No longer possible to manually upgrade RAM in M1 Macs?

[toka]

It is no longer possible to manually upgrade RAM memory sticks in Macbook M1? For example if a buy a M1 with 8 GB ram and i want to upgrade to 16 gb?

This means i have to buy the M1 setup i want in a M1 macbook directly?

 

[Randy B. Singer]

It is no longer possible to manually upgrade RAM memory sticks in Macbook M1? For example if a buy a M1 with 8 GB ram and i want to upgrade to 16 gb?

There are no memory sticks (RAM cards) in an M1-based Mac. The RAM in an M1-based Mac is part of a soldered together integrated single chip package along with the CPU, GPU, and storage. This package is theoretically possible to deconstruct and upgrade, but doing so would be so difficult that in practice NO ONE is going to be doing it.

This means i have to buy the M1 setup i want in a M1 macbook directly?

Correct.

 

[chscag]

As Randy stated, Apple's new line of M1 Macs are not user upgradeable for memory or storage. Be sure to purchase for your future needs with regard to memory or storage. Yes, it can be expensive but a lot less expensive if you purchase an M1 and later find out it does not meet your needs.

 

[Slydude]

As usual, the guys have provided excellent advice. Can I make one suggestion with regards to identifying the amount of memory you may need. It's not a perfect solution but it might give you some numbers to work with:

1. It's best to start this little experiment from scratch. If your Mac is already running reboot it and log in as usual.
2. Open Activity Monitor, in Applications/Utilities and click on the Memory tab. Move the window somewhere where it can be seen.
3. Go about your normal routine but be sure to include your most demanding tasks. Keep an eye on the memory window and monitor the amount of memory being used. If your memory pressure stays green, the amount of memory you have may be sufficient If the graph is turning yellow you may need a bit more memory when you purchase the new machine.

 

[pm-r]

Can I make one suggestion with regards to identifying the amount of memory you may need. It's not a perfect solution but it might give you some numbers to work with:

That's a good suggestion Sly but it might be a little bit dated, especially if one is going to be thinking of purchasing one of the latest M1 Macs that seem to use memory much more efficiently.

Have a look and read some of the hits with a quick Google search and some articles suggest a huge Improvement so one doesn't want to be wasting their money on some expensive memory when unnecessary;

Try reading some of the Articles here:

do new M1 macs use memory more efficiently - Google Search

Typical comments:

With M1 chips in new Macs, Apple has a new “Unified Memory Architecture” (UMA) that dramatically speeds up memory performance.Nov. 30, 2020

Not only are the M1 Macs faster, cooler, and have better battery life than pretty much any comparable rival, they manage to do it with half the standard amount of RAM. ... The new M1 Apple Silicon Macs come with only 8GB RAM as standard, and yet they seem to perform as well as an Intel Mac with 16GB RAM or more.

And many more similar type remarks... So quite a change...


- Patrick
=======

 

[chscag]

Blah, blah, and more blah.....

The bottom line is that technology changes fast so it's always best to plan for the future. Ordering more memory than you need now is always a good idea. The same can be said for storage.

 

[Slydude]

@pm-r

I'm aware of some of the changes in the way that Macs manage memory now. I haven't made an extensive study of memory management in the M1 Macs but everything I have read suggests that they are even more efficient than current Intel Macs. That's why I suggested that the method I outlined would only be an estimate.

Even though the method I suggested isn't perfect that doesn't change the need to have some rough awareness of how much memory and storage your computing needs require. The old adage of buy as much computer as you can afford is OK but it has lead many users to purchase more machine than they needed. I'm merely providing a rough yardstick as "food for thought" so to speak.

 

[Randy B. Singer]

The bottom line is that technology changes fast so it's always best to plan for the future. Ordering more memory than you need now is always a good idea.

I'm very sorry, but I have to disagree. While users all presume that every new version of the Mac OS requires more RAM (and that may indeed be true for Windows), the opposite has been the actual case for Macs for close to a decade now. With each new version of the Mac OS, the Mac has had better (smarter) memory management and Apple has even added very advanced memory compression.

Memory Compression on the Mac Can Improve Performance

Compressed memory is part of the Mac. Your Mac can make better use of available RAM improving performance while preventing paging memory to disk.

macs.about.com

OS X 10.11 El Capitan: The MacStories Review

Force Touch Apple has opened up new features and APIs to third-party developers as well, though OS X El Capitan is nowhere near as third-party-centric as watchOS 2 is. New Force Touch APIs will let third-party developers take advantage of the new capabilities in Apple’s latest Mac lineup...

www.macstories.net

Users shouldn't be made to believe that they have to throw more money at hardware than they really need to.

I do, however, agree that you need to assess what your needs may be down the road when purchasing a new Mac. If you are a high school student now, and you expect to be studying in college for a career in advanced graphics, video, 3D modeling, etc., then in time you are going to find that you have a need for more RAM as you move up to using much more sophisticated professional-level software applications. It's good to plan for that in advance.

 

[pm-r]

Even though the method I suggested isn't perfect that doesn't change the need to have some rough awareness of how much memory and storage your computing needs require.

Hey Sly, I certainly was not disagreeing with your method, in fact, I would agree with it, but I just wanted to point out and maybe avoid the purchaser over-purchasing if one was getting a recent M1 Mac where the extra RAM may not really be required. And I think the extra 8 GB of memory would be about $250cdn which may not be too excessive for peace of mind and just in case situations.


- Patrick
=======

 

[chscag]

I'm very sorry, but I have to disagree.

Then we have to agree to disagree.

 

[jpdemers]

If you want to see somebody actually push an M1 Mac with 8GB of RAM into a situation where the memory is inadequate, using common software, check out this review:

Is the base MacBook Air M1/8GB powerful enough for you? - 9to5Mac

So I decided to pick up the base $999 MacBook Air` to see how it would hold up side-by-side with my 16-inch behemoth. The results are incredible.

9to5mac.com

That should go a long ways toward telling you whether you're likely to need the extra RAM.

 

[Raz0rEdge]

My answer to "Do I need more RAM" is always yes.

But then again my workflow demands it.

 

[chscag]

That should go a long ways toward telling you whether you're likely to need the extra RAM.

Good unscientific article (as the author says), however, future proofing should always be taken in account. The author also says that new ARM software should fly on these machines. Unless he has a crystal ball, that's not a given.

I've learned over the years that it's better to over equip your Mac with more memory and storage than you currently need. Of course not everyone can afford Apple's premium prices for memory and storage. That's understood.

 

[Randy B. Singer]

...

Is the base MacBook Air M1/8GB powerful enough for you? - 9to5Mac

So I decided to pick up the base $999 MacBook Air` to see how it would hold up side-by-side with my 16-inch behemoth. The results are incredible.

9to5mac.com

That should go a long ways toward telling you whether you're likely to need the extra RAM.

Nice pick up! I think that article was pretty definitive:

"...actual memory used in Activity Monitor, even under the highest of loads described above, never even hit the full 8GB."

"I think the clear answer is that, for the vast majority of people, even for those who lean on the “professional” side of laptop multitasking with several apps and a dozen browser tabs and multiple types of media playing at the same time, the base models of these computers with 8GB of RAM are going to be enough. Not only are they enough — it’s seriously difficult to get them to slow down. "

 

[MacInWin]

I think that the new SoC approach from Apple is going to change a lot of paradigms we used to use for assessing what to purchase. That article certainly is strong evidence that going forward the average user won't need to think about large memory (RAM) as we used to. Just as SDDs changed our approach to maintenance of storage (no more defragmentation, no worry of rotational speeds, etc), so the SoC will make definite changes in other areas. I would think that going forward, storage size, connectivity (ports) and battery life are going to be the bigger factors for most portable computers from Apple. And eventually the separation of RAM and STORAGE will get very fuzzy. After all, is it really swapping if the OS moves something from one place in the memory cells to another? Or will the system simply re-label the work being swapped out as STORAGE instead of working RAM, and then reverse that when the work can be swapped back in? In both of those cases the "penalty" for swap will be so small as to be inconsequential. And at that point, maybe the amount of RAM becomes immaterial?

 

[exncite]

Blah, blah, and more blah.....

The bottom line is that technology changes fast so it's always best to plan for the future. Ordering more memory than you need now is always a good idea. The same can be said for storage.

I hear what you're saying. My problem is that Apple keeps coming out with newer operating systems (IMHO so they can say they are cool) that you'll have to buy a new computer anyway because nothing will be supported on the older systems, so why spend the money up front on more memory so you can protect yourself from future needs.

I've always favored Apple over Microsoft but am beginning to get disgusted with Apple as well.

 

[MacInWin]

@exncite, that is a strange take, at least to me. I have a mid-2015 MBP, now 6 years old, that runs Big Sur just fine and is on the supported list for Monterey at this point. I will have gotten at least 6-7 years of service out of it. Yes, technology has changed, but this machine just keeps chugging along. Nothing Apple has introduced in any of the updates from when I bought it have not been supported. At the time I bought it, I did get more memory and a larger storage drive than I thought I needed at the time, but I have grown into it. But none of the OS upgrades made me think I needed to get a new computer. Now, I do want a new machine when Apple releases the new 16" model, hopefully an Apple Silicon machine, but that's because I want the Silicon, not that this machine is somehow crippled by the newer OS version. The jump in technology from this machine to a 6-7 year newer Mx machine is just too much to ignore. But I'm not forced by the OS upgrades.

 

[Randy B. Singer]

...My problem is that Apple keeps coming out with newer operating systems (IMHO so they can say they are cool) that you'll have to buy a new computer anyway because nothing will be supported on the older systems, ....

I think that is not at all a correct generalization. The only exception is that with Catalina Apple depreciated 32-bit apps, but that had little to do with the model of Macintosh that you have, and it isn't an event that is likely to be repeated anytime soon.

I virtually support a huge number of Macintosh users. I'm seeing most of them easily getting 7 years worth of use out of their computers, and many getting as much as about 11 years out of them. Apple isn't turning older Macs into bricks.

The limiting factor to the lifespan of a Macintosh used to be the rotating disk hard drive. Those aren't made by Apple, Apple purchases them from big suppliers. Rotating disk hard drives statistically become unreliable after about four to five years, and they become unacceptably unreliable after about seven years. With the advent of SSD's, Macs are starting to last for some folks for well over a decade with no hardships.

 

[exncite]

@exncite, that is a strange take, at least to me. I have a mid-2015 MBP, now 6 years old, that runs Big Sur just fine and is on the supported list for Monterey at this point. I will have gotten at least 6-7 years of service out of it. Yes, technology has changed, but this machine just keeps chugging along. Nothing Apple has introduced in any of the updates from when I bought it have not been supported. At the time I bought it, I did get more memory and a larger storage drive than I thought I needed at the time, but I have grown into it. But none of the OS upgrades made me think I needed to get a new computer. Now, I do want a new machine when Apple releases the new 16" model, hopefully an Apple Silicon machine, but that's because I want the Silicon, not that this machine is somehow crippled by the newer OS version. The jump in technology from this machine to a 6-7 year newer Mx machine is just too much to ignore. But I'm not forced by the OS upgrades.

For both you and Randy, I apologize for speaking out. What you both have said is correct. I also have a 2015 iMac. My frustration stems from the fact that I can't increase the memory and upgrading the OS (from Mojave) won't allow me to run some of the programs I use. If I want to upgrade to a bigger screen, a faster HD or more memory, I'm stuck having to buy a new computer. Apple used to be geared toward a new way of computing without the threat of virus. I feel that, like the whistleblower pointed out about Facebook, Apple has become more concerned about profits. That is the only reason I can think of.

I wonder if buying a new one and reinstalling backward to Mojave would help? Best of both worlds (until they stop supporting Mojave).

 

[MacInWin]

For both you and Randy, I apologize for speaking out. What you both have said is correct. I also have a 2015 iMac. My frustration stems from the fact that I can't increase the memory and upgrading the OS (from Mojave) won't allow me to run some of the programs I use. If I want to upgrade to a bigger screen, a faster HD or more memory, I'm stuck having to buy a new computer. Apple used to be geared toward a new way of computing without the threat of virus. I feel that, like the whistleblower pointed out about Facebook, Apple has become more concerned about profits. That is the only reason I can think of.

I wonder if buying a new one and reinstalling backward to Mojave would help? Best of both worlds (until they stop supporting Mojave).

I don't know what you mean by "Apple used to be geared toward a new way of computing without the threat of virus." They still are. There are no viruses loose now for macOS. There is malware, like browser hijackers, etc, but no viruses. You still have to authorize any software installation and Gatekeeper will at least warn you of any new installation it doesn't know about.

I don't know what the link is between the Facebook whistleblower and Apple, but Apple has always been about profits. It's a company that makes hardware, after all, so selling that hardware is for profit. Now they have services added (iCloud, Music, etc), so that produces profit as well.

I don't know what you mean by, "That is the only reason I can think of." For what? Apple creates new technology and moves on. It did that when it moved from the PowerPC to Intel and now to Apple Silicon (Mx).

And you cannot install an older version of the OS on a machine that came from the factory with a newer one. In addition, the new M1/x systems have an entirely different CPU architecture that is not supported by any OS older than Big Sur, so buying a new one won't let you install Mojave. You could, of course, get a refurb, or a used system that can run Mojave, but not a NEW one.