HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I did right at the beginning. This one can use either. However, I did want the classic games MORE than the AAAs.
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.
Apple's 2024 M4 Mac Mini: What We Know
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I did right at the beginning. This one can use either. However, I did want the classic games MORE than the AAAs.
Vote with your wallet (purchasing a competitor computer) and teach Apple a lesson. Will you do it?
Seeing as my M1 Mini is about due an upgrade; the M4 Mac Mini will be the perfect move to do that
My M2 Mac Mini is on a short holiday with my brother as his 2018 Mini died; but as I was hardly using it it's not being missed
But my M1 Mini will be reverted back to being a music server I think...
This can't come soon enough; money is already burning a hole in my arse pocket in my never worn jeans 😂
My M2 Mac Mini is on a short holiday with my brother as his 2018 Mini died; but as I was hardly using it it's not being missed
But my M1 Mini will be reverted back to being a music server I think...
This can't come soon enough; money is already burning a hole in my arse pocket in my never worn jeans 😂
I'll accept your words but alas, it doesn't meet the needs for many as well. Why not avoid the problem altogether and simply offer 16 gigs as the base? We know Apple has its reasons but on a topic of basic performance, it wouldn't cost Apple much to put in 16 instead. As more multi-media and AI enter our world, 8 gigs might struggle.
The majority of Apple Mini customers (who are not tech oriented) will do fine with 8 gb. They shouldn't have to pay more for memory they'll never use.
Those that actually need more memory (editing 4K videos, processing multiple large images in photoshop, signal processing in MATLAB, decrypting foreign adversary communications, chip design, driving multiple displays, etc) can simply choose that option when making a Mini purchase.
It's great Apple offers choices.
Mkay WAIT.
So im supposed to believe that the Mac mini will get M4 BEFORE the Mac Studio according to this report.
What sense does that make?
So im supposed to believe that the Mac mini will get M4 BEFORE the Mac Studio according to this report.
What sense does that make?
Agree; my previous Macs and M1 Mac Mini & MBA have had zero issues with 8GB RAM; more so as the M1 uses the RAM better (doesn't it)
Either way I've never taxed the Macs at all...
It's easy enough to upgrade to 16GB when buying; maybe a slight drop in price for that would appeal more; then again Apple have never done this and never had any complaints either...
Yeah, I've seen it, but I belive there is som unrealised potential for the entire category, thinking Satechi stand finish and quality or better. No such luck as a 3D printer, I'm afraid.
The Mac Mini got the M1 generation chip before the Mac Studio. The Mac Mini also got the M2 generation chip before the Mac Studio.
So it only makes sense, I guess?
Yeah, you're right, USB C standards are all over the place as they've always been with confusing branding/labeling/naming and soforth. My approach will likely be Thunderbolt for as much as possible and decent USB-C for the rest, standardising as much as possible whilst future-proofing. USB A is a dead end, and there is not much left of it in this house that I'll carry onwards. I want it gone. Did I mention I resent cables of anything but exact length? Using a 32" on a Ergotron arm with cables of exact length, and am on the verge of searching for docks I can integrate in the desktop 🤣
I belive M4 Max Mac Mini is indeed possible, and I don't mind the looks and features of Mac Studio at all, those are fantastic computers. Just don't like stuff on my desk, and want to tuck it anonymously beneath. If they cover the requirements of the maxed out users, it's more than fine by me. Anything above Max would be overdoing it for my use anyway. But I do like overdoing it.
I don't really speculate a lot in what M4 configurations they will introduce for the Macs as I want to be surprised. I do anticipate more AI kernels and and slightly improved graphics with not that much change for the number of CPUs. Hope for split SSD modules for bandwidth though.
What I do belive is that they will make a more distinct separation between levels of performance, and they now have the liberty to make the die form factor as they deem suitable and change those for every generation in order to get optimal bandwidth and performance at each step of the performance ladder. Not that much talk about it, but that is a significant feature compared to what they had to put up with in the Intel era. Depends a bit upon how flexible the production is as far as that goes. If they can do all variations on "one" production line, the rest should be hunky dory I belive.
So do not believe the purloined Gurman report if it is nonsensical to you. I too have [some] difficulty with it from a marketing standpoint, because many people wrongly perceive "M4 chip" as just one thing, which it of course will not be. Basic versus Pro versus Max are hugely different beasts; an M1 Max being stronger than M2 or M3 basic chips, for instance. The level of M4 that any Mini will see is nothing like what will present in M4 Studios.
I am square in the market segment for buying a new Studio and opine that skipping M3 makes perfect sense; because M2 Studios are so solid already. When M4 Studios do come out I still may buy an M2 if M2 prices fall far enough.
I'm very pleased with mine. So, I guess until 2026, when the M5 or M6 hit the market.
You are going to have to elaborate on such an absurd statement. Just count transistors or look at pictures of the different chips and their huge differences. You could even delve into the deep weeds of the architectural differences.
Believe ram will become a bottleneck when software takes full advantage of AI. Not for me to say when, but my prediction is that 8gb will be on the short side when that happens. The app guys will start looking into upping the ante for minimum spec requirements.
My main PC, the one I actually do taxes and finances on, is already Linux.
Although I'm quite happy with the M1 Air for light work and portability, the new Qualcom Snapdragons are very interesting. I'm interested in what will be out in a year.
The mini in the stereo cabinet is running Monterey, but will run Linux very well. The issue there is converting my playlists to something else. Determining the something else is quite the exercise, too many choices are available. That is a next winter project, or maybe the winter after that. Or maybe a price collapse of M1 minis (they are not Augmented Idiocy ready) will make a used one an attractive option.
Because usually Apple develops a baseline and pro-level M-series chip first, followed by the Max- and Ultra-level versions. Since the Mac Mini only comes in baseline and pro-level M chips, it's kind of a no-brainer.
I'll be jumping onto this as a much needed upgrade to my intel iMac. I've been holding out for a larger screen iMac but I'm ready to stop waiting and move on now.
I've got my eye on an M4 Pro with 16GB RAM (minimum). Just hope Apple can refresh the Studio Display as well🤞
I've got my eye on an M4 Pro with 16GB RAM (minimum). Just hope Apple can refresh the Studio Display as well🤞
How do you know it’s long past the point where 16GB should be standard? We’re talking base model (M chip) computers, right? Is it because 16GB is standard for you and other tech enthusiasts? Or because it’s standard on some high end models from some other companies? Neither of those support that conclusion at all. Perhaps if most base models from most other companies had it as standard, then maybe you could start to have reasonable grounds—but even that comparison has other variables that muddle things. Really, the only decently reasonable grounds is if no one buys Apple’s lowest configuration OR if most people who do buy it are unsatisfied. In other words, we would need numbers on sales and satisfaction rates for individual configurations, but I don’t think anyone other than Apple has that. But I do recall there are some third party surveys that show Macs in general have high satisfaction rate, so it’s doubtful that the base config has low satisfaction rate because the cheapest config likely sells well.
Likewise my 2011 mini server still gets it done, at least enough to keep me on the sideline. Of course it's only serving as a NAS for Time Machine backups at this point, but I am occasionally templed by the newer minis mainly for the faster I/O.
It has nothing to do with the cost of memory chips. It has to do with the profit and margin Apple receives selling $200 RAM upgrades. It would cost Apple money if 16GB was the base since that would eliminate the $200 RAM upgrade revenue stream.
And surprise most people (even here on MR) think 8GB is still sufficient in 2024 for at least some people.
Who’s 8GB/256GB good for in 2024?
Lots and lots of discussion so let’s vote: (You can have upto 2 votes)
forums.macrumors.com
I'll stop buying base ram when Apple stops charging outrageous prices for upgrading.
Actually the chatter going around is it’s looking like the M4 chip has 12GB of RAM but with 4GB disabled in the iPad Pro, so I think it’s VERY likely the M4 Macs are gonna start with 12GB