To be fair. 8GB of ram is huge. I don't know, maybe I'm stuck in the early 00s but even 2 GB of ram still seems extravagant; I remember when that was an exotic amount of RAM for dedicated gamers to play extremely high fidelity games, so for a mere web server 8 GB of ram almost seems like absurd overkill. I still feel a tinge of shame whenever I see any software of my own using more than a few hundred megabytes. What a waste.
The major difference, here, is this is intended for multiple users (not one person). Imaging 5,000 users all using the device at the same time. The amount of memory, open file handles, network connections, etc. for many users at once adds up.
Depends entirely on what you're doing. 8GB of RAM is very insufficient for 3D texturing workflows, for example, where you can have many different 4k textures cached in memory. For other things, 8GB is probably a lot.
I barely used or remember the ZX-81 my folks had with it's amazing 1KB of memory. It had a 16K expansion module you could plug into the back, which apparently made a big difference, but also didn't have the greatest connection. You could easily dislodge it typing on the keyboard. I do remember my father coming up with various ways to try to secure it.
The ZX Spectrum that followed, with its huge 48K of RAM was night and day. The programs were so much more complicated.
Even echo on linux these days takes 38K of disk space and a baseline of 13K of memory to execute, before whatever is required to hold the message you're repeating.
RAM was so tight on those 8-bit machines that many games used tricks like hiding things inside the viewable area of the screen to eck out just a little bit more.
Quite often clients were more powerful than servers. Hell, at one point a CPU embedded into a printer could be faster than, say, 8088. An X server (running on the client side) often required a more powerful machine than one running X clients (i.e. a server). A web browser is not an exception.
