The Mac mini Dilemma

[russell_314]

mostly watching video or gaming

Apple Studio Display Review

The Apple Studio Display is a 27-inch, 5k display. It competes with the LG UltraFine 5k and is one of two monitors from Apple. Meant for personal use, it's a low...

www.rtings.com

I wouldn’t consider serious gaming on a Mac in the first place. The whole machine and OS is not ideal for that so a gaming monitor isn’t going to help. To me gaming on a Mac is something you do because it’s all you have. For example on a trip and you only have your MacBook Pro.

I’m not sure what videos but I only watch YouTube so nothing that needs perfect visuals. I can see where it was struggle if you were trying to watch a movie at 24 FPS. I guess if you were buying a monitor to watch movies on your Mac then it would not be so great. In that case, I would hook it up to a big screen TV.

I think it’s the best monitor for doing general purpose things like browsing the web, watching YouTube, photo and video editing, and office work. I agree there’s probably some specialized uses where it would not be ideal.

 

[nathansz]

I wouldn’t consider serious gaming on a Mac in the first place. The whole machine and OS is not ideal for that so a gaming monitor isn’t going to help. To me gaming on a Mac is something you do because it’s all you have. For example on a trip and you only have your MacBook Pro.

between whisky/gptk and xbox cloud gaming, gaming on a Mac is actually not that bad currently, the only thing really lacking is GPU horsepower

I actually just sold my gaming tower after getting a new MacBook Pro, its more than sufficient for the few games I play

it's not that the studio display isn't a gaming monitor, it's that it's especially bad for gaming. there are plenty of monitors that are just as good for office and browsing stuff but much better for gaming, and for much less $$$

it's hard to think of anything the audio display is near best at other colour accuracy. and displaying macOS because they insist on building the entire UI around non-standard resolutions

 

[jakey rolling]

It's sometimes an inconvenience (and you don't have to use a hub, you can buy small adapters), but the USB Type-A plug was initially released in 1996! It's time to move on from the USB-A form now that we are almost 30 years down the road. We also moved on (mostly) from PS/2 plugs. Let it go.

The problem with the whole "that old thing is old, so it should go away" argument is that "it is old" it not, in itself, a good reason to get rid of older technologies. Unless there is some real advantage to moving to the shiny new thing, there is really no reason to do so. The question that has to be answered is "what does USB-C do that USB-A doesn't?"

When it comes to keyboards, mice, stream decks, joysticks, printers, scanners, and most other lower-bandwidth accessories, the answer is "not very much at all". We mostly moved on from Serial, Parallel, SCSI, PS/2, and ADB because those other connections had serious limitations that USB addressed (ability to hot-swap, expand connections via hubs, better speed, and proper plug-and-play support). For all intents and purposes, there is no serious limitation to USB-A (or USB 2/3) that USB-C addresses for these peripherals. USB-C's only real advantage (outside of its reversible connector) is really only realized by high-power or high-bandwidth peripherals.

Heck, I'll ask the question directly, though it would be the same question to have to answer for all of us "old fogies" who refuse to give up our USB-A peripherals: Suppose that I do give up my mechanical keyboard, wireless mouse (with its USB-A RF dongle), my webcam, my Stream Deck, my Tascam audio interface, and my label printer, all of which currently work very well, and replace them with USB-C devices, what actual benefit will I get?

 

[jakey rolling]

But in the year 2024 anyone who works at all remotely is going to need these things, and would consider them essential.

You misread what ILoveCalvinCool said - "...don’t even want a webcam, speakers, or mic in their monitors."

Yes, people who work remotely (like myself) need a webcam, speakers, and a microphone, what they don't need is those things to be integrated into their monitor. As good as the speakers in the ASD are, they are still quite poor compared to even a sub-$100 set of computer speakers. The webcam and microphone are barely on-par with what you'd find in a mid-range external webcam. If you're going to be video conferencing and want to sound professional, you're going to use a good quality headset anyway.

 

[ThailandToo]

Keep in mind that not everyone is the same.

I do agree with you on the mouse, definitely. But I love laptop style keyboards and really don't like the travel of most mechanical keyboards. I love my Microsoft Sculpts.

Yes I do agree with you on the Studio Display--way overpriced. Of course so is that 8k2k monstrosity you can't get to work with Apple (on sale for $1600). I just got a midrange 4k 144Hz Acer monitor for $360 that will work great on Mac and Windows. So it's not that strange that some people really like the Studio Display. Monitors are rather personal.

Eh, if all you need is one USB-A port, you can add that with an adapter. But, yes, a $20 hub will do just fine.

For a lot of people, 256GB is just fine. I need 512GB, but I am like having all my files locally. This is also less of an issue on a Mini, as external storage can be added.

I don’t know why anyone would use old USB A anymore? I don’t get it. I mean, I upgraded everything years ago. I hated the USB C to Lightning even. Just convert cables to USB C. It’s faster and better in every way. Whether it’s a thumb drive that’s USB C or a cable that was originally USB A to whatever, it’s simple to switch out for a USB C cable. I do like my Pro Displays but the Studio Display is nice and so is the iMac display. I mean 16” MBPs feel large, so a 24” iMac isn’t that bad. It seems just what the person is used to. I do like the clean look of the iMac as the OP stated. But to each their own.

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

I don’t think the iMac is that poor value for money. But then to some extent value can go beyond actual cost.

To me, the iMac is a high quality 4.K display (£3-400), speakers (let’s say £50), mic and webcam (£50) and the computer itself (in Mac mini realms, that’s £500 with discount). And what little remains left pays for the beautiful industrial design.

Everyone’s needs are different, but I would struggle to say that the iMac is any way poor value.

 

[russell_314]

between whisky/gptk and xbox cloud gaming, gaming on a Mac is actually not that bad currently, the only thing really lacking is GPU horsepower

What you said doesn’t even make sense. That’s like saying you have a drag car and the only thing it lacks is speed.

Cloud gaming could be done on a Chromebook or a $100 mini PC.

I actually just sold my gaming tower after getting a new MacBook Pro, its more than sufficient for the few games I play

There’s nothing wrong with that if the specific games you play are on macOS and work with the newer Mac hardware. You can occasionally game on the Mac, but there’s no convincing me that it’s seriously a gaming computer.

it's not that the studio display isn't a gaming monitor, it's that it's especially bad for gaming. there are plenty of monitors that are just as good for office and browsing stuff but much better for gaming, and for much less $$$

Define just as good? They don’t look as good to my eyes. Will they work? Absolutely. If you’re on a budget, there’s nothing wrong with a good 4K or even 1440P monitor, but it’s not the same.

it's hard to think of anything the audio display is near best at other colour accuracy. and displaying macOS because they insist on building the entire UI around non-standard resolutions

And this is why they are better on macOS. A 4K monitor will never look as good on macOS as a 5K.

 

[nathansz]

What you said doesn’t even make sense. That’s like saying you have a drag car and the only thing it lacks is speed.

Not every game requires that much power nor needs to be played at 200 fps

There’s nothing wrong with that if the specific games you play are on macOS

They don’t need to be on macOS. Whiskey can run most windows games now

Define just as good? They don’t look as good to my eyes. Will they work? Absolutely. If you’re on a budget, there’s nothing wrong with a good 4K or even 1440P monitor, but it’s not the same.

Studio display isn’t the only 5k monitor out there, but also not convinced you are missing much on a 4k monitor for just browsing and office stuff. I do 2560x1440x2 on a 4k monitor and text is plenty sharp from where I set. you have to zoom in a ridiculous amount before you see any pixels or blur

 

[kimjongbill]

There is quite a difference between feeling the need of a Studio Display and a very good $300 monitor, which is not hard to find these days. You absolutely can get more bang for your buck going the Mac mini route vs paying a $1000 premium for the iMac.

Mac min - $499 (education discount)
Magic Keyboard w/ Touch ID - $149
Magic Trackpad - $129
34" Ultrawide monitor - $299

$1076

That still puts you about $400 cheaper than the iMac with an embarrassing 24" screen in 2024. While the screen looks great, the size just doesn't cut it IMO.

At least you can change the screen scaling so you can fit a lot more than you could on a non-retina 24” screen

 

[monokakata]

I guess if you don't really listen to music then having only built in speakers makes sense

I personally couldn't imagine it

even most "computer" or "multi-media" speakers are trash

As my hearing deteriorated (but my love of music didn't) and I wanted to clear off my desk, I got a Studio monitor to go with my Studio, and put my pair of small Genelecs and the USB audio interface in storage. The Studio speakers are just fine for getting through the day. When I want to listen to music, I use high-end headphones (Sennheiser and B&W). The tradeoff works for me.

At first I thought of it as a trial period, but it's been almost 18 months now and I'm not wishing for the Genelecs. Time for craigslist, I guess.

 

[Rychiar]

Well, you could also argue the magic starts to go away when you start noticing the bad bits of Apple.

• Magic Mouse is a genuinely ****** mouse.
• Magic Keyboard is a mediocre laptop style keyboard at an inflated price.
• Studio Display has the specs of a ~$500-600 4K display, but is priced at 3x that just because it's Apple and 5K res.
• Requiring a USB hub to add to your Mac Mini because it doesn't come with a single USB-A port adds inconvenience.
• The base storage of 256 GB means you'll likely run into the need to get an external drive, again adding clutter and inconvenience.

I love all of these things except the base storage being embarrassingly low. Love my 8tb external

 

[chmania]

There’s no real dilemma with opting for the 'base' M4 Mac mini; the real conundrum lies with those who splashed out for the extra 16GB of RAM on their M1, M2, and M3 Macs, whatever they may be. Not everyone is engaged in video editing or trying to be a YouTube 'expert.' I’ve just acquired a brand new M4 'base' Mac mini and an MSI 4K 27" monitor. I had those fancy 'magic' peripherals already, the mouse and the trackpad. I’m running the resolution at 6K split into two - 3008x1692px, and I couldn’t care less about the whole “using scaled resolution may affect performance” malarkey. I’ve also just got my hands on a Nulea trackball mouse, so the 'magic' mouse will be retired—perhaps even sold off.

 

[uller6]

Hi,

I am interested to hear more about this. Could you share in what ways the studio display is better than the XDR?

I personally don't like the mini-LED backlight array on the XDR. The non-uniform backlight messes with my brain, so I prefer a single uniform backlight - of course I figured this out after I purchased the XDR.

The XDR also has a strange "grainy" effect when scrolling text on white backgrounds, while the studio display does not. I'm not sure what causes this, but most of my work is text-based so it is very noticeable to me.

 

[georgivelev]

Bear in mind the base iMac has only 2 USB ports, whereas the mini has 5. The processor in the base iMac has 8-core CPU and 8-core GPU, whereas the mini has 10 cores for CPU and 10 GPU. Therefore, a better comparison would be the base mini against 2nd tier iMac.

The base iMac can be used only as a typewriter or email checking machine at hotels. Or at schools, libraries, etc. For most any other task it would be inconvenient.

Having said that, I do not think iMacs as general are useless. If all of your devices are wireless, your desk is mostly declutered, which is beautiful. However, it comes at a price. You should also factor in the upgrade of the storage - 256GB won’t cut it - to at least 1GB, which adds another €1000. An external 1GB SSD costs 95€ but adds clutter.

So, basically, it’s a €2200 iMac against a €800 mini. Guess what, I’d rather live with the clutter.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Bear in mind the base iMac has only 2 USB ports, whereas the mini has 5. The processor in the base iMac has 8-core CPU and 8-core GPU, whereas the mini has 10 cores for CPU and 10 GPU. Therefore, a better comparison would be the base mini against 2nd tier iMac.

The base iMac can be used only as a typewriter or email checking machine at hotels. Or at schools, libraries, etc. For most any other task it would be inconvenient.

Having said that, I do not think iMacs as general are useless. If all of your devices are wireless, your desk is mostly declutered, which is beautiful. However, it comes at a price. You should also factor in the upgrade of the storage - 256GB won’t cut it - to at least 1GB, which adds another €1000. An external 1GB SSD costs 95€ but adds clutter.

So, basically, it’s a €2200 iMac against a €800 mini. Guess what, I’d rather live with the clutter.

I agree with you on this (above). When I purchased my 2019 iMac (27" 5K screen) I still use for light photo editing, I bought and installed as much Crucial RAM modules as possible, and now plan to replace the 2TB Fusion drive with a 2-4TB SSD. This iMac is still useful to me, even if it is much slower to function than a 2024 iMac. The M4 iMac looks pretty, but it would cost a fortune to buy one with a 10-Core CPU & GPU plus internal 64GB RAM and a 2TB SSD. The thought of a new M4 iMac does not even cross my mind.

More than likely I will buy a Mini with more RAM and minimum internal storage, and move the Home Folder, plus applications, to a compact and fast 2-4TB external SSD. At least once the warranty is over there may be ways to replace the SSD with a 1-2TB one (?)

 

[eltoslightfoot]

Studio display isn’t the only 5k monitor out there, but also not convinced you are missing much on a 4k monitor for just browsing and office stuff. I do 2560x1440x2 on a 4k monitor and text is plenty sharp from where I set. you have to zoom in a ridiculous amount before you see any pixels or blur

Totally agree. I use a 4k gaming monitor (Acer Predator 27" something-or-other) and it looks great on Mac. Very sharp.

 

[ivnj]

There is quite a difference between feeling the need of a Studio Display and a very good $300 monitor, which is not hard to find these days. You absolutely can get more bang for your buck going the Mac mini route vs paying a $1000 premium for the iMac.

Mac min - $499 (education discount)
Magic Keyboard w/ Touch ID - $149
Magic Trackpad - $129
34" Ultrawide monitor - $299

$1076

That still puts you about $400 cheaper than the iMac with an embarrassing 24" screen in 2024. While the screen looks great, the size just doesn't cut it IMO.

I already have monitor, keyboard, and mouse. So only 500 for me plus M1 256-8 tradein.

The initial investment is high. But for the next mini then the monitor and accessories get reused.

Except I need a hub for the USB A keyboard and mouse. Or A female to C male adapter for the existing hub.

Unless M4 mini requires a special monitor. Mine has HDMI only. No USB C.

 

[ivnj]

This is my monitor.

Dell Monitor

mvvg.blogspot.com

 

[lwilliams]

Yesterday, 2 days ago, I bought:

mac Mini M4 10 Core, 512 SSD, 24GB
Magic Kybd with Touch ID
Magic Mouse
MSI 40" Ultrawide 4K, IPS, HDR

I have been using Macbook Pro machines for 14 years. Multiple iPhones, Apple Watches, iPads, Apple TVs. So, I needed to upgrade my Windows machine in my studio. I looked at iMacs, but since Apple does not have the 27" now, it was out of the running for me.

I installed everything today. The macOS on this 40" display is great. I would never go to the 24" iMac display.

After spending all day with the new hardware, I am fully certain that I made the right decision. I may still get a trackpad.

.

 

[xraydoc]

Studio Display has the specs of a ~$500-600 4K display, but is priced at 3x that just because it's Apple and 5K res.

You’ve obviously never used one for any length of time.

 

[redheeler]

Studio Display has the specs of a ~$500-600 4K display, but is priced at 3x that just because it's Apple and 5K res.

You’ve obviously never used one for any length of time.

Or any 5120x2880 display for that matter (including the old 27” iMacs and LG Ultrafine 5K).

There are exactly 0 comparable 4K displays. And 0 that will deliver as polished an experience on MacOS which is really best on 2x integer scaling.

 

[chmania]

Yesterday, 2 days ago, I bought:

mac Mini M4 10 Core, 512 SSD, 24GB
Magic Kybd with Touch ID
Magic Mouse
MSI 40" Ultrawide 4K, IPS, HDR

I have been using Macbook Pro machines for 14 years. Multiple iPhones, Apple Watches, iPads, Apple TVs. So, I needed to upgrade my Windows machine in my studio. I looked at iMacs, but since Apple does not have the 27" now, it was out of the running for me.

I installed everything today. The macOS on this 40" display is great. I would never go to the 24" iMac display.

After spending all day with the new hardware, I am fully certain that I made the right decision. I may still get a trackpad.

.

You've made a wise choice with MSI as your monitor. In time, you may find yourself regretting the Magic Mouse. I purchased mine from a rather disgruntled user, and now I've been introduced to the joys of a trackball mouse, so the Magic Mouse will soon be up for sale.

 

[Isengardtom]

You’ve obviously never used one for any length of time.

I agree that 500$-600$ was a bit hyperbole but it's definitely overpriced at 1.779 EUR base) here in Belgium with only 60 Hz, extremely mediocre webcam (I would even call it bad) and no adjustable stand without paying extra for nano texture and adjustable stand (2.489 EUR)


Personally think the iMac is beter value thank the Mac Mini - unless you buy a monitor to use for the next decade.
* design is subjective but I like it a lot. Clean, 1 cable
* good screen, webcam,
* I always choose the trackpad as I think MacOS actually works well with trackpads (Windows less so for me). I like the keyboard


24" screen is big enough and if I need multi tasking I prefer two 24" screens (I have a samsung one from work for working from home) then 1 27" screen.

It's still cheap (vs. an iMac) if you consider that the nice monitor, etc. that you buy for it will come across to your next mini.

I agree with this to an extent, but the monitor will be outdated at some point. 60 hZ feels already outdated for that price point

 

[russell_314]

In time, you may find yourself regretting the Magic Mouse. I purchased mine from a rather disgruntled user, and now I've been introduced to the joys of a trackball mouse, so the Magic Mouse will soon be up for sale.

I see some people on here absolutely love the magic mouse. I’m in the camp of not liking it because it feels too thin under my hand. I like to rest my palm on the mouse, and I feel like I have to hover uncomfortably over the magic mouse. I’ll admit I didn’t give it much of a chance though.

 

[throAU]

I agree with this to an extent, but the monitor will be outdated at some point. 60 hZ feels already outdated for that price point

This is kinda the point though - if you buy a mini you wouldn't buy a 60hz display today. Unless you're buying an apple studio display I guess, but there are plenty of other options.