The worst part of the 2018 models, aside from weak graphics, was that tacky space grey color. Silver is much cleaner and more modern-looking. Very glad they switched back.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Unveils New Mac Mini Powered By M1 Chip, Pricing Now Starts at $699
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The worst part of the 2018 models, aside from weak graphics, was that tacky space grey color. Silver is much cleaner and more modern-looking. Very glad they switched back.
Soooo... in Layman’s Terms... talking to someone who has no idea about those stats... is that good or not?! I guess it’s all subjective and depends on what you’re using it for mainly...
Wait, how the hell can i play Baldur's Gate 3 on a Mac Mini without a eGPU? Is the iGPU that good?
They still haven't solved the fundamental problem with the Mac Mini - if you hook it up to any display that isn't the Apple Pro or LG Ultrafine you get poor quality font rendering and/or poor desktop scaling.
A standard 1080p display will scale perfectly on OS X but font quality will be poor as it no longer uses sub-pixel anti aliasing. A 24 inch or 27 inch 4K display will give good font quality but your menubar will be too big as the DPI is only 160-180 rather than >200.
A standard 1080p display will scale perfectly on OS X but font quality will be poor as it no longer uses sub-pixel anti aliasing. A 24 inch or 27 inch 4K display will give good font quality but your menubar will be too big as the DPI is only 160-180 rather than >200.
Yes. I have Mac Minis '19 '18' '12Quad and '11 Quad----all user upgraded. My 19 has 4 ports. 1 each for 6TB back up drives, 1 TB port for 3880x1660 Dell Monitor and 1 going to a TB Dock by OWC. All 4 ports used. So yes---my Mac Mini 19 3.2Ghz i7 6 cores with 32 MB of ram is plenty fast speed wise. I do some video encoding with Handbrake which is acceptably fast and the VAST majority of my work is very snappy on my machine. We have no benchmarks other than what's been provided by Apple so I'm not convinced that the 2020 is 2x-3x as fast my "any measurable metric". It's an unproven chip. I know "battery life" is same! Maybe the video performance COULD offset the port reduction but we'll see. Fewer ports, non user upgradable RAM---Big losers in my mind.
Great.
But.
I have a 2018 mac Mini 6 core top spec with 32 gb ram. It’s powerful. I also have a 2018 iPad Pro. The ipad is much much faster in general computing operations. Video editing on luma fusion is ridiculously fast. Affinity photo and Lightroom work instantly and without lag, when compared to lightroom classic and photoshop on the mac it’s absolutely better.
This is ‘just’ an ipad, a land where ram amounts and clock speed aren’t even a thing mentioned let alone chosen.
You’re making negative assumptions on a chip that actually has measurable benefits over x86 already shown. Stick that in a mac, with mac type options, try it. It’s ridiculous to think anything other than the thing will fly.
I just cant wait for the high end versions to come out. This is the most exciting time for Apple and the industry in general after years and years of stagnation.
Your OWC TB dock connected to one of the TB ports on a ARM mini + the other connected to your display is all you need
In your example, your 6TB backups can either go on USB-A, or the TB dock.Still don't see how the 2020 ARM mini can't work in your scenario?
This right here. Even my iMac Pro and 13" 2018 MacBook Pro (Four TB3 ports) hangs waaaay more often than my iPad Pro.
EDIT - forgot about my Intel Mac that misbehaves the most, my "work" 2019 MacBook Pro (Four TB3). There's nothing broken with it, but you can just tell that due to CPU architecture, it often hangs upon launching programs and generally gets stuck way more than an iPad/iPhone.
Last edited:
For everyone complaining about 16GB; you don’t know how it’s used. Could be like how a car or a train both have 300HP motors.
Apple today introduced a new Mac mini, one of three new Macs powered by the company's new custom M1 chip with integrated graphics.
Thanks to the introduction of the M1 chip, the Mac mini's 8-core CPU provides faster performance than the previous generation. Specifically, Apple says that the M1-powered Mac mini is able to compile code in Xcode up to three times faster, play a graphics-intensive game with up to four times higher frame rates, and render a complex timeline in Final Cut Pro up to six times faster.
The new Mac mini also features an advanced thermal design to sustain performance, allowing it to stay cool and quiet. It supports up to two displays and Wi-Fi 6 for faster wireless performance. There's also the Secure Enclave in M1 for what Apple describes as best-in-class security.
Apple says the 5-nanometer M1 chip supports Thunderbolt 3 and USB4 support, and boasts the world's fastest integrated graphics with a 16-core Neural Engine that can process 11 trillion operations per second.
Alongside new MacBook Air and 13-inch MacBook Pro models, the new Mac mini is part of Apple's transition away from Intel processors in Macs. In June, Apple revealed its plans to begin using its own custom Apple Silicon processors in Macs, promising industry-leading performance per watt. Apple said that the transition would take about two years to be completed.
The Mac mini with M1 is available to order today on Apple.com, and then it will begin to arrive to customers November 17. The Mac mini is available at $699 for 256GB storage — down from a starting price of $799 previously — and at $899 for 512GB storage.
Article Link: Apple Unveils New Mac Mini Powered By M1 Chip, Pricing Now Starts at $699
There's a problem in looking at just the raw performance of any particular component. You have to consider the chipsets augmenting the performance, such as the neural engine, along with software optimization. That 2.6 TFLOPS could be equivalent to the 5.5 TFLOPS option without the new architecture.
I suspect that's the case. Higher raw power = higher energy requirement = higher heat output. Apple has demonstrated that they reach higher performance with much lower power draw and heat output.
It was more that I didn't feel comfortable going into the mac mini after 7 years of operation. I didn't want to screw anything up. The internal vs external debate on speed was minimal in my opinion and I just felt more comfortable replacing the spinning disk boot with an external.
This is a shortsighted thinking. What's wrong with the existing design? Even if there is now more space inside, as someone pointed out, that can only improve the cooling performance. When something looks good, why change it? Just so you can say it looks new?
Cars go through far fewer revisions than you think and it's not even a good comparison. Vastly different products.
Apple's new M1 Macs won't work with external GPUs
The spec pages for Apple's new Macs with M1 CPUs reveals something is missing -- support for eGPUs favored by some gamers and creative professionals.
Space grey is practically used across Apple's entire product line for the past 5 years, and given it's popularity I would say 'tacky' is not how most people describe it.
I wanted a new refurb iMac a few weeks back as I found a really good deal. Glad I waited though. I don’t expect an arm iMac to be released anytime soon, so I’m now tempted to try a arm mini. My main app is fcpx and when they talked about 8K playback it really sounded promising. I can always sell the mini when the iMac comes along if I’m not satisfied by the mini
Repeat after me: Apple is comparing to i3. Not i7. The fact that people will scramble to find metrics where their i7 beats M1 (and they will), just speaks to the leap Apple is taking here - everyone is comparing the bottom end Apple Silicon to the top end Intel. I can’t wait for the PC folks to start gloating about their 5000 dollar DIY gaming rig beating a fanless 1000 dollar laptop to submission. I’ll be smiling in the corner, with the knowledge that Apple isn’t even trying yet.
M1 is much better than Intel UHD Graphics 630 in previous Mac Mini. It's even better than iMac 21.5" with 560X. Only real tests shows how good it is. It can be better optimized and faster than raw numbers. For example Radeon Pro 5300 in iMac 2020 produces less TFLOPS than 580X in iMac 2019 but is faster in many games.
They should have said that then
With the m1 you don’t need a lot of ram
Why not mention that
Apple's new M1 Macs won't work with external GPUs
The spec pages for Apple's new Macs with M1 CPUs reveals something is missing -- support for eGPUs favored by some gamers and creative professionals.www.engadget.com
Yea. I was willing to take a chance on some shortcomings of this new Mini but that's a solid no-go for me, unfortunately. I need to power two 1080 resolution touchscreens and an additional 1080 display up top here.
Has anyone any suggestion on making this work, other than just scrapping the idea of getting myself into a new Mini?
First a train locomotive is more like 3000HP.
Yes, you don't know how the 16GB is used. Maybe everything runs from SSD. As a glorified iPad it will work for most. But when I have more than 16GB of apps and active data it simply won't fit. Memory compression can help but it slows things down.
UK prices: £800 ($1050) upgrade price on the base model for a 2TB SSD. You can buy a brand new gen 4 2TB at retail for half the price. £200 for an 8GB RAM upgrade which you now have to buy from Apple cause of the new platform.
Well, I ordered a Mac Mini with 16GB um and 1TB SSD, so we’ll see how it goes in real life in a few weeks! 😬
Thanks for the advice and info, much appreciated!!!
How much of the heat is produced by the internal power supply? And how much weight and space does it take? It no longer needs 150 watts, with no fan and spinning disks or graphics cards. Apple should take the power supply out and put in a MacBook battery so it doesn’t need a UPS and can be used anywhere. And make a battery powered wireless screen.