p.1 #1 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
My M1 MacBook Pro logic board died recently so I'm looking to replace it with a new MacBook Pro. A local AD for Apple has some certified refurbished Macs for what seems like a great price. There are two options that have caught my eye and I'm curious if you would prioritize more RAM or more internal SSD storage? Besides the ordinary computer usage, I'm primarily looking to use the computer for processing images through Lightroom and Lightroom Classic.
Option 1: MacBook Pro M2 Pro, 10 Core, 16 Core GPU, 16 GB RAM, 8 TB SSD
For perspective, my many years of photography and some video are currently scattered across a bunch of drives, including some older storage like an iMac that I need to replace. Backups and file management are currently a pain that I would like to figure out a way to get better control over. The idea of 8 TB onboard is appealing in that more of my work can be stored in one place and backed up more simply. The downside to this configuration is that it only features 16 GB of RAM and although this is enough from previous experience, I would have liked a little more. Price: $1,449
Option 2: MacBook Pro M2 Max, 12 Core, 38 Core GPU, 32 GB RAM, 4 TB SSD
This one is significantly more money for less storage. The additional RAM is appealing but I'm not sure if the GPU bump will benefit me that much as a photo editor. 4 TB is still a lot of storage but the 8 TB in option 1 is more appealing. Price: $1,899
Which of these options would you go with or what would you recommend from Apple in the same price range instead?
p.1 #2 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
I would never settle for 16gb RAM. I would rather live with less storage and buy an external SSD to compliment the internal storage. You can’t add RAM if you need it.
p.1 #3 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
jwpstl wrote:
I would never settle for 16gb RAM. I would rather live with less storage and buy an external SSD to compliment the internal storage. You can’t add RAM if you need it.
Thanks for your comment! How many GB of RAM do you consider necessary for your photo editing?
p.1 #4 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
I just upgraded to the lower-mid end M4 max 14” MBP, and upgraded to 48mb ram and the 1tb ssd. I would always take ram over drive space if I couldn’t swing both.
p.1 #5 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
Option 2. 32GB RAM would be a minimum nowadays since it's not upgradable and the CPU is higher spec also.
I don't know your options for SSD upgrades, how many and what capacities there are.
I buy 14'' laptops with small internal drives like 1TB and then upgrade to 16TB (2x8TB). Some laptops only have one SSD slot and I avoid those.
p.1 #6 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
IMO, the best gauge to help you decide is to run Activity Monitor while processing. That way you can see if you’re approaching or surpassing the limits of your equipment. You may not have that option since your logic board died. But if you have or could find a way, I think that would be the most meaningful way to determine your hardware needs.
As a for instance, I run Photoshop on my M2 Max MacBook Pro with 32GB and 38-core GPU and 1TB SSD and never reach the limit of its capability. It’s comforting to know that I don’t need to be concerned with swap files.
Consider, too, that it’s easy to add storage; not-so-much processor or GPU power, or memory. Option 2 would be my recommendation.
p.1 #7 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
justandyphoto wrote:
or what would you recommend from Apple in the same price range instead?
I'm coming from left field by recommending that you buy a cheapo MacBook of some kind, and then spend $169 for a used Mac Pro "trashcan" from OWC to perform heavy-lift image processing. You still win on the budget with two such machines.
The MP is small, not expandable like a PC, but comes with two (2) GPUs and four DIMM slots. DDR3 is almost free, so 64GB is a no-brainer upgrade, and you can do it yourself in about 7.3sec with no tools.
FYI, my frontline machines are a MBP (13", early 2015, 16GB), MP "trashcan" (12GB), Windows PC (40GB, RTX 3050), and a couple of Linux PCs (dual-socket Xeon, no GPU, 128GB each). The Linux boxes work best for image processing due to the massive RAM banks). The MBP is borderline torture for lack of RAM (I use layers a lot).
p.1 #8 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
I think Rico’s reco is spot on. That old trash can mac pro wth the 1 tb ssd and 64 gb ram upgrade is a great buy and will be a really affordable, but nice performance solution. The m4 MBP I mentioned above is about $1000 more than the refurbished you linked to and IMO definitely worth it longer term; the performance increase is significant. If you can’t swing it, I’d buy an older, pre M1 refurb mbp along with the Mac Pro above, and total outlay will be well under your budget; and the pre m1 is not very far behind the m1/2 to begin with.
p.1 #9 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
justandyphoto wrote:
Thanks for your comment! How many GB of RAM do you consider necessary for your photo editing?
Nothing less than 32GB.
Also, consider that you ARE planning on keeping this one for a while. And OS / other software demands continue to creep in on overhead. If you only have (example) 16GB RAM, and the overhead becomes 12GB RAM ... you've only got 4GB available. If you start with 32, and the overhead is 12, then you've got 20.
The other thing that is important to note about the difference between the Pro vs. Max configuration isn't JUST the AMOUNT of RAM capacity ... but, because the M chips are Modular, you have double the chips, double the pipeline, double the memory bandwidth in the 32GB Max configuration.
I personally have the M2 Max ... for this very reason of memory bandwidth. I bought / returned a variety of configurations of Pro / Max with different amounts of RAM. My longstanding recommendation has been MAX with 32GB (or more). If you do opt for a Pro ... still, nothing less than 32GB.
p.1 #10 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
justandyphoto wrote:
My M1 MacBook Pro logic board died recently so I'm looking to replace it with a new MacBook Pro. A local AD for Apple has some certified refurbished Macs for what seems like a great price. There are two options that have caught my eye and I'm curious if you would prioritize more RAM or more internal SSD storage? Besides the ordinary computer usage, I'm primarily looking to use the computer for processing images through Lightroom and Lightroom Classic.
Option 1: MacBook Pro M2 Pro, 10 Core, 16 Core GPU, 16 GB RAM, 8 TB SSD
For perspective, my many years of photography and some video are currently scattered across a bunch of drives, including some older storage like an iMac that I need to replace. Backups and file management are currently a pain that I would like to figure out a way to get better control over. The idea of 8 TB onboard is appealing in that more of my work can be stored in one place and backed up more simply. The downside to this configuration is that it only features 16 GB of RAM and although this is enough from previous experience, I would have liked a little more. Price: $1,449
Option 2: MacBook Pro M2 Max, 12 Core, 38 Core GPU, 32 GB RAM, 4 TB SSD
This one is significantly more money for less storage. The additional RAM is appealing but I'm not sure if the GPU bump will benefit me that much as a photo editor. 4 TB is still a lot of storage but the 8 TB in option 1 is more appealing. Price: $1,899
Which of these options would you go with or what would you recommend from Apple in the same price range instead?...Show more →
Option #2 under almost all circumstances. 16GB of memory could easily become your bottleneck, forcing applications to swap out programs and data (thrashing) to your SSDs. Additionally, the GPU is being increasingly utilized for parallel processing in various graphics functions within PS and LR, which could provide a performance boost. The 4TB and 8TB drives you are considering are both very close in performance.
The only time you might be in trouble with the 4TB drive is if you must remain mobile (no external SSD drive) and you plan to have the 4TB drive very, very full, where it can really reduce performance. In this case, I think you would be better off finding a way not to carry around that much SSD storage with just the onboard SSD.
As others have mentioned, you cannot add more memory later. For reference, to make my 2021 MacBook Pro investment last I bit the bullet and got the 64G memory option.
p.1 #12 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
You're going about it poorly, why would anyone need 4TB or even 8TB of space especially on a MBP? I bought the MBP M2 32GB and 500GB model and it's been a great performer and I recently added a Studio Display. After shooting a project, I backup to two G Tech drives for redundancy and delete from the MBP SSD after the images have been delivered. There's no need to keep large amounts of data on the working drive, it will gradually slow a machine down. I currently use about 165GB on the machine with all projects delivered, lean and ready to go when needed.
p.1 #13 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
Another vote for option 2. As others have mentioned, of the three non-upgradeable Apple configuration options (CPU/GPU, RAM and storage), the least performance penalty applies to adding external NVMe SSDs in Thunderbolt 3/4/5 enclosures. Therefore, if having to compromise, it should be internal storage, within reason. 4TB is still ample and normally comes with a significant upgrade charge when choosing this option from Apple at the time of purchase.
And as others have mentioned, I would not underestimate the value of having ample GPU cores, given increasing reliance on the GPU for some image processing tasks. For example, we have seen that Adobe's AI Denoise/Enhance feature relies heavily on GPU quality and core numbers. When this feature first rolled out, some complained that their non-Apple silicon systems were taking many minutes to process/denoise a single image. In comparison, the M4 Max 16/40 core system I just acquired runs the same process on a 45MP file in about 12 seconds. My 2021 M1 Pro 10/16 core MBP is about 3x slower.
The idea of the MP 'trash can' as a cheap option is interesting but you will find yourself constantly behind the curve and in some areas unable to keep up, particularly with OS releases, though apparently there is a hack option around this. In any case, while many apps will work on OS version many generations behind the current, annoyingly, if you want to keep using the latest from Adobe, you need to be able to keep the OS relatively up to date, which means running relatively current hardware. Apple silicon is also way more energy efficient, given the same processing tasks, than the previous Intel-based Macs. I guess it depends on your needs - a MP trash can space heater might come in handy during the long, cold MN winters.
p.1 #14 · Prioritize RAM or SSD Size on Photography MacBook Pro
rscheffler wrote:
Another vote for option 2. As others have mentioned, of the three non-upgradeable Apple configuration options (CPU/GPU, RAM and storage), the least performance penalty applies to adding external NVMe SSDs in Thunderbolt 3/4/5 enclosures. Therefore, if having to compromise, it should be internal storage, within reason. 4TB is still ample and normally comes with a significant upgrade charge when choosing this option from Apple at the time of purchase.
And as others have mentioned, I would not underestimate the value of having ample GPU cores, given increasing reliance on the GPU for some image processing tasks. For example, we have seen that Adobe's AI Denoise/Enhance feature relies heavily on GPU quality and core numbers. When this feature first rolled out, some complained that their non-Apple silicon systems were taking many minutes to process/denoise a single image. In comparison, the M4 Max 16/40 core system I just acquired runs the same process on a 45MP file in about 12 seconds. My 2021 M1 Pro 10/16 core MBP is about 3x slower.
The idea of the MP 'trash can' as a cheap option is interesting but you will find yourself constantly behind the curve and in some areas unable to keep up, particularly with OS releases, though apparently there is a hack option around this. In any case, while many apps will work on OS version many generations behind the current, annoyingly, if you want to keep using the latest from Adobe, you need to be able to keep the OS relatively up to date, which means running relatively current hardware. Apple silicon is also way more energy efficient, given the same processing tasks, than the previous Intel-based Macs. I guess it depends on your needs - a MP trash can space heater might come in handy during the long, cold MN winters. ...Show more →
This is another great post. And frankly the last paragraph sums up my first reco above: find a way to bust out another $1000, bite the bullet and get a new M4 Macbook Pro. Current, fast and configurable to your needs and uses.
