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

[bzgnyc2]

Very true. My biggest concern, I think, is memory - have a few VMs running on this thing and I think things are starting to get a little cramped. All-in-all though I'm impressed how well this thing's holding up to what I've thrown at it...

Yeah -- my Mac Mini 2018 does so much with so little its really hard to justify replacing it at all. I know the new ones are faster, etc, etc, but short of playing with local AI, etc, there's not much its hardware can't do that I need. The software support will end before its usefulness does.

A Mac Mini M4 w/32GB of RAM is only $1K in the US store, which I think is still pretty reasonable. Still 1/2 price of a Studio for probably similar performance and almost the same life expectancy for the previous things you've mentioned.

The Studio makes more sense to me when you need to go to 48GB+ RAM, want TB5, benefit from the extra GPU, encode a lot of H.264/H.265/ProRes videos, or do long-running calculations. Short of those things, the base M4 (with up to 32GB RAM as needed) can handle a lot. On the other hand, if your needs are such that a spec'd out Mac Mini M4 Pro is the lowest you can go, I would jump up to the Studio for a few dollars more.

 

[switz]

Migrated my file server from a M2 Pro mini (32GB ram, 10Gb ethernet and 2 TB SSD) to a M4 Pro mini (64GB Ram, 10Gb ethernet and 2 TB SDD) when it was announced. A bird in hand is worth more than two in the bush. My M1 Ultra Mac Studio has a M4 Pro mini (64GB ram, 10Gb ethernet and 8 TB SDSD) as a backup on the shelf.

Thus we upgraded most of our Apple gear to the latest processors before the changing of the guard.

Ability to get new gear could become problematic with current political situation.

 

[drrich2]

I'm debating finally replacing my late-2014 model mac Mini, which mostly acts as a server for a variety of things at home (Home Assistant, Plex, others...). It's actually holding up to the workload quite nicely, but I'm starting to run into issues where the older OS isn't supported anymore (it's on Monterey; latest available for it).
Tempted to get the Studio, as the extra performance would help the replacement remain useful longer, but do I need it when this 16GB i7 is still chugging along dutifully? Hmmm

I love to hear of a computer being useful for so long. That said, what's your comfort level for running one years beyond when Apple stops issuing security updates for it?

I'm a fan of some 'future proofing' the spec.s, then running a system several years, till it becomes buggy and/or slow. That said, if the system is connected to the Internet, these days security is such a concern.

 

[bzgnyc2]

I love to hear of a computer being useful for so long. That said, what's your comfort level for running one years beyond when Apple stops issuing security updates for it?

I'm a fan of some 'future proofing' the spec.s, then running a system several years, till it becomes buggy and/or slow. That said, if the system is connected to the Internet, these days security is such a concern.

If one wants to continue using a version of macOS that Apple has stopped supporting (whether for software compatability need, dropped hardware support, or preference), I would definitely switch to a browser not tied to the OS. Firefox, Orion, and Brave among others still support macOS versions that Apple has abandoned. Firefox 115 ESR back to Sierra, Orion back to Mojave (though it supports Catalina+ better), and Brave back to Big Sur. Mozilla will drop support for Firefox 115 ESR soon but their more recent ESR will support Catalina for a while longer.

The other most likely attack vector is Mail and similarly needs to be protected. Then I think one would be safer after enabling the firewall and avoiding sketchy sites than those with the latest updates installed but who browse with reckless abandon and mate with to any open Wifi access point they come across.