Updated Mac Mini Still Coming With M2 and M2 Pro Chips

Mr. Dee said:
Geez, we can't even let the M1 Ultra simmer. The notebook rumor turned out to be a farce anyway. So, take these things with a grain of salt. I am still enjoying my M1 MacBook Pro. But I am still keeping hope Apple will continue to make a much larger iMac. 32 inch screen would be nice.
Click to expand...
yep, as gurman and others said Apple just replace the normal 27" imac
 
_Spinn_ said:
If Apple is going to start releasing the new M2 chips before they’ve transitioned the Mac Pro, I wonder what that means for whatever chip they are planning to put in there?

Is it going to be an M2 of some kind? They did say the M1 Ultra was the last M1 chip. Seems odd to announce the absolute top of the line M2 before the other variants.

Or maybe the Mac Pro will have 2 M1 Ultras in it so it isn’t technically a new chip? Though Apple seemed to throw shade at that during the announcement of the M1 Ultra.
Click to expand...
planteater said:
I see the Mac Pro being the first with the M2.
Click to expand...
smulji said:
This is assuming that Apple will release the Mac Pro this year.
Click to expand...
Maybe they will release the M2 chip in the Mini, and the Ultra M2 in the Pro, at the same event later this year?

BobMcBob said:
The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming
Click to expand...
You could make a religion out of that.
 
An 10/14 M1 Pro Mac mini would probably start at $1199 with 16/512.

M1 Mac mini with 16/512 is $1099.
10/24 M1 Max Mac Studio with 32/512 is $1999 (Apple charges $400 to upgrade memory from 16GB to 32GB, $300 to upgrade processor from 10/14 M1 Pro to 10/24 M1 Max).

If the M2 Mac mini increases in price, there is no room for the Mx Pro chip in the Mac mini lineup.
 
M2 release would a be a hint about how computers would evolve in this new era, since 15 years ago, X86 in single core improvements have been quite slow, you can see only 2X in 10 years, and multicore was the only way to multiply performance, but that wouldn't mean improvements for all software as many relies in single core for task.

This single core thing, did many users didn't need to upgrade computers in 10 years as common task relies in single core, but if Apple silicon proves big leaps, this would mean huge software improvements and hardware would be obsolete sooner (same as smartphones where most of their new features are just outcome of CPU improvements and they become old quite soon)

So M1 took a big lap in single core performance compared with X86, let's see how M2 compares with M1.

Single core performance with power efficiency is what really leads the software development.
 
Sadly I I can't wait more time (macbook pro late 2013 here), so I'm tied to get the base mac studio right now, the diff between my mini specs that I want vs the new base studio are around $700, so I think the studio worth.
 
Makes lots of sense.

More as likely, for prosumers that want a big screen Mac with a pro processor (formerly known as the iMac Pro), Apple’s answer will be to buy the studio display and Mac mini with an m2 pro processor.

I also think that this will mean that the iMac stays as the desktop equivalent of the MacBook Air, as an entry level computer for those that want a stylish all in one.

I know there are iMac Pro fans out there - but it strikes me that Apple knows it’s not a big enough market to justify making an unupgradeable 5k screen all in one computer.
 
erikkfi said:
For a lineup that used to have a $499 entry point as recently as 2018, it sounds too high to me.
Click to expand...
Agree. When Jobs announced the first mac mini, the goal was to attract new users to the mac family with a BYODKM lower cost mac.

The current Apple is different. A trillion dollar company doesn't necessarily need to attract new users directly. The Apple brand itself already draw new users. So today's Apple's goal is to gain as much money from their users.
 
SSDGUY said:
Perhaps they were wrong and the M1 Ultra is the M2? I mean, did anyone see the M1 Ultra coming?
Click to expand...
That sounds logical. M2 could have been dual m1 max all this time and other rumors like Apple is testing M2 Mac was true in that regard before the peek performance event. We certainly understand the event tile is applicable to the M1 ultra.

Also now that we have seen the m1 ultra thermo design in the Mac Ultra there is no way Apple was ready at the event to show off a large iMac with how some suggested product forms lacked adequate cooling.
Too many rumors also suggested smaller Mac Mini models as getting M2. Seems like a lot of assumptions we’re not satisfied by this show that seemed very brief and fast covering everything that was announced.

Do we have updates for Mac Minis coming, yes, should we label them around the M2 term, no, we got zinged by Apple. They did a excellent job of misdirecting our speculation.
 
Miat said:
M2, more ports, and 32GB RAM. Take. My. Money. ????

M2 will happen, more ports will almost certainly happen, but 32GB RAM may not, at least not yet.

Good chance Apple will keep the Mini on 16GB max for another generation to reduce competition with the Studio in particular. RAM will be a major point of difference.

That said, as a low end base user (single monitor, streaming vids, browsing, very occasional video processing), even the current M1 would be fine for my needs. A bit more self-restraint with the number of windows and tabs open, plus a 3rd-party port hub, will cover it for me.

Actually seriously considering an M1 refurb at the moment.

I am running a 2012 Mini, so any models from 2018 on are a huge step up.
Click to expand...
Agreed!

To my mind - more RAM = longevity.

I have found that with the Mac mini (and really, any desktop) it is eventually the lack of RAM that kills them. Your venerable 2012 Mini (I had one from a similar vintage) remains a very capable computer in lots of ways - the processor is fine for most use, good I/O, storage can be augmented externally if need be, etc. But eventually 4/8GB becomes limiting sadly.

I care about this less for laptops (which I think of as being replaced more regularly due to battery decline, damage, etc), but I really want my desktop computers to be useable at least as secondary machine in 7+ years time.
 
erikkfi said:
For a lineup that used to have a $499 entry point as recently as 2018, it sounds too high to me.
Click to expand...
Seems very likely there will still be a lower priced Mini, sans PRO variant M1 (or M2).

2018 lineup had low price with weaker Intel to high price with stronger Intel… to BTO maxed out Mini at $2999.

Going into the MAR 8 event, I was expecting new Minis with both PRO and MAX options… adding to the M1 Minis already available. I was logically guessing the maxed out Mini with M1 MAX would be priced around $5K.

With Studio now, maybe PRO will be the maxed Mini chip, probably starting in that zone between about $1299 and Studios base price at $1999... and jacking way up from that equiv to a 14" MBpro with more storage than base option, minus about $500-$700 for lid, keyboard, trackpad, etc. Apple can still offer a cheaper Mini too with a M1 or perhaps M2 chip.
 
Last edited:
Doesn’t seem right they’d release an M2 Pro in a Mac Mini. It will outperform the M1 Pro Max in the Mac Studio at a lower price.

I’d love it if they did. But Apple usually encourages upselling. Not downselling.
 
poker327 said:
I am in the same boat. I figure I am overpaying by $500, but I don't want to wait till possibly October for a 32 GB unified memory Mac mini. I ordered a low end Mac Studio yesterday with 1 TB sdd, but cancelled the order after reading this article. But I am convinced to order it again. I am a developer, but don't use this machine as my primary developing machine, but code after work as a hobby, so I am not just an email/watch Youtube user. I don't edit videos or photos though, so not much use for GPUs. I am replacing a 2015 27" iMac i7 with 32GB ram, souped up at the time iirc. I have a monitor for my work macbook pro, and every day I have to swap my iMac and my monitor on my desk. If I can stop doing that for $500, it will be worth it to me...
Click to expand...
I‘m an iOS developer and the M1 Mac Mini is more than enough for me. I came from a 2015 MacBook Pro and the M1 blows it away. If you’re not doing anything too complex you can most definitely get away with the current Mini. I even updated it to 16G ram and 1TB hard drive and it still was only $1099. I’m so happy with it I may supplement it eventually with a MacBook Air (I work from home but would like to be a bit more mobile at times). The Mini is the best computer I’ve ever owned BY FAR. What‘s great is that at the $1000 price point I can replace it easily in a couple of years for something better If needed. But for basic development M1 is more than enough.
 
PeteBurgh said:
Good news! The Mini was my first Mac in 2005, and I've always had a soft spot for it.
Click to expand...

Same here - I still have my 2005 base Mac mini (512 MG memory, and a 40 or 80 GB hard drive). I found a "modified" version of System 9.2 that will install on the G4 Mac minis, and I have done that. Never used System x back in the day, so it is nice to play around with every now and then to see what the predecessor to OS X is like.

I liked the 2005 mini enough that I got a base level 2014 mini (4 GB memory and a hard drive), although that will get retired later this year.

I wouldn't mind getting another mini, but not the base model (although there is nothing wrong with the M1 version) - I have an older 2009 Mac Pro that I bought used, and when it is time to replace that I think a "enhanced" M-series mini would be want I get.

2005 Mac mini.png
 
lowkey said:
Doesn’t seem right they’d release an M2 Pro in a Mac Mini. It will outperform the M1 Pro Max in the Mac Studio at a lower price.

I’d love it if they did. But Apple usually encourages upselling. Not downselling.
Click to expand...

Don't worry. Apple will have a M2 MAX Studio to sell those concerned about who has the bigger number painted on a chip they will probably never actually see.

There is no rule that the next generation of M-series chips must follow the first generation in rolling out only the basic version first and then getting around to PRO, MAX, ULTRA. Maybe some-to-all of them roll out together for the Macs in which they will be utilized?

Besides, once on board the "doesn't seem right" train about chip progression, it won't make sense to release M3 because the M2 Macs will be one number behind. And M4 won't "seem right" either. See A-Series progression. Of the many tens of millions buying iPhone each month, ALL of them are probably about to be 1 number behind this Fall,,, and probably 2 numbers behind next Fall.

The only way to right that "wrong" is to spend, spend, spend to keep up with the "latest & greatest" numbers painted on chips. Apple likely hopes we all feel that compulsion (and somehow have the money).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top