The first ARM macs are going to experience a lot of growing pains. I’d avoid them for the first generation until the world gets up to speed with native arm apps. I predict there’s going to be a lot of pain & complaining when the arm macs hit the street
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Wait for ARM mac mini or buy now?
- Thread starter mayakukla
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
One of the best benefits of the current Minis versus the AS ones is using an eGPU - if you do any gaming, or if you're using any Pro apps that take advantage of having a GPU for acceleration and compute, then the current Minis will allow you to use an eGPU and upgrade your graphics card on a regular basis. Right now, we really don't know for sure if we will still be able to use an eGPU with AS Macs and their integrated graphics. Apparently the AMD graphics drivers in Big Sur have not been converted into universal binary versions with Arm code - so using a dedicated AMD GPU with AS Macs isn't possible at this time.
They should be perfect for basic general computing from the start. Basically they will be iPads minus screen plus MacOS. Browsing, youtubing, basic programming and photoshopping, things like that will work as they should from the go, at least I think so.
Last edited:
My thoughts is to just buy what you need right now and not to forecast what would come next. The current Mac Mini 2018/2020 are a great combination which offers good power and value for at least 2-3 years time or up to 5 years and I see these machines as a good wait and see platform, while being able to use the Mini and extract any value you paid into the system. Wait and see is a good defensive move, because I suspect like the first PowerPC to Intel transitions, it took a few intel generations before they work out the bugs. I see this to be true with the ARM transition.
The benefits of the ARM chip, on paper at least, is the thermal/power/performance advantage. This is good for laptops, because what is going with the Intel CPUs right now is that, the older 10nm design with so much cramped transistors to get more performance out of them is simply putting these Macs into thermal throttle often and thus not being able to flex its fullest muscle. It is not limited to the Macs though, despite what other Youtubers and PC lovers said, the compact sized PCs with the same Intel CPUs and Nvidia GPUs also overheat. That is why a lot of PC makers are moving over to the AMD Ryzen CPUs where they provide more bang for the buck. The Apple ARM chips are moving towards the right direction as well; more bang for the buck using less power and therefore generate less heat. Another departure from the traditional CPU/GPU setup is that Apple ARM chips are going to be an all in one chip, so therefore there will be a new generation of applications that would otherwise be non-feasible using Intel/AMD GPU or Intel/Nvidia GPU due to heat and power consumption, become more feasible with the Apple ARM chip with its neural engine network. But all of these technological advancements would be realized until perhaps a few ARM generations later. This is the same with the introduction of the Intel Mac Mini and that was, it wasn't until around 2011 and 2012 that the Apple Mac Mini represented good power and value. The Intel Core i series provide power and Quicksync which helped in transcoding and decoding of h.264 materials at much faster speeds, something that would require a dongle like the Elgato Turbo 264HD which I still use and have for the older Intel CPUs that do not have Quicksync. But it took about 5 years for the Mini to mature to a state that, the 2012 Mini was a great product and I am sure many Mini 2012 users would agree. So, do you have a 5 year time frame to wait for a future ARM Mini that would encompass a polished product that you have new modern and amazing applications that you could only use an ARM to run or buy a 1st generation ARM only to have upgrade it to a mature ARM Mini?
Like myself, I took a more reasonable approach. The reason I bought a Mac Pro was because, it allowed me to run a Radeon GPU and it has enough power to do video editing up to 4K and the thermal cooling is amazing; much better than the Mini 2018 for the stuff I want to do. But it is a machine that I am going to use and continue to use until I see a major advantage for me to use ARM. And to complement that, I also use a Windows PC with a modern Intel CPU and Graphics card to complement my Mac Pro to allow me to use 2 applications that can help me on my tasks. All of these machines help me achieve what I want to do "NOW". And when I see an ARM mac that can do way better than what both my Mac Pro and my PC both do, then I can easily transition to that.
A computer is just a tool. Never make a mistake in thinking a computer is a good investment. It is only so if it can address your needs now, not some 5 years down the road which no one has a clear crystal ball to forecast.
Hope this helps.
Anyone who buys a first-generation ARM Mac doesn't have to prove their bravery in any other way. I plan to hang back and see how the chips fall (no pun intended).
[automerge]1595765857[/automerge]
I expect Apple has been developing MacOS for ARM for quite a while, secretly and in parallel with MacOS on Intel. That's what they did when they switched from PPC. The rub is the non-Apple software, like Adobe. Major software partners like Adobe I'm sure had advanced warning of this change in architecture, but how much of an advanced warning? Enough to iron out all the kinks?
Last edited:
> won't allow direct boot of Windows but will continue to allow virtualization as parallels is doing now
As of right now, the ArmMacs do not allow the virtualization of Windows. The virtualization of Windows *CAN HAPPEN* (in theory) if Microsoft releases an Arm version of Windows that people can purchase. However, Windows-Arm will not be able to run Windows x86 or x64 programs though.
As of right now, the ArmMacs do not allow the virtualization of Windows. The virtualization of Windows *CAN HAPPEN* (in theory) if Microsoft releases an Arm version of Windows that people can purchase. However, Windows-Arm will not be able to run Windows x86 or x64 programs though.
The current gen Mac Mini is anything but “massive computing power”. The first ARM Mini (if there is one) will blow the doors off the Intel Mini.
it would have to be a version of Windows specially built for Apple Silicon. The likelihood of this is extremely low; the current version of Windows on ARM is for Snapdragon only.
I bought a refurbished 2018 mini (i7/64GB/512GB) for two reasons.
1. My Late 2013 15" MacBook Pro (i7/16GB/512GB) was getting long in the tooth and I wanted an upgrade
2. I figured the refurbished mini should give 3-5 years or life (or less if Apple axes Intel MacOS)
For #2, that should be 3+ generations of Apple Silicon Macs. I figured ~3-5 years from now there should be a matured full line of Macs to choose from, and I didn't want to have to choose from the initial batch of Apple Silicon Macs.
But the big driver is #1, I wanted an upgrade. I care more about CPU performance than graphics so the fact that the mini's integrated graphics is sucky is fine with me. #2 just added to the justification.
1. My Late 2013 15" MacBook Pro (i7/16GB/512GB) was getting long in the tooth and I wanted an upgrade
2. I figured the refurbished mini should give 3-5 years or life (or less if Apple axes Intel MacOS)
For #2, that should be 3+ generations of Apple Silicon Macs. I figured ~3-5 years from now there should be a matured full line of Macs to choose from, and I didn't want to have to choose from the initial batch of Apple Silicon Macs.
But the big driver is #1, I wanted an upgrade. I care more about CPU performance than graphics so the fact that the mini's integrated graphics is sucky is fine with me. #2 just added to the justification.
Just ordered an i7, 8GB, 1TB, 10GbE Mini. Was looking very hard at 2019 Mac Pro to replace my 2010 Mac Pro for (hopefully) another 10-year run until Apple Silicon announcement landed. I can’t see spending $9k on a dead end system.
Moving all my storage over to TB3. Dropping in 64GB RAM.
I’ll wait for Apple Silicon 2.0 then maybe move to the Mini or Pro. Not touching anything 1.0 of Apple hardware. Been a Mac user since early 90’s. Early Apple adopters always pay top dollar to get unfinished products that are poorly supported. Been there, done that. Many, many times.
Did order the Speed Designs cooling base. I do a lot of rendering/ transcoding. Hoping the base helps maintain boost clocks on hours(maybe days)-long runs.
Moving all my storage over to TB3. Dropping in 64GB RAM.
I’ll wait for Apple Silicon 2.0 then maybe move to the Mini or Pro. Not touching anything 1.0 of Apple hardware. Been a Mac user since early 90’s. Early Apple adopters always pay top dollar to get unfinished products that are poorly supported. Been there, done that. Many, many times.
Did order the Speed Designs cooling base. I do a lot of rendering/ transcoding. Hoping the base helps maintain boost clocks on hours(maybe days)-long runs.
This article suggests that the Mini does pretty well with its own cooling.
"...we're impressed with how the performance on the Mac mini held up as the job progressed and time ticked on. The clock speed averaged out at around 3.4GHz to 3.5GHz under 100 percent CPU workload with the i7 models, but at no point did it drop below the 3.2GHz base clock speed — making it a solid performer even when under load for a long time."
Testing thermal throttling and performance in the 2018 i7 Mac mini | AppleInsider
The new Mac Mini is a powerhouse, featuring up to a six-core i7 processor in a very small enclosure — that could lead to thermal constraints. AppleInsider strains the Mac mini, to see what happens when the machine is under load for a long time, and to see how bad the impact is on performance.
It really doesn't do well. Did you not read the article? Full boost is 4.1-4.26GHz. Boost is limited to 3.4 is 3.6 due to the CPU hitting 100°C. It gets worse over time too, with the first Cinebench run scoring 1188 and the 4th scoring 1103. That's an 8% slowdown from the already thermally-throttled first run.
For light desktop use, it will never matter. For extended high-CPU runs, it will fall flat in its face. But then for extended CPU runs, you must be doing something for-profit and should pay the "Pro" hardware tax. No thanks.
Apple's cooling solutions are so abysmal that they do a massive PR event when they release a computer that doesn't overheat(see 2013 and 2019 Mac Pro).
With the cooling base, I expect to maintain 4.13GHz clocks on long transcodes. Big step up from 3.5-ish. 18% gain. On a 12-hour transcode, that's about 2 hours saved.
This test with the cooling stand averaged 4.13GHz and 80°C full load with the cooling fan at less than max.
For light desktop use, it will never matter. For extended high-CPU runs, it will fall flat in its face. But then for extended CPU runs, you must be doing something for-profit and should pay the "Pro" hardware tax. No thanks.
Apple's cooling solutions are so abysmal that they do a massive PR event when they release a computer that doesn't overheat(see 2013 and 2019 Mac Pro).
With the cooling base, I expect to maintain 4.13GHz clocks on long transcodes. Big step up from 3.5-ish. 18% gain. On a 12-hour transcode, that's about 2 hours saved.
This test with the cooling stand averaged 4.13GHz and 80°C full load with the cooling fan at less than max.
This article suggests that the Mini does pretty well with its own cooling.
"...we're impressed with how the performance on the Mac mini held up as the job progressed and time ticked on. The clock speed averaged out at around 3.4GHz to 3.5GHz under 100 percent CPU workload with the i7 models, but at no point did it drop below the 3.2GHz base clock speed — making it a solid performer even when under load for a long time."
Testing thermal throttling and performance in the 2018 i7 Mac mini | AppleInsider
The new Mac Mini is a powerhouse, featuring up to a six-core i7 processor in a very small enclosure — that could lead to thermal constraints. AppleInsider strains the Mac mini, to see what happens when the machine is under load for a long time, and to see how bad the impact is on performance.appleinsider.com
Exactly. That's why I think entire 2018 line-up is a bad shot. Using desktop class CPU in a tiny standard case of Mac Mini was questionable idea from the start.