Mac Mini vs. Mac Studio Buyer's Guide: 20+ Differences Compared

[HazardousT]

From the article -
You should only consider the ‌Mac Studio‌ if you have a professional workflow that can leverage the extreme power of the ‌M1 Max‌ or ‌M1‌ Ultra, as well as its wider selection of ports. If you need the ‌Mac Studio‌, you will likely know that you are looking for a highly powerful machine that is capable of supporting an intense workflow.

For some workflows, the ability to upgrade the ‌Mac mini‌ to 16GB of memory, up to 2TB of storage, and 10Gb Ethernet can make it a very capable machine. This may be a good option for professionals or "prosumers" that have specific needs or can't stretch to the ‌Mac Studio‌. Nevertheless, the ‌Mac Studio‌ has greater potential, making it a better long-term option if you can afford it.

So... you should only consider the Mac Studio if you have a professional workflow if you follow the logic of the first paragraph, but using the logic of the second paragraph if you are a 'prosumer' the Mac Studio has greater potential and it can be a better long term option if you can afford it.

To be honest, that isn't very helpful for me in making a decision since what I wanted was the 27 inch iMac, even if I had to live with just an M1 processor but I could get a decent SSD and a 16 or 32 GB memory options. So I can spend less money (on the Mac Mini), and either have a smaller screen or pay $1600 to get an equivalent sized 27 inch screen but either way I will have a less powerful processor and have to pay to bump up the memory, or I can spend a little less than $3000 dollars (depending on how much memory I decide to get and hard drive size) and get a Studio. I don't want a laptop, and I don't know where the last round of MacBook Pro laptops rate compared to the Studio anyway, performance wise.

Therein lies one of the main gripes that many of us have and some don't seem to understand.


The M1 limits you to 16GB of memory and the M1 Max is overkill for most of us.

Not sure why Apple decided to only release the M1 Pro in a laptop. I don't need a portable computer and for that matter there is no real estate on my desk to accommodate one even if I were to purchase and connect to an external monitor.

The iMac 27" was the perfect fit for me.

 

[pcote]

So it's either low end or high end? No middle ground at all on this is there?

I agree. They should have added the M1 Pro chip as well as an entry point.

 

[slainbabyyc]

They are gonna give you guys M1 pro in a Mac mini eventually, after they have tempted as many people as they can to spring for the Studio.

 

[CWallace]

To me, "a better long term option" (i.e. longevity) is tied to upgradeability. I'm typing this on a Mid 2010 Mac Pro cheese grater running Mojave, and the reason I am is because over the last 10 years I was able to upgrade the SSD (twice), the video card (to an Metal-capable AMD RADEON HD 7950 Sapphire Mac Edition) and the memory (from 8 GB to 24 GB). As my needs increased, the system was able to be upgraded to meet them.

Well there is the 2019 Mac Pro for that market. And yes, I know it costs a shedload, but the mid-2010 model was a significant price jump from the earlier models, as well.

This is no longer the case with the Mac Studio, you're locked in for the life of the hardware. That 32 GB/10 core CPU/24 core GPU cores looks great now - will it still look as great in 10 years when the base 2032 Mac Studio (assuming it's still being made) is an "M6 Max" with, say, 128 GB/128 core CPU/256 core GPU?

Considering you appear to have never felt the need to replace the decade-old CPUs in your current Mac Pro (not that you had many options to do so), an M1 Max or M1 Ultra might very well last a decade, as well. And the iMac forum has quite a number of folks sitting on 5-10 year old machines that are still doing the job, so they've been holding on to see what comes down the pike with M1, M2 and beyond.

The biggest issue someone buying a Mac Studio today would be how much memory to put in it since that is the one thing you absolutely cannot expand. Storage you can easily (and inexpensively) add via USB4 and TB4. And even though eGPUs currently do not work with Apple silicon (and probably never will), current Apple silicon GPUs are absolute beasts for video editing and image manipulation. An M1 Ultra can handle something like 18 8K video streams - far more than a human video editor could work with simultaneously.

So, why isn't there an M1 Pro-based "Mac mini pro" yet? No one seems to talk about that, either.

With respect, the pundits and this forum have been talking about it for almost a year.

My guess is that an M1 Pro / M2 Pro Mac mini is coming to slot below the Mac Studio. It is the only real reason to not have not offered an M1 Pro / 16GB memory option in the Studio. A Mac mini with a Pro SoC would likely be around $1299 with 16GB/512GB, so you'd be saving $700 over the Studio. Upgrade to 32GB, and it would still be $300 cheaper.

 

[HazardousT]

They are gonna give you guys M1 pro in a Mac mini eventually, after they have tempted as many people as they can to spring for the Studio.

There are no guarantees that will happen. It's all just wishful thinking at this point.

 

[slainbabyyc]

There are no guarantees that will happen. It's all just wishful thinking at this point.

I'll bet you $5 it does

 

[HazardousT]

I'll bet you $5 it does

I'm not betting on anything when it comes to Apple and besides what do they plan on doing, releasing an M1 Pro desktop and M2 simultaneously? It just makes no sense to me why the decided not to do it now. How hard would it have been to swap out the M1 max for an M1 pro on the mainboard and call it a day?

 

[Riot Nrrrd]

Well there is the 2019 Mac Pro for that market. And yes, I know it costs a shedload, but the mid-2010 model was a significant price jump from the earlier models, as well.

The 2019 model was well above my pay grade. And I paid US $4,150 for that slightly-used Mid 2010, in part because it also came with an Apple RAID Card and 4x2 TB internal drives.

Considering you appear to have never felt the need to replace the decade-old CPUs in your current Mac Pro (not that you had many options to do so), an M1 Max or M1 Ultra might very well last a decade, as well. And the iMac forum has quite a number of folks sitting on 5-10 year old machines that are still doing the job, so they've been holding on to see what comes down the pike with M1, M2 and beyond.

The biggest issue someone buying a Mac Studio today would be how much memory to put in it since that is the one thing you absolutely cannot expand. Storage you can easily (and inexpensively) add via USB4 and TB4. And even though eGPUs currently do not work with Apple silicon (and probably never will), current Apple silicon GPUs are absolute beasts for video editing and image manipulation. An M1 Ultra can handle something like 18 8K video streams - far more than a human video editor could work with simultaneously.

Just because I didn't say it doesn't mean I didn't consider it

I've looked at dual-3.46 GHz tray replacements many times over the years (and as recently as a few months ago!) but until this year they were always too cost-prohibitive for me.

While you're right about adding secondary storage, most of my storage is on RAID units that are in another room so a 4 TB SSD would fill all of my needs just fine. (The 4x2 TB RAID is in a 4.8 TB RAID5 configuration and I'm only using half of that, mostly for music files that I like having a local cache for. That and photos.)

You're also right about RAM, that's a big sticking point. I bought my cheese grater with 8 GB and expanding it to 24 fit me perfectly. I average about 16-18 GB in use so for me an M1 Mac mini isn't really an option. I like having some overhead, presumably it's being used for page caching.

With respect, the pundits and this forum have been talking about it for almost a year.

My guess is that an M1 Pro / M2 Pro Mac mini is coming to slot below the Mac Studio. It is the only real reason to not have not offered an M1 Pro / 16GB memory option in the Studio. A Mac mini with a Pro SoC would likely be around $1299 with 16GB/512GB, so you'd be saving $700 over the Studio. Upgrade to 32GB, and it would still be $300 cheaper.

I didn't phrase that well.

What I meant was that people have been talking about the fact that there wasn't an M1 Pro Mac mini announced, but they haven't really talked about the why. I'm trying to speculate about the technical reasons why Apple would not have announced such a machine at this past Apple Event. I haven't really seen a lot of chatter about that. I'm wondering if thermal issues played a part in that decision.

I would've been really happy to have seen a 32 GB M1 Pro Mac mini announced, so I'm curious why it didn't. I suspect as you do that eventually we will get something to close that gap; but by then my hand will have been forced - to get a low-end Mac Studio.

(My work is about to block all hosts that don't run at least Big Sur from the network, so I won't be able to connect in from my cheese grater anymore. I can't use any dosdude1-type hacks to run Big Sur or Monterey, because it'll break my iSight FireWire camera and my internal RAID. The signs are all there that it's time to replace it. 10 years is a good run. New computer here we come!)

 

[pertusis1]

If you need to read a buyer's guide to decide if you need the power of the Mac Studio, you probably don't need the power of the Mac Studio.

I was hoping for some gaming info. Oh well. We use FCPX and logic a lot, and by the specs, studio should be awesome for those. I’m not using 8k video or anything.

 

[CWallace]

I would've been really happy to have seen a 32 GB M1 Pro Mac mini announced, so I'm curious why it didn't.

My guess is the same reason it was not released alongside the MacBook Pro 14/16: Apple wanted the focus on the new toys then and they wanted it on the new toy (Mac Studio) now.

With Mac Pro said to be announced at WWDC, my guess is we will see it launch late summer (via a Press Release) if an M1 Pro or in the Fall at a Mac event alongside the M2 Mac mini (so M2 Pro), M2 MacBook Air and M2 MacBook Pro 13.3".

 

[pertusis1]

Something to consider is the longevity of a good monitor. Many forum users still use 30” ACD from 2007-2009. They were crazy expensive new, but I have two with not one missing pixel 14 years later.

I agree that getting a mini with a nice monitor and planning on upgrading the CPU over time is not a bad option. I am blown away with how capable my MacBook Air is with a wide variety of tasks.

 

[ruka.snow]

Useful insight, thanks. I agree, files in PS can balloon. I would like to a) edit quickly and move between photos quick;y and b) export the edits quickly, e.g. batches of 10 in LR. Thoughts/experience? The Mac Studio looks nice, for sure. But already the M1 is a boost I am sure. I am on an i7 from 2012!

The batches you are exporting and your current machine suggests anything from a base M1 mini would provide a major improvement. Even this weekend my M1 mini had no problems importing 12,000 45 MP RAW images and batch updating a dozen adjustments then exporting the few hundred best picks. The MBP 14 inch I have and surely the Studio coming next week would have done it all a little quicker, but it does not sound like you are working on this scale and on a individual photo in Lightroom, Capture One, or even a gigabyte multi layered PSD I find the extra 4 performance cores and extra GPU cores aren’t being felt.

 

[ruka.snow]

Something to consider is the longevity of a good monitor. Many forum users still use 30” ACD from 2007-2009. They were crazy expensive new, but I have two with not one missing pixel 14 years later.

I agree that getting a mini with a nice monitor and planning on upgrading the CPU over time is not a bad option. I am blown away with how capable my MacBook Air is with a wide variety of tasks.

That’s a lot of mileage out of those monitors. How’s the backlight holding up? I have a few LCD where ether they are perfect, off completely, of have dimmed considerably.

 

[Pmperry]

Without gaming, the market for the $5k version of this studio is wasted on most people. Even the $4K Mac Studio is wasted on most people.

Anyone that honestly feels like they need a little more than the M1 Pro, should just jump to the base model of the Studio and maybe look at more storage and RAM.

I can’t even fathom why I would need more than my M1 Max MacBook Pro, and I struggle to believe that most other people need that either.

 

[Pmperry]

That studio with a display included at $1999 would be middle ground. The additional $1600 for a display that was already included in the previous 27" iMac is anything but.

We can agree to disagree.

Not only that, there are 10 bit 4K displays that are hardware calibrated and a better fit for less money. This display is honestly overpriced and I wish it were more like an iPad with Pencil support.

 

[kazmac]

My iMacs were almost always close to $3k and none were top of the line. For me, the entry level Mac Studio is a good price (hell my M1 MacBookPro was almost $2500 which I thought was too much for the highest config). The Studio display is overpriced though, especially with the added price for the stand (which doesn’t include portrait rotation).

To sell the Studio display at more than the 24” iMac is a bit much. I‘d definitely wait on sales for the Studio display and use something else with the Max Mac Studio in the interim.

 

[HazardousT]

My iMacs were almost always close to $3k and none were top of the line. For me, the entry level Mac Studio is a good price (hell my M1 MacBookPro was almost $2500 which I thought was too much for the highest config). The Studio display is overpriced though, especially with the added price for the stand (which doesn’t include portrait rotation).

To sell the Studio display at more than the 24” iMac is a bit much. I‘d definitely wait on sales for the Studio display and use something else with the Max Mac Studio in the interim.

No disrespect but what iMac were you buying that were not top of the line that cost close to 3k?

There are my configurations just a few years ago.

Keep in mind I upgraded to 64GB of memory separately for a few hundred $ because Apple wants your first born child to pay for theirs.

27-inch iMac with Retina 5K display​

With the following configuration: 3.6GHz 8-core 9th-generation Intel Core i9 processor, Turbo Boost up to 5.0GHz 8GB 2666MHz DDR4 memory Radeon Pro Vega 48 with 8GB of HBM2 memory 1TB SSD storage Magic Mouse 2 Magic Keyboard - US English Accessory Kit​

$3,104.00​

 

[kazmac]

No disrespect but what iMac were you buying that were not top of the line that cost close to 3k?

There are my configurations just a few years ago.

Keep in mind I upgraded to 64GB of memory separately for a few hundred $ because Apple wants your first born child to pay for theirs.

27-inch iMac with Retina 5K display​

With the following configuration: 3.6GHz 8-core 9th-generation Intel Core i9 processor, Turbo Boost up to 5.0GHz 8GB 2666MHz DDR4 memory Radeon Pro Vega 48 with 8GB of HBM2 memory 1TB SSD storage Magic Mouse 2 Magic Keyboard - US English Accessory Kit​

$3,104.00​

No worries.

Maxing out memory and storage on 21” iMacs pushed it past $2500, until I moved to stock configurations of the 21” and 27” iMacs, $2500 and more was the usual price I paid for iMacs because of the upgrade fees.

Kind of annoyed I paid close to that again for 13” M1 MBP.

 

[ian87w]

I find this comparison hilarious, where one is less than half the price of the other.

 

[pertusis1]

That’s a lot of mileage out of those monitors. How’s the backlight holding up? I have a few LCD where ether they are perfect, off completely, of have dimmed considerably.

The backlight is holding up great. I'm not sure what it was like when it was started, but I rarely use it at full brightness.

 

[Riot Nrrrd]

That’s a lot of mileage out of those [Apple Cinema Display] monitors. How’s the backlight holding up? I have a few LCD where ether they are perfect, off completely, of have dimmed considerably.

Maybe it's my eyes from getting old, but I've had my 30" Apple Cinema HD Display for over 13 years now and it still looks almost as good as new to me. It's had problems (I can't seem to get my HP laptop to talk to it reliably without blinking; and the power/brightness buttons gave me "I'm just gonna do whatever I want" fits until I disabled them in System Preferences) but the image quality is still great.

 

[HazardousT]

Maybe it's my eyes from getting old, but I've had my 30" Apple Cinema HD Display for over 13 years now and it still looks almost as good as new to me. It's had problems (I can't seem to get my HP laptop to talk to it reliably without blinking; and the power/brightness buttons gave me "I'm just gonna do whatever I want" fits until I disabled them in System Preferences) but the image quality is still great.

Some of the best monitors ever created.

 

[ikramerica]

I need to say that I am confused now. Nothing negative, just not very clear. We now have Mac Mini, Mac Studio and Mac Pro. How to really understand it?

Thats easy

Try this

Classic II
LC 1/2
IIsi
IIvi
IIvx
IIcx
IIci
IIfx
Quadra 700
Quadra 900
Quadra 950

All sold concurrently.

Plus performa versions of some.

 

[ikramerica]

Maybe it's my eyes from getting old, but I've had my 30" Apple Cinema HD Display for over 13 years now and it still looks almost as good as new to me. It's had problems (I can't seem to get my HP laptop to talk to it reliably without blinking; and the power/brightness buttons gave me "I'm just gonna do whatever I want" fits until I disabled them in System Preferences) but the image quality is still great.

I am sure, but I think it’s lost brightness over time. I loved my original Cinema but I think by the end it lost 1/2 it’s brightness.

 

[JustAnExpat]

My iMacs were almost always close to $3k and none were top of the line. For me, the entry level Mac Studio is a good price (hell my M1 MacBookPro was almost $2500 which I thought was too much for the highest config). The Studio display is overpriced though, especially with the added price for the stand (which doesn’t include portrait rotation).

To sell the Studio display at more than the 24” iMac is a bit much. I‘d definitely wait on sales for the Studio display and use something else with the Max Mac Studio in the interim.

Are you in America, or elsewhere? I'm unable to find any American priced iMacs that are not customized and cost around $3K USD.

2020 Retina 27": $2,299 (3.8GHZ)
2019 Retina 27": $2,299 (3.7 GHZ)
2019 Retina 21": $1,499 (3.0 GHZ)
2017 iMac Pro: $4,999 (3.2 GHZ) [Note: This can not be your model, since it's greater then 3K USD and designed for pros.
2015 Retina 27": $2,299 (3.3 GHZ)
2014 Retina 27": $2,499 [speed unknown]
2013 Retina 27": $1,999 (3.4 GHZ)
2012 27": $1,999 (3.2 GHZ)
2011 27": $1,999 (3.1 GHZ)
2010 27": $1,999 (2.8 GHZ)
2009 27": $1,999 (2.66 GHZ)

(source: MacTracker)

COULD these prices be higher elsewhere in the world? Yes, because of import taxes and potentially VAT/Sales Tax. Could you be remembering the price with sales tax included if you're in America? Maybe (if you're paying 10% sales tax, the top of the line 2020 retina would be about $2,500).