Mac Mini vs. Mac Studio Buyer's Guide: 20+ Differences Compared

[MGrayson3]

There's pretty much a single computer here with options for CPU cores, GPU cores, RAM, and SSD. I entered ALL the options and prices for Mac Minis and Studios. The fit with the smallest maximum residual was actually linear in all variables.

$Price = 52*CPU cores + 46*GPU cores + 12*RAM GB + 318*SSD TB - $190.

No, Apple will not give you $190 if you buy nothing. Never trust a model! There's obviously some nonlinearity in the prices, (and a lot of correlation in the data), but trying to add that explicitly (without just typing them in) didn't improve the global fit much. The residuals are all less than $250, with a standard deviation of $127, and are not significantly larger for Minis or Studios. Doing separate fits for Minis and Studios gave lower residuals (as you'd expect), but standard deviations of $70 for the minis and $114 for the Studios. (I didn't put in number and kind of ports - probably should have)

So pick how much of each you need and buy a computer.

 

[MisterAndrew]

Probably not a good idea to buy an M1 Mac at this point. Even M2 might not be the best choice because it was delayed and M3 will be here soon. But then again I'd still buy a used/refurbished Mac Pro 2019 over any of the higher-end mini or Studio Macs. I just don't like the idea of a closed-box system. (If you do I'm glad for you.)

 

[mytdave]

The distiction between the Mac Mini, Studio, and Pro (ignoring the current discrepancy in CPUs):

 

[NY Guitarist]

What are the chances of Apple releasing the Mac Mini Ultra or Mac Studio Ultra?

Have questions about buying a Mac?​

Customize your Mac Studio​

• Apple M1 Ultra with 20-core CPU, 48-core GPU, 32-core Neural Engine

 

[Zdigital2015]

I need to say that I am confused now. Nothing negative, just not very clear. We now have Mac Mini, Mac Studio and Mac Pro. How to really understand it?

It’s really quite simple.

Don’t buy a MacPro unless you need Intel and PCIe slots.

Buy a Mac Studio if you need the M1 Max and Ultra options because you’re using apps that can take advantage

And for the 90% of the rest of users, just buy a Mac mini.

 

[4nNtt]

The Mac Studio makes for an amazing software development machine. This is the Mac I've been most thrilled to own in years. Although the GPU is overkill for what I use it for, it is nice to see Apple prioritize the GPU to push the state-of-the-art forward. If everyone has an amazing GPU, it will enable new software. At least the 3 games that run on Mac run incredibly smoothly at 5K on the M1 Ultra for the occasional break from work.

 

[4nNtt]

It’s really quite simple.

Don’t buy a MacPro unless you need Intel and PCIe slots.

Buy a Mac Studio if you need the M1 Max and Ultra options because you’re using apps that can take advantage

And for the 90% of the rest of users, just buy a Mac mini.

I'd recommend that even for prospective iMac users. I don't care for the panel Apple chose for the 24" iMac. The Mac looks beautiful, but the screen doesn't have a very wide viewing angle. It might be a little more expensive, but the Mac mini with a Studio Display is a big upgrade from the iMac. The screen on the Studio Display is great.

 

[Macmamamac]

Do you spend a lot of time staring at the screen as you wait for your Mac to compile/process your data?

Then time to upgrade.

 

[roland.g]

This horribly written comparison shouldn't feature all the "up tos" but rather the high end M2 Pro Mini v the M1 Max Studio as those are the closest and the best comparison and the most likely that someone will be deciding between.

 

[roland.g]

I've been looking at this very question, but the answer I get is I want something Apple doesn't make, and may never make. That's something between the M1 Mini and the M1 Max Studio. Perhaps a Mini with an M1 Max? I don't really see why the M1 Max can be in a laptop but needs to be in a Studio-like enclosure for a desktop. That $1300 jump between Mini and Studio bothers me.

Whoa whoa whoa. You missed it then. You want an M1 Max Mini. So did I. But that machine would undoubtedly be $1500-2000k. Apple is not going to take the base Mini, throw in the M1 Max and sell it to you for $799-1299.

And what is in between the M1 Mini and the M1 Max Studio. 2 computers. The M2 Mini and the M2 Pro Mini. Both of those fall between the original M1 Mini and the current Max Studio.

 

[roland.g]

And this was ultra lazy, they took the old M1 Mini v Studio guide and comments thread and updated it with the M2 Mini making all the comments start from last March. Come on.

 

[roland.g]

The M2 Pro Mac Mini would be the choice over the M1 Mac Studio for single core performance tasks. That is a pretty significant conclusion given what most people use their computers for.

Correct. Except that the Studio has other advantages over the M2 Pro Mini, such as display capabilities, ports, and potentially thermal management. Now for most users, the single core performance gains of the M2 make the Mini better than the existing Studio. But it's hard to ignore those ports.

 

[roland.g]

The base Mac mini with M2 Pro is ok, but if you start doing upgrades, it quickly shows it is over priced compared with the Mac Studio. Configured with as close to the same specs as possible, and you see that the Mac mini with M2 Pro is actually more expensive. I do love the Mac mini, and the M2 (non-Pro) mini is a great deal, especially for typical home users)

Mac mini with M2 Pro - with upgraded chip to get more GPU cores (12 CPU cores, 19 GPU cores), 32 GB of ram, 512 GB storage and 10 Gb Ethernet to match the Mac Studio is $2,099 USD. It will have better CPU performance, but lower GPU results. It is thinner and lighter. Bluetooth 5.3, Wi-Fi 6E are both current advantages.

The Mac Studio base model is $1,999 USD with the M1 Max (10 CPU cores, 24 GPU cores), 32 GB of ram, 512 GB of storage, 10 Gb Ethernet. It supports more displays (up to 5), has more ports built-in including an SDXC card reader, more memory bandwidth, two video encode engines (instead of 1 in the M2 Pro), two ProRes encode & decode engines (instead of 1 in the M2 Pro). I'd expect the M2 version of the Mac Studio to gain most of the improvements the Mini has gotten rendering it an even worse deal in comparison.

If the Mac mini with M2 Pro was about $200 USD less as a base price, it would make it more compelling.

This is spot on. If you actually put the 10Gb Ethernet, same RAM and storage but leave the CPU stock on the M2 Pro Mini, you come out a little cheaper than the Studio, but then you must ask whether the increased performance of the M2 Pro in certain tasks over the M1 Max outweighs the other aspects of the Studio, a big one of which you did not mention is that the baked in 32GB of RAM on the Studio has 2x the bandwidth at 400 v 200.

 

[Formula1nut]

I'll say this much. When you factor in the costs of RAM and memory of a M2 Pro mini to come close to a base Studio it really comes down to your needs. It is a $200 difference at that point and the Studio has double the data thru put more ports, more Cores and more GPU. So if you are going to spend $1799 why not go the extra bit and spend $1999?

 

[_Spinn_]

Probably not a good idea to buy an M1 Mac at this point. Even M2 might not be the best choice because it was delayed and M3 will be here soon. But then again I'd still buy a used/refurbished Mac Pro 2019 over any of the higher-end mini or Studio Macs. I just don't like the idea of a closed-box system. (If you do I'm glad for you.)

I wa thinking the same thing about the M2 lifecycle being cut short due to the delay.

 

[Stow]

Which would be better for xcode m2 pro mini 32gb 1tb ssd or m1 max studio 32gb 1tb?

 

[Tagbert]

Or get cancelled so as to not compete with the upcoming Mac Pro.

i doubt that the Mac Studio will get cancelled. The Mac Pro is a much more expensive machine. Cancelling the Studio would leave a big hole in the product line. As it stands now, they have a nice product ladder with relatively even steps from Mac Mini to Mac Studio to Mac Pro. there is a small mismatch now because the Mini just got the M2 upgrade but it would be relatively easy task for Apple to update the Mac Studio to M2 Max/Ultra.

The one that is most at risk is the Mac Pro. It has become a very, very specialized device. Right now, the chip roadmap doesn’t show a big way forward with the Mac Pro. They will certainly include an M2 Ultra version but that only gets it to Mac Studio performance. With the apparent failure of the M# Extreme processor effort, there isn’t really a processor advantage of the Mac Pro (Unless they jump straight to 3nm for the Mac Pro as a low volume special edition). That leaves only the ISA ports and it is not clear what support they will have with Apple Silicon. Hopefully Apple can extend support for addon cards, in particular GPUs and maybe RAM but it’s not clear how they do that. This coming year will be interesting to see how that story unfolds.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

The Mac Studio is not even remotely mid-ranged at this point.

Wrong. The Studio absolutely is the mid range Apple desktop. Mini is low range to mid range; Studio is solid mid range; Mac Pro is high range. What is so hard to understand? Unless y'all choose to arbitrarily lower the high range

Where does Mac Mini with M2 Pro fit in here ?

Mac Mini M2 Pro is limited to 32 GB RAM. With Apple's Unified Memory Architecture (UMA) CPU, GPU and Neural Engine all share the same RAM baked on to the chip electrically very close. So 32 GB RAM is not that much for future higher end usages, self-limiting the Mini.

Studio is the next step up with 64 GB RAM available on the Max Studio and 128 GB on the Ultra Studio (also moving up in price and GPU choices). Plus memory bandwidth increases with the Studio. Currently Studio is older-tech M1, so right now the highest end Mini is typically more appropriate than the lowest end Studio at similar cost. But M2 Studios will come, and even with M1, all Studios above the very lowest Studio configuration all wup all Minis.

 

[anthogag]

I believe if Apple is making minor modifications to the 2024 Mac mini design they should at least put a USB or Thunderbolt port on each of the 3 sides, right in the middle. Then, for example, I could use a USB port on the front to charge my AirPods Max.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

You seem to wrap things up with "Overall, it is clear that the ‌Mac mini‌ and ‌Mac Studio‌ are very different machines intended for different customer bases." I don't think you've backed this up at all. Many businesses, including mine, have been pushing the Mac mini as hard as we can to do our typical "power user" administrative work and our graphic design work, InDesign, Acrobat, Photoshop, etc. We are definitely doing "intense workflows" but you haven't made it clear which of the things we do would benefit from the multicore performance boost of the Studio, which (aside from the simple benefits of double the RAM and more useful ports) is the main difference between the two platforms. The question remains, do we stay with our maxed-out minis, or will we really see increased throughput from the Studio. These are questions from within a single customer base, I think the machines are not at all targeted toward different groups. There hasn't been any choice before; now there is. It's hard to evaluate based on information presented which is the better way to go.

Agreed, the statement "it is clear that the ‌Mac mini‌ and ‌Mac Studio‌ are very different machines intended for different customer bases" is absurd. The Mini line at its strongest smoothly morphs into the striking similar but stronger Studio line.

Small differences in usages among the same customer base will place any given user in Mini or in Studio. E.g. my workflow intensity 4 years ago was MacPro/Studio-level but 2024 is expected to be less intense (same apps) and possibly Mini-level. Not "...different customer bases."

 

[mytdave]

Or just wait a hot minute for Apple to update the Studio with M2 processors. They'd be crazy not to.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

Given some rumors of Apple being directionless with the Mac Pro could indicate how the Studio is essentially the top of the crop already (save for moving up to M2 Max/Ultra chips and other improvements) - the architecture limits the use of external components such as GPUs or accelerators, not to forget soldered RAM and storage are part of the design as well, which goes directly against the customization we were accustomed to with the pro towers.

The other piece is the 2 x Ultra chip that was/is supposed to power the Mac Pro, which apparently is not happening - they hit a technical roadblock, it would be too expensive in the end, who knows. If that is the case and the M2 Ultra is the only top contender at this time, it makes me wonder what sort of edge the Mac Pro is going over the Mac Studio (assuming the Mac Studio gets the M2 Ultra).

In the event the Mac Pro is also an all-soldered "unified" design, I wonder why we would need a tower case at all - the Mac Studio form factor is pretty much all we need.

There are lots of folks who need more than the Studio form factor, specifically as regards removing the heat created by extreme workflows.

 

[Monotremata]

Niiiiiiiiice.. Single core score is great for me as my Mac's main job is to run Cubase. Sounds like I wont miss much going with the M2 Pro over the base model Studio and can throw that extra cash towards maxing out the Mini..

 

[theluggage]

That leaves only the ISA ports and it is not clear what support they will have with Apple Silicon. Hopefully Apple can extend support for addon cards, in particular GPUs and maybe RAM but it’s not clear how they do that. This coming year will be interesting to see how that story unfolds.

Well the M2 Max now goes up to 96GB RAM, so the M2 Ultra will presumably take 192GB... yeah, still a bit short of the Mac Pro's 1.5TB... Maybe they could add a DDR5-based, volatile "RAM disk" with a PCIe interface and use it as swap, for speed and to avoid SSD wear.

The M1 Ultra Studio has 6 TB4 ports (why not 8 since it's 2 M1 Maxes? Possibly due to the interconnect, but let's be generous and assume the M1 Ultra has 8). Lets also assume that the TB4 ports on the chip can each be re-configured as 4 lanes of regular PCIe (speculation, but not unreasonable). If not, they could use an on board thunderbolt-to-PCIe bridge (but not so efficient) - that's up to 32 lanes of PCIe, but you'd presumably still want to keep at least 4 TB4 ports on a Pro machine, reducing that to 16. C.f. 64 on the Xeon-W. That could be fine for a few specialist interface cards or one GPU, but you're not going to be running quad high-end GPUs off of that...

So, yeah, I'm skeptical about a M2 Ultra "equivalent" of a 2019 MP - not that you couldn't do interesting things with clusters of M2 Max/Ultra SoCs - but they might not be great at running conventional "Pro" media creation apps.

 

[kamikrazee]

My criteria is ports. I have an iMac with six connection points, (4 USB and 2 Thunderbolt ports) and all but one have some sort of hub or adapter connected so I can keep the numerous gizmo's and gadgets that I accumulated connected and ready for that sudden whim to see how they will work in a given situation. Neither of these machines allows for any expansion and to me that screams PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE. And finally, the faux cuteness of the Studio makes me want to name it Lisa.