Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

smetvid

macrumors 6502a
Nov 1, 2009
551
433
You oddly verified exactly what I said. For people that do real work or even gaming and not just make TikTok, YouTube videos, these computers are definitely not the best choice for development or 3D render studios. They benchmark nicely with exclusive software like logic and final cut as they are highly optimized for metal. For anything else, a PC performs the same or better. There is no advantage and in most cases poorer performance. Real professionals do not purchase Mac's when they need to get real compute intensive work done. At least not yet.

Apple did not even compare the M2 to intel gen 13 and Nvidia/AMD GPU benchmark results this launch because the results are severely underwhelming for price/performance. And when you have a serious 3D render project that needs to be done by the end of the day, no one cares that it cost 3 dollars more in power if it gets done 5X+ faster. Throwing 2-3090 to do a render vs a single locked in M1 chip is laughable in comparison. The recent benchmarks are showing The M2 Max are finally catching up to 3070 ti / 3080. (this is metal vs direct x though) This a positive thing, but still nearly impossible to justify for price/performance especially when 4090 is now available. This is not to mention when the 5090 cards come out you can buy it and add it to the 4090 for massive render performance advantages and not have to buy a new 5-6g computer that has the performance of a single 2 generation old PC equivalent card.

I am not saying apple won't catch-up eventually, who knows. If you are convincing yourself that these are the best machines out there for home or for work... I fully disagree. These machines are status symbols. If they released MacOS, right now, into the wild for anyone to install, apple's hardware division would be out of business. Don't kid yourself.

And yes, when I get my clients asking me what Mac they should purchase now, they have no idea where to begin. It is about dollars to performance and life cycle. They aren't going to be buying $20,000+ Mac pro's, I can tell you that. I have a printshop clients running 2012 iMacs still with Adobe software and branching to PC's now because they simply can't justify affording Macs that are locked in and not serviceable. Operating system upgrades no longer being allowed to be installed. They really can't afford the lock down and non-serviceable aspect of apple MacMini's or iMacs anymore. They run their machines in a locked mode until upgrading is absolutely required. They can't afford a single day of downtime. They run file servers off raided old MacPro's and adjust storage as required.... Their is no flexibility like this in apple anymore unless you start buying expensive thunderbolt enclosures and planning to upgrading the OS constantly to keep your browser compatible and supported. MacOS Server is gone, so some customers I have migrated to TrueNAS boxes. Apple makes toys for celebrities and YouTubers now it seem. Definitely not the same creative "business" focus from back in the late nineties.

You can say all you want, I have seen apple for over 40 years now. This current business model they have now is completely back to sealed pretty boxes for maximized profits with celebrities and YouTubers being used by marketing to fill in the deficiencies.
Gaming is not professional. GPU 3D rendering a PC may have an advantage but thats a very small niche. You talk about obscure tasks like video editing and then use 3D rendering as an example. Video editing is 1000 more common from everyday users than 3D animation is.

There are a ton of different apps and industries that work very well on Apple Silicon. Every corner of content creation from graphic designers to 3D artists using CPU rendering. Everyday users benefit as well because let's be real not very many everyday casual users use even a fraction of the power these machines have. Thats why the base M1 MBA was such a big seller for Apple. An affordable machine and yet could do just about anything anybody threw at them with flying colors.

There are very few apps or tasks that run faster on a PC unless you also spend big bucks on the PC. Gaming is the one example and I'm sorry but gaming is not a profession. It's a hobby. Sure some earn money gaming but their ability to earn money gaming has nothing to do with the realism or quality of the render of the game. They can achieve their goal without anti aliasing or using ultra settings. Yeah it looks better but it has zero impact on the ability to earn money gaming. The only argument could be made for fps and yes in that rare case a really fast fps could improve reaction time in a competitive environment.

The reality is the number of tasks a PC can do faster minus gaming is actually very small. Of those tasks most are for a very niche group of users.

Besides I'm not entirely sure a 3D Studio would buy a bunch of Mac minis. Seems like an odd move and a really odd example to give. I work in 3D and if I was building a render farm a Mac would be my last choice. Doesn't mean I wouldn't use one for everything else I do however.

You are basing your examples on GPU 3D rendering which I'm going to assume means Blender Cycles GPU rendering and gaming. I use Blender and I follow very closely the development of the Metal support. Yes it's not there yet. I have a PC desktop I use for that when I need it. A lot of times I use an online render farm service because it's utterly ridiculous to bog down the main and likely only computer to render for hours/days. I use a service that can render something my 3060 GPU PC would take 42 hours to render and they get out done in 20 minutes for about $50. Just pass that cost off to the client. If the 3D is your own personal projects you have to factor in that render cost vs a 4090 for $2,000. You can render 40 large projects to equal the cost of that 4090. Not to mention like I said they get done in minutes vs hours. It's neat to do your own 3D rendering but it's also kind of ridiculous the cost and time involved to do so. By the time one renders that many projects the render farms likely will have updated their hardware meaning the renders can happen even faster and for less cost. In the end owning the GPU yourself doesn't save much unless you are a super power user and thats all you do. If that is the case then yeah sure a Mac mini is a poor choice. Damn Apple, how dare they not make a computer that can do everything. They should be ashamed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: subi257 and HDFan

Silly John Fatty

macrumors 68000
Nov 6, 2012
1,735
457
What do you guys recommend if you want to edit 4K videos that last up to several hours? (But will last less most of the time, more like 15-30 minutes usually). Basically just add subtitles, add audio translations and maybe do some cutting here and there.

Will the Mac Mini be enough to load and play back these big files without choking?

I have a 2010 27" LED Cinema Display, so can't even see the 4K I guess, but it still needs to be that format and therefore files come in a big size.
 

phrehdd

macrumors 601
Oct 25, 2008
4,289
1,292
What do you guys recommend if you want to edit 4K videos that last up to several hours? (But will last less most of the time, more like 15-30 minutes usually). Basically just add subtitles, add audio translations and maybe do some cutting here and there.

Will the Mac Mini be enough to load and play back these big files without choking?

I have a 2010 27" LED Cinema Display, so can't even see the 4K I guess, but it still needs to be that format and therefore files come in a big size.
Work backward - what software will be primary for your purposes? Once you figure that out, you can start to consider which hardware will be a reasonable match in terms of use and cost.

Though I am not quite sure, I do recall some discussion that older Cinema Displays may not work with M1 / M2 Macs. You may want to check into this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Silly John Fatty

gentlefury

macrumors 68030
Jul 21, 2011
2,866
23
Los Angeles, CA


The Mac Studio debuted in 2022 as Apple's most powerful custom silicon standalone desktop computer. Now, with the launch of the latest Mac mini models, the Mac Studio faces a formidable competitor that offers "Pro" capabilities at a substantially lower price point.

mac-studio-vs-mac-mini.jpg

The Mac Studio starts at $1,999, dwarfing the $599 starting price of the M2 Mac mini and even the $1,299 starting price of the M2 Pro Mac mini, so do you need the highest-end Apple silicon Mac, or is the humble Mac mini sufficient for your needs? Our guide helps to answer the question of how to decide which of these two desktop Macs is best for you.

Comparing the Mac Mini and the Mac Studio

The Mac mini and the Mac Studio share some fundamental features, including a familiar, boxy silver aluminum design, Apple silicon chipsets, and two USB-A ports. That being said, the two machines have much more in contrast than they do in common, including different chip options, memory capacities, ports, and external display support capabilities.

Key Differences


Mac mini

  • Height of 1.41 inches (3.58 cm)
  • M2 chip or M2 Pro chip
  • Up to 12-core CPU
  • Up to 19-core GPU
  • Media engine with video decode engine, video encode engines, and ProRes encode and decode engine
  • Up to 200GB/s memory bandwidth
  • Up to 32GB unified memory
  • Support for up to two displays (M2) or three displays (M2 Pro)
  • HDMI 2.1 port
  • Up to four Thunderbolt/USB 4 ports
  • Gigabit Ethernet or 10Gb Ethernet port
  • Wi-Fi 6E (802.11ax)
  • Bluetooth 5.3
  • Starts at $699 for M2 model or $1,299 for M2 Pro model


Mac Studio
  • Height of 3.7 inches (9.5 cm)
  • M1 Max chip or M1 Ultra chip
  • Up to 20-core CPU
  • Up to 64-core GPU
  • Media engine with two video decode engines, up to four video encode engines, and up to four ProRes encode and decode engines
  • Up to 800GB/s memory bandwidth
  • Up to 128GB unified memory
  • Support for up to four Pro Display XDRs and one 4K display
  • HDMI 2.0 port
  • Six Thunderbolt/USB 4 ports
  • SDXC card slot (UHS-II)
  • 10Gb Ethernet port
  • Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax)
    Bluetooth 5.0
  • Starts at $1,999 for M1 Max model or $3,999 for M1 Ultra model


Desktop Apple Silicon Chips Compared

In single-core tasks, the M2 and M2 Pro Mac mini models perform distinctly better than either of the Mac Studio configurations. In multi-core, the picture is less clear-cut. The M2 Mac mini is less powerful than either of the Mac Studio models, but the M2 Pro Mac mini is more powerful than the M1 Max Mac Studio. The M1 Ultra Mac Studio remains the most powerful in multi-core tasks. In GPU tasks, the chips scale as one would expect, with progressively better performance through the M2, M2 Pro, M1 Max, and M1 Ultra. As such, users who need maximum GPU power should still buy the Mac Studio over the Mac mini.

See the approximate Geekbench 5 scores for each Mac mini and Mac Studio below, including the scores for the now-discontinued M1 Mac mini for reference:


Single-Core Scores
  • M1: ~1,700
  • M2: ~2,000
  • M2 Pro: ~2,000
  • M1 Max: ~1,750
  • M1 Ultra: ~1,750
Metal GPU Scores
  • M1: ~22,500
  • M2: ~30,500
  • M2 Pro: ~52,700
  • M1 Max: ~64,700
  • M1 Ultra: ~94,500


Multi-Core Scores
  • M1: ~7,500
  • M2: ~9,000
  • M2 Pro: ~15,000
  • M1 Max: ~12,350
  • M1 Ultra: ~23,350


Unless you plan on buying the M1 Ultra Mac Studio with a focus on multi-core and GPU performance, the M2 Pro Mac mini should be the best all-round choice in terms of performance for most users.

Memory

If you need more than 32GB of memory, the Mac Studio can provide greater quantities up to 128GB. Likewise, the Mac mini's memory bandwidth maxes out at 200GB/s memory bandwidth. The Mac Studio, on the other hand, offers up to 400GB/s or 800GB/s memory bandwidth. As such, if you need extreme quantities of memory and a large amount of memory bandwidth for professional tasks, only the Mac Studio can meet these requirements. It is still worth noting that the M2 Pro Mac mini's 32GB memory option, along with 200GB/s memory bandwidth, should be more than enough for most users.

Ports and External Display Support

The Mac Studio offers a more versatile selection of ports, with two extra Thunderbolt/USB 4 ports and a SDXC card slot compared to the M2 Pro Mac mini, which could be an important consideration for users with a lot of peripherals.

The Mac mini has an HDMI 2.1 port, meaning that it will be better for a small number of users who work with 8K and high refresh-rate external displays, but otherwise the Mac Studio offers better external display support.

Final Thoughts

To some extent, purchasing decisions should be driven by budget, but it is worth bearing in mind that any savings on the desktop computer itself can be put toward a good external display such as Apple's Studio Display, which starts from $1,599. For example, an M2 Pro Mac mini paired with a Studio Display comes to $2,898, which is just $899 more than a lone base model Mac Studio and $1,101 less than the M1 Ultra Mac Studio with no display.


Buy Mac Mini if...
  • You need a high-level of performance and versatility at a comparatively low price
  • You need maximum single-core CPU performance
  • You need maximum multi-core CPU performance and cannot afford the M1 Ultra Mac Studio
  • You need HDMI 2.1 and support for 8K external displays
  • You need Wi-Fi 6E (802.11ax) or Bluetooth 5.3


Buy Mac Studio if...
  • You need maximum multi-core CPU performance and can afford the M1 Ultra model
  • You need maximum GPU performance
  • You need amounts of memory over 32GB and high memory bandwidth
  • You need more than four Thunderbolt/USB 4 ports
  • You need support for more than three external displays
  • You need a built-in SDXC card slot (UHS-II)


You should only consider the Mac Studio if you have a professional workflow that can leverage the extreme power of M1 Ultra, as well as its additional ports and memory options. If you need the Mac Studio, you will likely know that you are looking for a highly powerful machine that is capable of supporting specific intense workflows. Most customers should choose the M2 Pro Mac mini over the M1 Max Mac Studio, saving $700 when looking at the base models. There will likely still be substantial savings when it comes to custom configurations.

Article Link: Mac Mini vs. Mac Studio Buyer's Guide
I weighed my options and it's really annoying. The M1 Max is less powerful CPU than the M2 Pro...but I can get 64GB RAM and 512GB storage and use external storage for maxing out. Will the slower CPU really make a difference in this case? I already ordered the Mac Mini, but now I'm thinking maybe the Studio would be better. Tho I do want HMDI 2.1...but couldn't I use a USB-C to 2.1 cable to get 4k 120 out of the studio?
 

saulinpa

macrumors 65816
Jun 15, 2008
1,255
712
I weighed my options and it's really annoying. The M1 Max is less powerful CPU than the M2 Pro...but I can get 64GB RAM and 512GB storage and use external storage for maxing out. Will the slower CPU really make a difference in this case? I already ordered the Mac Mini, but now I'm thinking maybe the Studio would be better. Tho I do want HMDI 2.1...but couldn't I use a USB-C to 2.1 cable to get 4k 120 out of the studio?
CPU or RAM depends on your application and what you are doing. If you need all that RAM then even a CPU twice as fast might not help.

On a MAC USB-C to 2.1 doesn't get you 4K120Hz as that needs 48GHz and our TB4 ports only go to 40GHZ. Or something like that.
 

phrehdd

macrumors 601
Oct 25, 2008
4,289
1,292
CPU or RAM depends on your application and what you are doing. If you need all that RAM then even a CPU twice as fast might not help.

On a MAC USB-C to 2.1 doesn't get you 4K120Hz as that needs 48GHz and our TB4 ports only go to 40GHZ. Or something like that.
Not challenging but asking - why would a digital line out such as TB4 not handle passing through audio that is of a higher bitrate? It doesn't have to be necessarily processed by the Mac. I ask because I use USB out to my powered speakers that have a built in DAC. The playback is at 24/96 for 24/96 and 24/192 files. It would seem at worst, the Mini could convert to PCM and that would give possibly 48 and higher if it must do the processing. What am I missing here??
 

Silly John Fatty

macrumors 68000
Nov 6, 2012
1,735
457
Work backward - what software will be primary for your purposes? Once you figure that out, you can start to consider which hardware will be a reasonable match in terms of use and cost.

Though I am not quite sure, I do recall some discussion that older Cinema Displays may not work with M1 / M2 Macs. You may want to check into this.

I couldn't find anything about this, do you recall where you read it? That would annoy me, the 27" Cinema Display is such an awesome piece of technology. I can not believe it is well over 10 years old already – doesn't feel like it at all.

As for the software, I would use Final Cut I guess.
 

Matt Leaf

macrumors 6502
Feb 5, 2012
452
450
I’m weighing up between these two at the moment, but the Mac Studio is winning out based purely on ports selection.

As a Studio Display owner, you immediately lose a port due to it being a Thunderbolt Display. I also have a Thunderbolt audio interface. This counts out the M2 Mini for me. While the M2 Pro is a nice option, the SD card reader on the front of the Studio is also a feature I would use and find useful.

I’d basically be waiting for a refurbished Mac Studio that fit my needs, but I guess a big aspect of the M2 Pro mini is it’s simply cheaper.

I honestly don’t find the HDMI port useful at all, after all these years of using dongles to hook up displays. And since the Studio Display is Thunderbolt, HDMI is irrelevant.

If the Mini Pro had had an SD card reader on the back instead of HDMI, that would be perfect imo.
 

phrehdd

macrumors 601
Oct 25, 2008
4,289
1,292
I couldn't find anything about this, do you recall where you read it? That would annoy me, the 27" Cinema Display is such an awesome piece of technology. I can not believe it is well over 10 years old already – doesn't feel like it at all.

As for the software, I would use Final Cut I guess.
I did a quick look up (web browse) and there is a discussion that USB-C to DVI 3rd party adaptor will make the monitor work but some of the keyboard controls will not function. I would suggest you simply type "will old cinema displays work with m1 macs?" as a browser search or something similar to that. It should among things list Apple discussions and others.

For me, I am happy with Studio Max w/64 gigs RAM. It works for what I need and reasonably fast.

Here is something you might enjoy up to the end.
 

NeonNights

macrumors 6502
Jul 22, 2022
471
601
I’m weighing up between these two at the moment, but the Mac Studio is winning out based purely on ports selection.

As a Studio Display owner, you immediately lose a port due to it being a Thunderbolt Display. I also have a Thunderbolt audio interface. This counts out the M2 Mini for me. While the M2 Pro is a nice option, the SD card reader on the front of the Studio is also a feature I would use and find useful.

I’d basically be waiting for a refurbished Mac Studio that fit my needs, but I guess a big aspect of the M2 Pro mini is it’s simply cheaper.

I honestly don’t find the HDMI port useful at all, after all these years of using dongles to hook up displays. And since the Studio Display is Thunderbolt, HDMI is irrelevant.

If the Mini Pro had had an SD card reader on the back instead of HDMI, that would be perfect imo.
For me, I value that HDMI port more to connect a 43" 4K TV that serves as my desk monitor, and frees up TB ports for other peripherals. The TV is equivalent to four 21.5" 1080 monitors at a fraction of the cost. While work provides me with 2-3 monitors, doing daily activities at home on a desktop 43" is immensely more satisfying than an array of smaller monitors. The UHD TV doesn't have the color accuracy, nor refresh rate, of a high-end 27 or 32" 4K/5K/6K monitor but I don't require those features and am more than okay with not spending hundreds or thousands more on a computer display.

I am still torn between an M2 Pro Mini with 16GB/1TB ($1379) versus the base Mac Studio with 32GB/512GB from Costco for $1699. I do light photo/video editing of family vacations and want to get into iOS/Android development as a hobby but not sure how crucial 32GB is. This post by @smetvid is reassuring and suggests 16GB is more than sufficient, even for their professional mobile app development needs.

The 10-core M2 Pro with 32GB/1TB ($1739) is only $40 more than the Costco base Mac Studio, with the Mini having a newer SoC and twice the storage. I just don't know if I'll really use/need the additional RAM, and does the 400 GB/s bandwidth of the Mac Studio M1 Max really matter over 200 GB/s of the M2 Pro Mini for my use case? While $360 for 32GB feels like a ripoff, in the grand scheme of things it's a relatively small amount considering I plan to keep the system for 5-7 years, if not longer.
 
Last edited:

Tagbert

macrumors 603
Jun 22, 2011
5,448
6,269
Seattle
For me, I value that HDMI port more to connect a 43" 4K TV that serves as my desk monitor, and frees up TB ports for other peripherals. The TV is equivalent to four 21.5" 1080 monitors at a fraction of the cost. While work provides me with 2-3 monitors, doing daily activities at home on a desktop 43" is immensely more satisfying than an array of smaller monitors. The UHD TV doesn't have the color accuracy, nor refresh rate, of a high-end 27 or 32" 4K/5K/6K monitor but I don't require those features and am more than okay with not spending hundreds or thousands more on a computer display.

I am still torn between an M2 Pro Mini with 16GB/1TB ($1379) versus the base Mac Studio with 32GB/512GB from Costco for $1699. I do light photo/video editing of family vacations and want to get into iOS/Android development as a hobby but not sure how crucial 32GB is. This post by @smetvid is reassuring and suggests 16GB is more than sufficient, even for their professional mobile app development needs.

The 10-core M2 Pro with 32GB/1TB ($1739) is only $40 more than the Costco base Mac Studio, with the Mini having a newer SoC and twice the storage. I just don't know if I'll really use/need the additional RAM, and does the 400 GB/s bandwidth of the Mac Studio M1 Max really matter over 200 GB/s of the M2 Pro Mini for my use case? While $360 for 32GB feels like a ripoff, in the grand scheme of things it's a relatively small amount considering I plan to keep the system for 5-7 years, if not longer.
The developer of Overcast (podcast app by Marco Arment) was doing his development work on a 16GB M1 and had nothing but praise for it. Photo and family video editing will not stress any of the newer Macs. Your hobbiest coding doesn’t sound like it would be restrained by 16GB, either. Have you used Activity Monitor to look at your memory pressure while you do some of these tasks? That will give you a better idea of your particular needs than some of us on this forum - each of whom has their own needs and ideas of what is enough.
 

Matt Leaf

macrumors 6502
Feb 5, 2012
452
450
For me, I value that HDMI port more to connect a 43" 4K TV that serves as my desk monitor, and frees up TB ports for other peripherals. The TV is equivalent to four 21.5" 1080 monitors at a fraction of the cost. While work provides me with 2-3 monitors, doing daily activities at home on a desktop 43" is immensely more satisfying than an array of smaller monitors. The UHD TV doesn't have the color accuracy, nor refresh rate, of a high-end 27 or 32" 4K/5K/6K monitor but I don't require those features and am more than okay with not spending hundreds or thousands more on a computer display.

It’s funny how much a port or two weighs into a decision. For me, I look at it a couple of ways.

Actually I’m being pushed this way because the new MBP’s only have 3 Thunderbolt ports. My current setup has one connected to the studio display, another to my interface, I have a mouse attached (which could go into the studio display directly) leaving free one or two TB ports.

For me, using HDMI doesn’t free up a Thunderbolt port, because we lost one between MBP generations. While it’s fair to say one may have always been used for power, and now we have MagSafe for that, a Studio Display kills two birds with one stone - it both charges your laptop and connects the display.

When docked, this makes MagSafe redundant. HDMI also sits there doing nothing - meanwhile, I’m down a TB port - and only one on one side. I’d gladly trade the HDMI on the laptop to get back to 4 TB ports, but keep the SD card reader.

As it stands this small discrepancy pushes me to either a Mini or the Studio, and likely the Studio so I have port access on the front.

The bummer for this arrangement is, a docked laptop is a nice setup, so you can have all your stuff with you on the go. Moving to the Studio would see me having to utilise networked storage / file sharing / cloud when away from the desk with a laptop.
 

phrehdd

macrumors 601
Oct 25, 2008
4,289
1,292
It’s funny how much a port or two weighs into a decision. For me, I look at it a couple of ways.

Actually I’m being pushed this way because the new MBP’s only have 3 Thunderbolt ports. My current setup has one connected to the studio display, another to my interface, I have a mouse attached (which could go into the studio display directly) leaving free one or two TB ports.

For me, using HDMI doesn’t free up a Thunderbolt port, because we lost one between MBP generations. While it’s fair to say one may have always been used for power, and now we have MagSafe for that, a Studio Display kills two birds with one stone - it both charges your laptop and connects the display.

When docked, this makes MagSafe redundant. HDMI also sits there doing nothing - meanwhile, I’m down a TB port - and only one on one side. I’d gladly trade the HDMI on the laptop to get back to 4 TB ports, but keep the SD card reader.

As it stands this small discrepancy pushes me to either a Mini or the Studio, and likely the Studio so I have port access on the front.

The bummer for this arrangement is, a docked laptop is a nice setup, so you can have all your stuff with you on the go. Moving to the Studio would see me having to utilise networked storage / file sharing / cloud when away from the desk with a laptop.
I have a Studio Max (previously an M1 Mini but the RAM was not sufficient). Whether I stayed with the Mini or got a MBP...ports are needed - I expanded my ports with Caldigit Elements. For the most part, it works well. It is just C and A ports.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert

ijordano

macrumors regular
Mar 9, 2017
145
195
Why is it ridiculous?

The Mac Studio has two performance levels and a price range from $2000 to $4000+.

The Mac Mini also has two performance levels and a price that goes from $500 to $2000. The performance gets close to the Studio at the top range.

You could say the same thing about the Honda Civic and the Honda Accord. Are they ridiculous?
I don't know anything about cars but yeah, probably. Why not just have one Mac in this form factor and have it be customisable all the way from 500 to 4000? And I say this as an Apple employee who's job it is to explain the need for one or the other on a daily basis
 

Tagbert

macrumors 603
Jun 22, 2011
5,448
6,269
Seattle
I don't know anything about cars but yeah, probably. Why not just have one Mac in this form factor and have it be customisable all the way from 500 to 4000? And I say this as an Apple employee who's job it is to explain the need for one or the other on a daily basis
If the case were the Studio case, they probably could not sell it at $500 for the base. It would also be pretty big for those of us who want something smaller.

I suggest, if customers are asking you which one is which, tell them than the Mini is the Civic and the Studio is the Accord. Most people should get that distinction.
 

NeonNights

macrumors 6502
Jul 22, 2022
471
601
The car analogy makes a lot of sense...to me anyways. Yep, Civic/Accord, Corolla/Camry dilemma. Do you option a compact car to the gills or step up to the base midsize sedan? In most cases, folks would pick the roomier, more powerful Accord/Camry, but none of us need legroom in the Mac Studio. I still like the analogy, doesn't make my purchase decision any easier though.

I was certain of sticking with a souped up Mini but just picked up the Costco Mac Studio today and will try it out for a few weeks. My M2 Pro 16GB/1TB already shipped so it's too late for me to cancel and reorder the 32GB. I plan to return the 16GB M2 Pro as soon as it arrives. In the meantime I will put the Mac Studio through its paces and see if it convinces to to stay with it or order a 32GB M2 Pro. At least with Costco I'll have 90 days to decide.
 
Last edited:

Tagbert

macrumors 603
Jun 22, 2011
5,448
6,269
Seattle
The car analogy makes a lot of sense...to me anyways. Yep, Civic/Accord, Corolla/Camry dilemma. Do you option a compact car to the gills or step up to the base midsize sedan? In most cases, folks would pick the roomier, more powerful Accord/Camry, but none of us need legroom in the Mac Studio. I still like the analogy, doesn't make my purchase decision any easier though.

I was certain of sticking with a souped up Mini but just picked up the Costco Mac Studio today and will try it out for a few weeks. My M2 Pro 16GB/1TB already shipped so it's too late for me to cancel and reorder the 32GB. I plan to return the 16GB M2 Pro as soon as it arrives. In the meantime I will put the Mac Studio through its paces and see if it convinces to to stay with it or order a 32GB M2 Pro. At least with Costco I'll have 90 days to decide.
The Studio is definitely a great machine and if you can get a good deal on it, it is a good choice for a lot of people. I’m sure that you’ll be happy with it.
 

NeonNights

macrumors 6502
Jul 22, 2022
471
601
My guess is not until WWDC in June, at the earliest, but it's just a guess as no one outside Apple really knows with certainty.

The fact that Costco can sell a new base Mac Studio ($1699) for less than the Apple refurbished site ($1799) indicates to me that they're clearing out inventory to make room for the new Studio. Just don't know when. I expect Apple to give the new M2 Mini the spotlight for several months and use the time to build up anticipation for the next updated Mac Studio (and time to clear out old inventory).
 

Tagbert

macrumors 603
Jun 22, 2011
5,448
6,269
Seattle
Are there any predictions on when an M2 or M3 Studio will be released?
If they are putting M2 Max and M2 Ultra in them, I would guess prior to WWDC.

I wonder if they will launch the Mac Pro with an early M3 SOC. If so, they could reveal that at WWDC though ship dates might be later. In that case, they may wait to update the Studio to make use of the same M3 Ultra chip.

Alternately, they may decide to keep the M3 Ultra exclusive to the Pro for now to give it some advantage which might argue for the pre-WWDC M2 Max/Ultra update.
 
  • Like
Reactions: krell100

sunman42

macrumors regular
Jun 23, 2009
158
113
Maryland, USA
I'm sure you've read this but:

R
I suppose I could whistle past the graveyard and claim Mr. Gurman is wrong about as often as he's right, but it does make sense that if the performance/ports/other features of an Apple Silicon Mac Pro would not distinguish itself sufficiently from an M2 Studio, they might hold off on upgrading the Studio until those 3 nm chips were available for the Studio.

That would be a shame, though, because I pretty much had my heart set on buying a second-gen Studio this year. Ah, well, I guess the money won't burn a hole in my pocket.
 

krell100

macrumors 6502
Jul 7, 2007
384
534
Melbourne, Australia
Waiting on an M3 studio here. Don’t need the pci Slots but do need fast single core and lots of usb/TB Out. If Apple releases an M3 ultra studio it will be an instant buy no question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert

phrehdd

macrumors 601
Oct 25, 2008
4,289
1,292
I suppose I could whistle past the graveyard and claim Mr. Gurman is wrong about as often as he's right, but it does make sense that if the performance/ports/other features of an Apple Silicon Mac Pro would not distinguish itself sufficiently from an M2 Studio, they might hold off on upgrading the Studio until those 3 nm chips were available for the Studio.

That would be a shame, though, because I pretty much had my heart set on buying a second-gen Studio this year. Ah, well, I guess the money won't burn a hole in my pocket.
There are a few things that could distinguish a Mac Pro such as - ability to take either proprietary or typical cards on an arbitrated bus, improve the audio DAC situation, and possible inserts of either SSDs or a card that takes 4-6 M.2 or similar SSD. The goal would be internal and optimized.
 

funlad

macrumors regular
Feb 8, 2010
248
3
London. UK
I'm stuck with this decision. Mac Mini M2 Pro 10 core with 32GB of RAM, or a Base Studio M1 Max for just a teeny bit more. My head keeps bouncing between the two... any tips?

I do like the extra ports on the front of the Studio, but prefer the sleeker look of the Mini; I think the Studio looks kinda clunky sat on a desktop next to a monitor. I know that's pure aesthetics though. I've been holding out for a new 27" or larger iMac but am sick of waiting, my old 27" packed up a year ago and I've been living off my MacBook Pro ever since, it's driving me crazy.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.