[smeagol222]

hey everyone- just about to get a macbook with either 1gb or 2gb of Ram. dont know which one to get- will 2gb be just an overkill? or becuase it doesnt have a seperate graphics card will i need 2gb??

any help would be great

thanks

[mduell]

Two

[kennedy]

You certainly do not NEED 2GB to run the vast majority of apps.
HOWEVER, if you like to run multiple of the memory hogs at once, switching back and forth between them, the extra memory can greatly improve responsiveness.

If you plan to use Parallels, get 2GB.
If you use multiple iLife apps a lot, get 2GB.
If you have a lot of photos in iPhoto, it alone will enjoy 2GB.

[smeagol222]

im planning on using photoshop, parallels, corel etc. being graphic artist need apps that are memory intensive-

[philatduke]

Originally Posted by smeagol222

im planning on using photoshop, parallels, corel etc. being graphic artist need apps that are memory intensive-

my finace is a graphic designer and uses InDesign, Photoshop, Illustrator, etc... heavily. we got her a macbook 1.8 Ghz w/512 MB ram installed and she said it runs s-l-o-w. from what i've read, even 1GB won't even cut it, so i'd suggest to get 2GB. i just order 2gigs and should be in tomorrow. i'll let you know how much an improvement it is if i get a chance.

[smeagol222]

heh yeha im testing a 1.83ghz 512mb and its slowWWWW!

[dankar]

I am using my Macbook 2ghz with 2gb ram for graphic design when I am home, as that allows me to 'bring work home'. You would need 2gb ram if you plan to do some serious work on the Macbook.

[smeagol222]

sweet as thanks- i think ill go for the 2gb now

[b11051973]

I put 2 GB of ram in my MacBook.

I ordered a 160 GB hdd last week. When I get my MacBook back from getting fixed for the RSD problem, I'll put the hdd in.

[drnkn_stylz]

I would definitely get the 2GB. Don't get it from Apple however as they charge up the butt prices. This is my plan, along with swapping a 7200rpm Seagate HDD. After that the MacBook will be more than fast enough for my needs. I do use Photoshop CS, iPhoto, Flash (not that often), and I when I'm not 'working' I like to play some PSX emulators

[Madrag]

the more the better!
If you can afford it, buy the 2GB

[rhashem]

The other day, I say that Safari was using 620MB of RAM. That was just after a normal browsing session. Word or Excel take up 200MB apiece. Trust me, you want 2GB.

[p0stman]

Are you sure? because Word or Excel don't take more than 100 mb each for me (usually around 60 mb) and Safari only takes 80 mb with 5 windows open.

It all depends on your workload, but unless you're running more than 1 HIGHLY intensive application 1 gb should be more than enough. Most people put up the cash for 2 gb for bragging right and are usually ignorant on how it works... and for others they do it because frankly, they can finally stop worrying about it. It's all consumer hype/guesswork followed by the placebo effect.

But does the worry end there? I have also heard somewhere that having more RAM will slow down your computer performance (assuming you have ENOUGH to work with)... having less and enough will be a safer bet than having more and not using it.

Having more RAM does not increase the performance of your current applications... it just lets you have more applications. I guess maybe people are too lazy to close all 30 applications they have open and would rather get more RAM...

If you only have 256 mb ram on your computer and an application takes 200 mb, then it would make 0 difference even if you had 2000 gb to work with.

OSX Leopard is very similar to OSX and would likely have the same RAM consumption. Also 1 gb will run everything out there in the market. I guess having more than 1 gb RAM can help with things like professional intensive graphic design and intensive programming... but I find it hard to believe that even though most 2 gb RAM owners will say this to justify, that they acctually do it. On the other hand, a consumer product like Macbook isn't even suited for such work, and it would make much more sense getting another machine. Same goes for gaming capabilities.

Then again the bottom line is that you can't really take this sort of advice from the forums. There is too much diversity in the posters.

And in response to this quote: "the more the better!
If you can afford it, buy the 2G"

People that post this sort of questing can of course afford it. They're trying to distinguish whether it is worth it or not. Advice such as this and "get it if you can!" is not helpful.

[jhollow]

I'm a student and I am also interested in ordering a 2ghz macbook with 1gb of ram. I plan on mainly using office applications(word, powerpoint), firefox, adium and itunes or another media player. Since the reports on the office ram consumption seem to vary i was curious if 1gb of ram would be enough. I was also curious about how much ram firefox, adium and the new itunes consume. I was just concerned in general if 1gb of ram would be enough for my needs. Thanks in advance.

[rhashem]

Originally Posted by p0stman

Are you sure? because Word or Excel don't take more than 100 mb each for me (usually around 60 mb) and Safari only takes 80 mb with 5 windows open.

I've got 1 Safari window with 4 tabs open, and its sucking down 200MB. Word and Excel can be as low as 60MB, if you're not actually doing anything with your machine. Even loading a 15-page document can push it up to 100MB, and serious Word users regularly work on multi-hundred page files, using ~200MB of memory.

I guess maybe people are too lazy to close all 30 applications they have open and would rather get more RAM...

Sure. Computers keep getting better so people can be more lazy. On a heavy surfing session, I might have half a dozen Safari windows open, each with 7-8 tabs (that's where the 600MB instance comes from). Why should I waste my time micro-managing windows just to save a few dollars on RAM? Especially when Expose makes it so easy to have lots of Windows open.

but I find it hard to believe that even though most 2 gb RAM owners will say this to justify, that they acctually do it. On the other hand, a consumer product like Macbook isn't even suited for such work, and it would make much more sense getting another machine.

The MacBook makes an absolutely beautiful programming machine. It runs GCC substantially faster than my 2.3GHz dual-core G5, its nearly silent between compiles, and I can walk around with it if I get bored of sitting at my desk. The MacBook, on many native apps, is superior to the last generation of PowerMacs (save for the Quad). With dual 2GHz of power on tab, why not use it for seriously intensive applications? Indeed, it almost seems like a waste to just use the MacBook for some light surfing and updating your blog...

People that post this sort of questing can of course afford it. They're trying to distinguish whether it is worth it or not. Advice such as this and "get it if you can!" is not helpful.

If you actually do anything with your computer, get the 2GB. 1GB is fine for surfing and light office work, but if you're going to be writing a thesis in Word, editing pictures in Photoshop, writing code in XCode, and don't want to swap, you want the 2GB.

[zerock]

2GB works great.