Which Mac Mini recommended for my kind of Usage ?

[marcusalwayswins]

@marcusalwayswins, some good news! I am re-recommending the 8GB M1 Mac Mini, even for Affinity Photo.

I installed AP on my i3-6100 SkyLake box with an nVidia GTX 950, all drivers and Windows 10 fully updated. With 16GB of RAM AP exhibited noticeable lag compared to the 8GB M1 Mini. When importing photos the WinTel box consumes ~1GB of RAM for each RAW imports -- so less memory use than the 2GB per RAW import on the M1 Mini. However, performance on the 3.7 Ghz SkyLake with 16GB was laggy and the exposure slider took 2 seconds to reflect changes. This was connected to 4K monitor.

Next up, I installed AP on my 2015 MacBook Pro (2.7 Ghz Intel i5, 8GB RAM, macOS Monterey) and connected it to the 4K monitor. I learned about the Developer Persona Assistant and setting the RAW Engine to Apple Core Image RAW instead of the default Serif Labs. This cut memory consumption in half, matching Affinity Photo on Win10. My old trusty MacBook Pro did admirably and was a more pleasant experience to edit in AP than the WinTel box. The exposure slider still took a second to update changes but it was noticeably quicker than my 16GB Intel PC.

Lastly, I switched to Apple Core Image RAW on the 8GB M1 Mini and memory consumption expectedly went down by almost half and I can now comfortably import a dozen RAW files and edit them in real-time without any lag. If you can stretch the budget to a 16GB M1 then I'm sure it will serve you well for many years. For myself, I'm going to purchase Affinity Photo and keep my 8GB M1 Mini.

Affinity Photo RAW Engine set to default "Serif Labs", (after importing 3 Sony RAW files):
View attachment 2109063

Affinity Photo RAW Engine set to "Apple (Core Image RAW)", (after importing 3 Sony RAW files):
View attachment 2109068

How and where do you set the Affinity Photo Raw Engine ?

 

[marcusalwayswins]

Oh, I see. I don't know what resolution your 27" monitor is but keep in mind that will affect memory use. Importing and displaying photos in Affinity Photo used a few hundred MB less RAM, per photo, on the built-in display of my MacBook Pro compared to when I output it to a 4K monitor.

1080P

 

[NeonNights]

How and where do you set the Affinity Photo Raw Engine ?

Along the top menu bar. The Assistant resembles a tuxedo suit. Keep in mind though the only RAW Engine option for Windows is "Serifs Lab".

 

[NeonNights]

1080P

Then you shouldn't need as much RAM and the 8GB M1 Mini will work wonders. Even at 4K resolution for me the 8GB M1 Mini works very well and smoothly now in Affinity Pro (after setting RAW Engine to "Apple Core Image RAW"). 16GB would just allow you to import more photos, more quickly. The sliders and filters all react in real-time on the 8GB M1 Mini without any lag.

If you decide to upgrade your monitor in the future, take a look at 4K TVs too for comparison. UltraHD televisions may not have the full color gamut, or refresh rate, of a professional-grade photo editing monitor per se, but I found the color and image quality more than adequate for my needs. My $250 43" 4K TV serves as my desktop monitor for work and personal use and cost less than a 2K 32" PC monitor.

 

[NewUsername]

So which is the generation that I should be looking at and most ? importantly how much RAM do you think for my usage is good enough ? like I said I am gonna use affinity photo so I would want a hardware which can run it without any jitters. Forum Members on the affinity photo recommend 32GB of RAM. But I think that’s way…way… too much. I think they are suggesting it from a future stand point and just to be on the safer side to make my hardware future proof. And to have 32 GB RAM on Mac Mini, which I am sure you cannot install 32GB RAM on Mac Mini but it will cost me a fortune. So anyways I would want to keep my RAM Aspirations to a reasonable level and a realistic level, as long as the hardware is able to run software like affinity photo and photoshop smoothly. So what do you suggest ? what configuration Mac mini and which year should and How much RAM should I be looking at?

If 500-600 is your budget, a base model 2020 Mac Mini (8GB/256GB) will be fine. 16GB is nice but it’s not as important as you would think looking on this forum; you would probably never notice any considerable difference. More SSD storage is also nice but an external SSD is a lot cheaper.

The Intel Macs aren’t worth getting anymore, unless you can get one extremely cheap.

You could wait for the M2 model, but there are no new Macs rumoured for this year anymore so that would be at least a few months wait, my best guess would be until March. I’m not sure that would be worth the wait, especially if Apple decides to keep the M1 Mac mini in the product line and just add a higher-priced M2 Mac Mini on top of that.

 

[Heindijs]

Look, I know you’ve already had a lot of advice on here but I can speak from experience that even a 10 year old Mac Mini is fine for office work, web browsing and even Affinity Photo. I don’t work with large files, but editing in Affinity is good enough. The reason I bought one second hand was because it was a good deal if you have a really tight budget. It cost me only €175 and it had 16gb of ram already.

I’m not saying you should go ahead and buy a 2012 Mini right now or even ever, since I don’t expect it to last for much longer. I’m saying that it really doesn’t matter much, just buy a Mac that’s within your budget and newer is always better

 

[marcusalwayswins]

Then you shouldn't need as much RAM and the 8GB M1 Mini will work wonders. Even at 4K resolution for me the 8GB M1 Mini works very well and smoothly now in Affinity Pro (after setting RAW Engine to "Apple Core Image RAW"). 16GB would just allow you to import more photos, more quickly. The sliders and filters all react in real-time on the 8GB M1 Mini without any lag.

If you decide to upgrade your monitor in the future, take a look at 4K TVs too for comparison. UltraHD televisions may not have the full color gamut, or refresh rate, of a professional-grade photo editing monitor per se, but I found the color and image quality more than adequate for my needs. My $250 43" 4K TV serves as my desktop monitor for work and personal use and cost less than a 2K 32" PC monitor.

I do intend to upgrade to a 4K resolution Monitor some day.

Your suggestion on buying a TV instead of a Monitor which can serve a dual purpose of acting as a TV in the first place and also a Monitor when needed, is something that I have been thinking and debating for long still I have not been able to come to a concrete decision hence also the reluctance and delay in buying a 4K monitor. Both have their Pros and Cons...So Lets see If I get some inputs which can help me take a decision I may very quickly in the near future.