When you have an iPhone 12 Pro with 6 GB of ram, it is hard to believe that a desktop machine meant for multitasking has only 2 GB more. If memory didn't matter, why only 12 Pro has 6 GB but 12 still has 4 GB. There must be a clear need for more memory even on an iPhone as proved by 12 Pro having 6 GB. I will reserve my judgment after seeing some reviews and benchmarks, but I feel that Apple cheaped out on memory no matter what.
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.
Downgrade
- Thread starter MBX
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Memory matters a LOT. The M1 is not a magical unicorn that can overcome basic fundamentals in computing. iOS devices get away with way less because they only run one application at a time. And even then they can be quite limited when you start pushing the devices. Even with very fast SSD's, ram is still much faster and is a vital component of system speed.
If you're the type of user that only runs a single app or two at a time, then sure 16 GB might be fine. But if you are a more heavy user, anything below 32 GB is just too little. I will require 64 GB in my next Mac which the previous Mac Mini actually had. This is why a bunch of us are disappointed. The processor looks really good, but everything else has been severely downgraded. One step forward and two backwards.
If you're the type of user that only runs a single app or two at a time, then sure 16 GB might be fine. But if you are a more heavy user, anything below 32 GB is just too little. I will require 64 GB in my next Mac which the previous Mac Mini actually had. This is why a bunch of us are disappointed. The processor looks really good, but everything else has been severely downgraded. One step forward and two backwards.
It seems to b a replacement for the i3 mini apple did say better then the quad core option today. So to me that means performance might not b better then a 6 core intel yet. I am intreagued and am considering selling my base 21.5in 1080p imac to buy one
I think real use-case reviews will show how this Mac Mini with 8gb or 16gb of ram holds up against one with 32gb.
My hunch is this just works differently, and in the end its performance will blow out the current Intels.
Not saying that this Mac Mini will suddenly be a Mac Pro or even an iMac Pro, but if it can work on 2x 4k videos at the same time and still be buttery smooth, asking it to probably handle an 8k video means you need to get the Pro.
But will this Mac Mini with an 8/16gb configuration lag against the Mac Mini with 32gb ram? I doubt it. It will probably work much much better.
What you see here is that Apple is making specific choices since they now own the chip. Like they even have a Neural Engine in there. They are not playing the Intel game by just making a faster chip. They are designing a new class of laptop/desktop PCs from the ground up.
Need to appreciate that this is the 1st generation entry-level device using AS. There will be an M1X or whatever coming along in time that will mean more RAM and so on. As expected, too much hype leading to high expectations and then disappointment by so many.
That said, what they have delivered as a 1st device is impressive once you actually break it down.
That said, what they have delivered as a 1st device is impressive once you actually break it down.
I think you’re overstating things a bit. I have 8 GB (13” 2015 MBP) and can run a lot more than “a single app or two at a time” with no slowdown. I get that a 16 GB cap can be pretty limiting for certain users, but let’s not get carried away.
Today's Mac mini with the M1 chip is meant to be an entry level machine. It's not meant to replace the 2018/2020 Mac mini model. That is the 'Pro' model. Remember how they kept pushing the whole server & Mac Stadium thing when they released it in 2018. There was no mention of that today with the new model. Today's M1 model was meant to replace the entry-level model that was like the 2012/2014 models. That lower-end everyday computer for the new Mac user or someone looking for a cheap desktop solution that has a monitor, keyboard or mouse already. This is why they are still selling the i5/i7 models starting at $1099. Just like the higher-end Mac Book Pro 13 with Intel.
You will likely see these replaced further along in the transition. They are not going to leave Intel for their 'Pro" based Macs yet because they don't have silicon chips that can compete yet. Remember in the WWDC they said they would continue to release & support Intel Macs alongside the Apple Silicon during the 2 year transition. And we're likely gone have macOS support til 2025 at the earliest if not longer for the Intel machines.
There are only 2 Thunderbolt ports, so it’s not as if there are a lot of them.
There is no need for 10Gb ethernet on this model. It can't do the server/Mac Stadium or the linking together stuff like the 'Pro' 2018/2020 model can do. It's not meant for that. That's why they are still selling the i5/i7 model. Remember the M1 chip doesn't even have Boot Camp.
Load up multiple 61megapixel mirrorless RAW files in photoshop and then open several layers in each file. Let's see how long your 8gb or 16gb last. And No, going to M1 isn't going to reduce the memory requirements for this task.
They spent ten minutes during the video presentation going through all of the technological advancements of this chip. While watching that, did you think that the first three places they'd deploy it were in "entry-level", "similar to the 2014 Mini" (which I got for my parents w/o realizing a year later I'd have to put the OS on a Samsung SSD connected by USB 2.0 just so they could boot up and open their email in less than ten minutes) models, targeted to people for whom all of that M1 technology doesn't really mean a whole lot? Who probably aren't currently looking to upgrade anything?
My theory is that they just put three test units up for sale. And people who spend $699 tend to notice and/or care less and/or end up a LOT less upset when that test process turns out poorly than... the rest of us. The ones who found out whether or not it supported an eGPU. Or who literally — en masse — all took less than a collective three seconds to notice those missing ports.
My theory is that they just put three test units up for sale. And people who spend $699 tend to notice and/or care less and/or end up a LOT less upset when that test process turns out poorly than... the rest of us. The ones who found out whether or not it supported an eGPU. Or who literally — en masse — all took less than a collective three seconds to notice those missing ports.
I am not sure the current intel entry level Mac mini with 32/64gb of ram can do the same thing you are describing too? Or at least not in an efficient, wonky way.
I am pretty sure the machines they replaced cannot do what you just described.
That is where the higher end Arm Macs can come in.
I think people are confused what these chips can and can’t do. we will know soon enough when people get their hands on this.
That's why they are still selling the so-called 2018/2020 Mac mini 'Pro' model starting at $1099 and the higher-end MacBook Pro 13's. Apple Silicon is still a few years away from being able to complete at the Pro level. The Geekbench scores are gonna be higher but real-world tests are likely better on the Intel side still. But that will change in the next year I'm sure when the M1X or M2 is released.
I doubt Intel will fare better on real world test. Perhaps in specific workflows or on apps that were not made for Arm.
But when they say 5x better graphics, that is 500% better. We have been living in 15% to 20% improvements for too long.
I should have clarified. The Intel i5/i7 will fare better in everything but graphics but that is what an egpu is for. If you look on the Mac mini page btw with their so-called test, they compare the M1 chip to the now discontinued i3 model. They won't compare it to the i5/i7 model because it's 6-core desktop class. At the end of the day Apple Silicon is still an ARM processor and still is 1-2 years away from replacing these 'Pro' level Macs. And they said they're still gonna release Intel Macs during the 2 year transition. There is a reason for that. Remember Apple Silicon has No Boot Camp, No Upgradable RAM, No 10Gb ethernet. And it's because it's not meant to replace that YET. It's a 2 year transition, that stuff will likely come towards the end of that. They wouldn't have refreshed the Mac mini earlier this year if they were just gonna replace it with the M1 version. Apple knew what it was doing and it's still selling the i5/i7 model for a reason. One because it's more of a 'Pro' level model and two because the Apple Silicon can't compete with it yet. Just like the higher-end MBP 13's they are still selling. That will be the M1X or M2 that will bring the higher-end support.
I think it will be in the range of i5/i7 Intels. but for $100 cheaper, this is not the sluggish i3 Mac Mini. This is actually really good value because no Wintel PC will be able to compete on price per performance.
Also, as they currently stand, the M1 Mini is $400 cheaper than the high end Intel Mac Mini. This is not a dead beat Mac Mini.
After reading AnandTech's Apple Silicon deep dive, I'd expect the M1 Mac Mini to outperform the 8th Gen i5/i7 models by a wide margin. Obviously wait until there's concrete benchmarks/reviews, but from their deep dive:
The Benchmarks will of course be higher, it’s a matter of real world performance. Also if you look at the tests in the fine print on the Mac Mini page, they compare the M1 to the now discontinued i3. macOS is different than iOS/iPadOS and uses more resources. So Apple Silicon may be different than it is on the more lightweight iOS.After reading AnandTech's Apple Silicon deep dive, I'd expect the M1 Mac Mini to outperform the 8th Gen i5/i7 models by a wide margin. Obviously wait until there's concrete benchmarks/reviews, but from their deep dive:
They're not comparing against 5600m GPU on the MBP 16. They're comparing against intel's worthless iGPU. 5x of crap is still crap. Intel iGPUs have been gutter trash since the first one was released....
The whole point of Apple Silicon is that it's designed and optimized specifically for MacOS.
If we're talking about "real world performance", I'd expect it to be better, even if the benchmarks are equal.
If this entry level Mac Mini can drive a 4k monitor at scaled resolution without turning its fans on max, and with no ui tear or lag, that is already a "real world performance" win. Which from the looks of things it will.
Way more powerful, $100 cheaper, and much better-looking (space grey is tacky).
Overall, a big upgrade in my opinion.
Overall, a big upgrade in my opinion.