M4 iMac with 32GB RAM.... silly, or is it a nice upgrade to a decent machine?

[Turnpike]

Since I need something that runs the latest software and also could use a screen, I'm planning on ordering the M4 iMac and all the increments offered are the same (10 core CPU and 10 core GPU) with the only real options are the SSD size and RAM amount.

The maxxed out 32GB Ram brings the price to about 2K, and I would use it mostly for having a zillion tabs open at once while doing research. Is this a silly RAM upgrade on a weak computer, or is this just making the most of a robust machine?

The entry level of the Mac Mini is also a 10 core CPU and 10 core GPU, and maxxed out on 32 GB of Ram should in theory have the same performance, for having a ton of tabs open (hundreds across a few browsers) would I be better off with a Mac Mini with 32GB of Ram, or the iMac, if it's not about price? I'm afraid the iMac having the screen might be a slightly less performing machine. Everyone I've spoken to love the Mac Mini and with the extra ram can do about anything so if the iMac is just as good performance wise, I want to be sure I'm not opening up myself with any limitations by getting the iMac.

 

[Bigwaff]

The M3/M4 are extremely powerful SoC for web browsing. I don’t think 24GB vs 32GB memory will make much difference for web browsing. AIO design and price might be deciding factors. To that end, look for used M3 iMac 24GB if AIO design preferred. If web browsing truly your main computing use case, a tricked out 2020 Intel iMac w/ 32GB or 64GB memory will serve your needs for many years to come… Chrome/Firefox browser updates extend years past macOS updates. High-end configuration Intel Macs are incredible bargains for basic computing needs and can be had for much less than M-series Macs on used market.

 

[Ruggy]

So suppose you want to do 4K+ multicam editing in Final Cut Pro + live rendering + Motion plugins + background browsing.
Or training a medium-size LLM (like Mistral or LLaMA 2 7B) locally on your Mac using Python + PyTorch and maybe a bit of background browsing.
Every thing else you can do with 16Gb and the difference might be half a second, maybe a second.

 

[theluggage]

The maxxed out 32GB Ram brings the price to about 2K, and I would use it mostly for having a zillion tabs open at once while doing research. Is this a silly RAM upgrade on a weak computer, or is this just making the most of a robust machine?

The 10 core M4 is definitely capable of jobs that would benefit from 32GB RAM, but that's maybe not needed with the things you're doing. You'll probably be OK - or could compromise with 24GB.

The root of the problem is Apple's RAM upgrade pricing. On virtually any other system costing over $1000, getting 32GB "just in case" would be a no-brainer - its hardly an excessive "serious callers only" spec in 2025. If you want a new Mac - either take the chance or pay the Apple tax. You'll have the exact same dilemma over RAM and SSD with a Mac Mini.

I'm afraid the iMac having the screen might be a slightly less performing machine

There is unlikely to be any significant performance difference between a M4 Mini and an M4 iMac with the same cores & RAM. There are differences in the I/O facilities but no clear winner.

The economics of iMac vs. Mini depend on which display you would choose for a Mini. I'm pretty sure that there is no third party screen that is really comparable with the iMac screen - third party 4k 24" displays have become like hen's teeth, and the iMac is actually slightly higher definition than the standard "4k HDR". If that 24" screen hits your sweet spot, then the iMac is probably hard to beat.

However, there's no flexibility with the iMac screen - you can't upgrade the computer and keep the screen, the screen won't work with any other computer and if you want to switch to a bigger display or get a Studio Display you're stuck with 2 mismatched displays filling up your desk.

The "best" Mini experience would be with a 5k Studio Display - that's going to bring the total cost more than an iMac, but if you upgrade your Mac Mini in a few years' time you'll be able to carry the display over. Or maybe the rumoured new Studio Display will turn up next year and blow your socks off - in which case you'll be able to keep the Mini and swap your display. There are now a couple of third-party 5k3k 27" displays which don't seem to be quite in the same league as the Studio Display but really aren't bad (and while the list prices are a bit high, you're more likely to find them at a steep discount than with Apple products).

Then there's the whole world of 4k 27" displays, ultrawide, 4:3, dual monitor setups etc. from 3rd parties... and let's get this straight: 220ppi diisplays like the iMac, the Studio Display (& other 5k3k@27" screens) and 6k Pro XDR are the optimum resolution for MacOS - at the cost of sky-high prices and limited choice. However, don't succumb to the FUD about 4k displays being Bad For Mac or get confused into thinking that they can only be run at 1080p or 1440p: they can be perfectly adequate for a fraction of the price, and there's a much wider choice. You just have to decide between a slightly over-large MacOS user interface (which doesn't actually prevent you scaling the actual documents you're working on) or the "dreaded non-integer-scaled-mode" which creates "artefacts" that you'll probably only notice in a side-by-side comparison with 5k (or a website that shows you a 5c magnification of a simulation of the problem).

 

[Turnpike]

For those moving from 2017 and 2019 and 2020 27" iMacs, are the M4 iMacs that much snappier and quicker as far as the browsers?

 

[Dana Beck]

For those moving from 2017 and 2019 and 2020 27" iMacs, are the M4 iMacs that much snappier and quicker as far as the browsers?

Like...yeah!!... my 6-month-old iMac has 32 GB memory and a 2 TB hard drive and however many cores you can get. I use Photoshop a lot. The browser speed is lighting quick. I also have both a 2017 and 2015 iMac, so I can compare directly; neither of those could be upgraded, so Adobe "suggested" I upgrade if I wanted to continue using the program. Didn't think there would be that much difference, but there is.

 

[wilberforce]

For those moving from 2017 and 2019 and 2020 27" iMacs, are the M4 iMacs that much snappier and quicker as far as the browsers?

I had a 2020 iMac and now an M4 iMac, both with 32GB. Browser performance is pretty much the same. 400 mbps internet service.
A high spec 2020 iMac is a pretty powerful machine even by today’s standards, and the base M4 is not that impressive. There are several photo editing activities I do that are actually slower on the M4. Don’t count on being blown away. For that you need an M4 Pro (or better), which is not available in an iMac.
It rather depends on exactly what you are coming from. From a 2017-iMac it will be a big improvement, from a high spec 2020 iMac not so much

 

[kagharaht]

After using Topaz Video Ai to upscaled like hundred of family videos. I actually don't have that many, but when relatives found out I can do them, they sent me their Tapes to Digitize and work on. LOL... oh well I'm retired and it's fun. Anyway...I got the iMac M3 when it first came out full specs...That App will tax the machine like big time! Specially upscaling video and photos.... I've had video processing for 18 hours straight with the iMac Fans just blasting away... I'm afraid I'll be responsible for the untimely death of this iMac soon. Having said that, the little iMac M3 has not stalled, hiccup, crash or struggle with any app I open while it's churning away at the video. I think you'll be fine if you're happy with the screen.

 

[Turnpike]

This sounds great, thanks everybody! Then a 32GB Ram machine is what I'll try... plus if it's just not what I want, it will be a rare configuration on the used market and would probably sell quick at the right price.

 

[TSE]

I have 32 GBs of RAM on my M4 Yellow iMac because I run a lot of VMs.

 

[Foxglove9]

For those moving from 2017 and 2019 and 2020 27" iMacs, are the M4 iMacs that much snappier and quicker as far as the browsers?

I upgraded from a 2017 27" iMac with 24Gb ram and 500GB SSD to a M4 Studio with 36GB of Ram and 1TB SSD. Don't really notice a huge jump in browser performance. I notice it a little snappier when I have plex or YouTube video playing while browsing sites, but otherwise it's very minor.

 

[eRondeau]

Seems to me you’ve already answered your own question. You’ve got to be happy with what you buy. If you know you’ll ONLY be satisfied with 32GB RAM then get it. Don’t be in a situation where you hate your new iMac (and yourself) because it has 16GB or 24GB. Will you notice a performance difference? No. Will you psychologically feel better about your decision? Absolutely.

 

[123123123]

Why the iMac instead of a Mini? If the display goes some day, you're toast.

 

[neo_cs193p]

I think the iMac is the machine that makes the most sense to upgrade to 32GB, if you want to use it for many years. It may seem overkill now, but in a few years it will probably make the difference between having to throw away that beautiful display, or being able to use it a few more years.

 

[Terraaustralis]

The M3/M4 are extremely powerful SoC for web browsing. I don’t think 24GB vs 32GB memory will make much difference for web browsing. AIO design and price might be deciding factors. To that end, look for used M3 iMac 24GB if AIO design preferred. If web browsing truly your main computing use case, a tricked out 2020 Intel iMac w/ 32GB or 64GB memory will serve your needs for many years to come… Chrome/Firefox browser updates extend years past macOS updates. High-end configuration Intel Macs are incredible bargains for basic computing needs and can be had for much less than M-series Macs on used market.

I agree with you Bigwaff. M series CPU cycle speeds in the 3.2 GHz area are excessive for browsing needs.
May as well buy a Ferrari to drive to the supermarket!

 

[Terraaustralis]

I upgraded from a 2017 27" iMac with 24Gb ram and 500GB SSD to a M4 Studio with 36GB of Ram and 1TB SSD. Don't really notice a huge jump in browser performance. I notice it a little snappier when I have plex or YouTube video playing while browsing sites, but otherwise it's very minor.

CPU power does not influence Browser behaviour very much at all. Memory is much more important for those who, like Turnpike have ’a zillion tabs or windows‘ open. In my understanding, SSD power is the main determining speed factor which users experience.

In the past, Apple 2019 iMac SSD’s have been of moderate power only. The 128GB Polaris ran at Read approx 990MB/s, Write 1500 MB/s. for a system capable of theoretical PCIE 3 speeds of 3500MB/s. That is why so many Intel users upgrade entry and pro iMacs and double the SSD speed performance with WD Black NVME and achieve 3000MB/s plus.

Using AmorphousDiskMark, the M series Macs register above or below 7000MB/s Write to 5000MB/s Read according to Mac model and memory spec. See this blog https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ssd-speeds-of-m3-macbook-pro.2410262/ It is notable that Write speeds exceed Reads in M series configurations. The reverse of the Intel situation.

CPU clock speed and multi cores are appreciated by those working in the Movie industry with high end video graphics, cutting edge games design and complex image rendering tasks. IMHO the Trillions of clock cycles provided in M Series Macs are largely redundant for general consumer usage.

In short, I think you see little difference between your 2017 iMac and the M4 because the work you do does not require M4 specifications.

I am a graphic designer undertaking DTP in large volume using a 2019 Intel iMac. Since I upgraded the with a fast NVME and a SATA second drive, I recognise there is no need for me to purchase an M series Mac.

 

[Steve121178]

I have 24GB in my M3 iMac which was the maximum available at the time. If I was buying today I'd go for at least 24GB, but probably 32GB. You can never have enough RAM, especially with all the AI nonsense that is going to be included in future versions of macOS. 16GB to be fully compatible will be the bare minimum in the not too distant future, so 24GB & 32GB configs are wise.

 

[popup]

Why the iMac instead of a Mini? If the display goes some day, you're toast.

This. The impossibility to use the display and the computer parts separately pushes me back. If one part goes dead, then the whole thing is gone.

 

[okkibs]

If one part goes dead, then the whole thing is gone.

Even if it doesn't there'll be a time where you want a new machine and then you'll have to buy a new monitor even though you got a perfectly capable one still sitting on your desk. It's easier to ship a small Mini or Studio back and forth too, rather than that entire iMac.

That's why Apple must really love their Macbooks: You have a 2021 MBP and want to upgrade to M4? Instead of Apple offering to swap out just the logic board for a M4 version and charging the customer a grand or so you'll instead have to buy the same spec chassis, display, keyboard, trackpad, and so on all over again. Some of these parts are literally identical but you still need to buy them for the price of a brand new machine once more.

 

[Steve121178]

This. The impossibility to use the display and the computer parts separately pushes me back. If one part goes dead, then the whole thing is gone.

Get Apple Care like you should with all Mac purchases and you don't need to worry about the "what ifs".

 

[chrfr]

Get Apple Care like you should with all Mac purchases and you don't need to worry about the "what ifs".

Nonetheless, it's common that a display will last for many years longer than a computer it's attached to, if the computer isn't an iMac or other all-in-one.

 

[uller6]

Nonetheless, it's common that a display will last for many years longer than a computer it's attached to, if the computer isn't an iMac or other all-in-one.

I made the same assumption, then my M1 iMac display went bad (fuzzy lines) just after the 3 year AppleCare warranty ran out. So, no more Mx iMacs for me! Now I'm forever external displays + modular computers.

 

[wilberforce]

Get Apple Care like you should with all Mac purchases and you don't need to worry about the "what ifs".

Applecare is a bad deal. Just buy a new one if it fails. Cheaper in the long run, and you get the latest model.

 

[Steve121178]

Applecare is a bad deal. Just buy a new one if it fails. Cheaper in the long run, and you get the latest model.

I mean Apple Care costs what, around £60 a year for an iMac for example or approx £160 for 3 years. I am no mathematician, but that does work out cheaper than buying a new computer by my calculations.

Apple Care essentially pays for itself if you need to use it on your £1000-£5000+ hardware. For peace of mind alone it's worth it for some of us.

 

[phrehdd]

If you are talking about a cost of 2 grand for a M4 Mini with 32 gigs RAM, then you really should look at the Studio Max instead. It has more to offer. Otherwise, look at the iMac as you mentioned. The Studio Max I recall would be 36 gigs RAM with 512 SSD. You can up the drive size or add externally.