application you can take memory used - cached files and then subtract that from physical memory to get the actual amount of memory available for use. Still kind of a pain in the butt. And no, homebrew doesn't have any psutils free command, I checked. There's sketchy stuff on github with like 4 stars, and some scripts on stackoverflow that all disagree on their output, that's it.

Anyway for example on my mac with 64GB RAM, I have 46.5GB used, 22.3GB cached. 46.5-22.3=24.2, then 64-24.2=39.8. So I have 39.8GB of RAM available for use.
 
Last edited:

Cranioclast

Ars Legatus Legionis
10,846
Subscriptor++
I haven't bothered looking at Activity Monitor with my AS Macs, as I've rarely run into any performance issues to investigate. This thread made me curious, so I opened it up on my work-issued 16GB M2 Pro MacBook to find 17GB swap used. Maybe putting 64GB in my personal machine wasn't overkill after all?
 
Swap usage isn't necessarily bad, often the OS will swap-out infrequently used data. What impacts performance is active swapping. On MacOS you want to look for memory pressure which is kind of an aggregated metric; there is a CLI program for this conveniently named "memory_pressure" and the activity monitor also shows it under the memory tab.
 

japtor

Ars Legatus Legionis
14,010
Ended up ordering a 24GB M4 Pro MBP 14. My cheapness outweighed my paranoia, and generally being fine with 16GB lately, so hoping the extra 8GB cushion is good enough my uses. 48 would push it past my mental budget and be way overkill for me...and close enough to the Max/36 model that I'd considered that too, but ultimately decided to save my money.
 

amateurpro

Ars Tribunus Militum
2,261
Our 2017 Intel home iMac has user-installed 40Gb RAM which has made a huge difference in its usability 6+ years later.

We're considering getting a new M4 iMac, but probably only with 24Gb RAM. (We've decided to spend $200 on nano-texture glass instead of a measly 8Gb more RAM.) Which makes me a little nervous, frankly.
 

ant1pathy

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
6,984
Our 2017 Intel home iMac has user-installed 40Gb RAM which has made a huge difference in its usability 6+ years later.

We're considering getting a new M4 iMac, but probably only with 24Gb RAM. (We've decided to spend $200 on nano-texture glass instead of a measly 8Gb more RAM.) Which makes me a little nervous, frankly.
What is that computer typically used for? The upgrade from a 2017 Intel model to an M4 is going to be huge on it's own.
 

amateurpro

Ars Tribunus Militum
2,261
What is that computer typically used for? The upgrade from a 2017 Intel model to an M4 is going to be huge on it's own.
A little of everything but the most processor/RAM intensive tasks will be photo (not video) storage and editing, and music production with Ableton Live. The rest will be light work: writing, web browsing and music/video streaming (although my User account typically has 30 Brave tabs open).

Right now under macOS Ventura, Activity Monitor says I'm using 24.69Gb RAM with 18.99Gb App Memory... and I've just got Brave and Safari open, with Apple Music and Messages (and a ton of menubar utilities).

So I'm pretty wary of just getting 24Gb RAM in a new iMac. (I'm on the fence about getting a loaded mini Pro and an 800 Acer 5K monitor for around the same price -- uglier but faster, more RAM, and a bigger screen -- because the rest of the family prefers an all-in-one. And purple.)

I suppose I could spend an extra $200 to go from 24Gb RAM to 32Gb, but that pricing really grates on me, especially since the the iMac with 24Gb/1Tb/extended keyboard/trackpad is already $2600 with tax. (Though I'm likely to drop down $200 on the SSD upgrade and instead spend $350 on a 4Tb USB4 external drive I'll set up as a boot drive.)
 

ant1pathy

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
6,984
A little of everything but the most processor/RAM intensive tasks will be photo (not video) storage and editing, and music production with Ableton Live. The rest will be light work: writing, web browsing and music/video streaming (although my User account typically has 30 Brave tabs open).

Right now under macOS Ventura, Activity Monitor says I'm using 24.69Gb RAM with 18.99Gb App Memory... and I've just got Brave and Safari open, with Apple Music and Messages (and a ton of menubar utilities).

So I'm pretty wary of just getting 24Gb RAM in a new iMac. (I'm on the fence about getting a loaded mini Pro and an 800 Acer 5K monitor for around the same price -- uglier but faster, more RAM, and a bigger screen -- because the rest of the family prefers an all-in-one. And purple.)

I suppose I could spend an extra $200 to go from 24Gb RAM to 32Gb, but that pricing really grates on me, especially since the the iMac with 24Gb/1Tb/extended keyboard/trackpad is already $2600 with tax. (Though I'm likely to drop down $200 on the SSD upgrade and instead spend $350 on a 4Tb USB4 external drive I'll set up as a boot drive.)
A very close friend does (personal) music production / editing with Ableton on a base model M1 Mac Mini with 8GB of RAM. More is certainly better, but I expect you're vastly overestimating the actual amount needed for the tasks you have listed :).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert

gabemaroz

Ars Tribunus Militum
1,704
The thing is, if the system runs out of RAM and uses the SSD for swap the performance hit will be an order of magnitude slower.

Consider that the M1 to M3 chip was like 1.3x faster. A nice boost but outside of niche workflows, probably not enough to justify an upgrade.

Meanwhile, RAM bandwidth is around 66GB/s for the M1 while SSD bandwidth is about 5GB/s. An enormous performance difference.

With modern Apple silicon, I suspect users will find RAM limiting longevity far more than the CPU or GPU.
 

amateurpro

Ars Tribunus Militum
2,261
The thing is, if the system runs out of RAM and uses the SSD for swap the performance hit will be an order of magnitude slower.

With modern Apple silicon, I suspect users will find RAM limiting longevity far more than the CPU or GPU.
I know. I'm just really disgusted by the idea of paying another $200 for just an additional 8Gb RAM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gabemaroz
2022 Air with 24GB RAM. I just kind of leave apps and browser tabs open between restarts. This is what happens when I let a hog loose (Activity Monitor, asitop):

Screenshot 2024-11-25 at 16.46.29.png

Screenshot 2024-11-25 at 16.46.14.png


It's been three days since I last restarted and I have 68 Safari tabs, three electron apps (and Chrome itself), IINA, five Pixelmator Pro projects, and Sublime with a bunch of markdown files open (plus some misc. stuff, Messages/Mail/Terminal tabs). The hog here is Whiskey running Steam + Metal Gear Solid V, which appears to have a memory leak when running via Wine. Thats using ~7GB; Figma wants ~2GB, and Pixelmator ~1.5GB. htop shows real, immediate memory usage:

Screenshot 2024-11-25 at 16.46.19.png


As I'm typing this post with MGSV idling CPU usage is ~100% E/~70% P, SoC package power is ~6.5W and it is thermally throttling. System responsiveness is not perceptibly worse. Under normal circumstances htop shows ~12GB used with no swap and no compressed memory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: continuum

leet

Ars Praefectus
3,069
Subscriptor++
An update after a few weeks with my base M4 Mini. Memory usage per Activity Monitor hovers between 10 GB and 14 GB used regardless of what I'm doing. Currently have Safari with 6 tabs open, Music, Numbers, BB Edit, 1Password, Passwords, Outlook, Messages, Spotify, Tips, Activity Monitor and Preview open. Swap is at 0. I think my last restart was shortly after I set it up and applied the latest updates. 2 GB Wired and 5 GB compressed.

Browsing the web caused swapping frequently with my 8 GB M1 Mini.
 

JimCampbell

Ars Praefectus
3,336
Subscriptor
I have to say, I'm fascinated by the fact that even here, on a heavily self-selecting techie/Mac enthusiast sample, just shy of 75% of the respondants are working with 48GB or under, with the single largest cohort being ~16GB.

I've literally just bought a new MBP — the stock configuration from Amazon (£300 off in the Black Friday sale!) came with 36GB and based on my experience of using my M1 with 32GB for the last three years, I'm pretty confident that 36 will be more than enough for my work.

(I mean, obviously, Apple's eye-watering prices for RAM upgrades are going to be a factor, but if there was any group on the internet that was going to shell out for gob-loads of RAM, I'd have thought this one would be it.)
 

SportivoA

Ars Tribunus Militum
1,746
That's just about where people put their money. Apple demands a lot for more RAM. If they were just the delta between grades of the current gen of paired DDRx sticks or a bit more, a lot of us would probably take that capacity bump for the heck of it. But we don't really need it and Apple Silicon is a good steward of what RAM you have, true heavy use not withstanding. Now that I've completed my week's wallet hits, I'm still at 16 GB of RAM on all the (incoming) Macs. Since the heaviest stuff I'll be doing is music transcoding, quick photo editing, and keeping my MacPorts installed software up to date (a fairly heavy hit since they don't have a lot of binaries due to limited project hardware for MacOS 15/ARM-64). For those that do push on VMs, video, CAD/rendering, well, they did justify the bump and made it happen.
 

benwiggy

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,281
I have 32Gb on both my Macs (MBP, Mini). In my experience, "used" RAM plus "cached files" always equals all the RAM. If my used RAM goes down, cached files goes up.
I do some audio work, and sample libraries have multi-GB audio files that must be loaded into RAM to effect playback.

Preview is using 3GB right now, as I've got several large PDFs (scanned pages) up, too.

Screenshot.png


I did test a 16GB M1 MBP, but the pressure was too high, so I returned it and got the 32GB model.