Replace 2022 Mac Studio M1 Ultra with top Mac Mini M4 Pro

[Jeff Sorley]

I'm looking fort advice on whether to "upgrade."

What I need it for (tl;dr version): I use my Mac for the typical stuff. Web browsing. Word processing, etc. What I primarily use it for, though, is digital illustration via Photoshop.

What I have:

2022 Mac Studio "M1 Ultra" - M1 Ultra 3.2 GHz 20-core CPU/64-core GPU, 32-core Neural Engine, 64GB RAM, 1TB SSD drive.

What I'm looking at:

2024 Mac Mini "M4 Pro" - M4 Pro 4.5 GHz 14-core CPU/20-core GPU, 16-core Neural Engine, 64GB RAM, 1TB SSD drive.

What I need(?) it for (long version): Due to the nature of the images I create in Photoshop, they tend to be very large. I am finding that when have multiple files open, extra layers start get added on, etc. that my Mac Studio starts to lag. This could be because Photoshop gobbles all of the RAM, which I try to mitigate by closing other apps or browser windows, but this doesn't always solve the problem.

I'm not so good at comparing tech specs, because I know that it's not always apples to apples. It seems that RAM and storage aside, the M4 Pro and M1 Ultra chips compare differently in benchmarks, with one being better somewhere, and the other being better in another.

I was curious if the advances in chip tech have made M4 Pro, with less cores overall, may still see a performance boost. I also (think) I recall somewhere that the smaller Neural Engine of the Mac Mini M4 Pro does a great deal in regards to image/graphics processing... but I could be mistaken.

Overall, if the Mac Mini can help with some of these lag issues, despite being a "lesser" system, I'd gladly, swap them out. But obviously don't want to make the switch if there is no performance gain (or it is negligible). It could also just be a RAM issue, in which case there's not much to be done.

Any thoughts or advice are greatly appreciated.

 

[avkills]

If you are dealing with insanely large canvas sizes then you need more RAM, in fact you need as much as you can afford to get.

Personally I would wait for the M4 based Studios to arrive then make a decision.

 

[Jeff Sorley]

If you are dealing with insanely large canvas sizes then you need more RAM, in fact you need as much as you can afford to get.

Personally I would wait for the M4 based Studios to arrive then make a decision.

Thanks for your reply!

Yeah, that's the rub. I could barely swing the M1 Ultra when it came out. And while I'll afford Apple a lot of slack because I like a computer that just works out of the box, them moving away from user-upgradeable RAM is a hard pill to swallow considering the exorbitant prices they charge for it. I guess it really depends on what the base RAM of the M4 Studio will be (and probably the lower M4 Max end of things).

 

[AdamBuker]

Thanks for your reply!

Yeah, that's the rub. I could barely swing the M1 Ultra when it came out. And while I'll afford Apple a lot of slack because I like a computer that just works out of the box, them moving away from user-upgradeable RAM is a hard pill to swallow considering the exorbitant prices they charge for it. I guess it really depends on what the base RAM of the M4 Studio will be (and probably the lower M4 Max end of things).

If nothing else maybe see if you could find a used M1 Ultra maxed out at 128GB and see if that helps.

 

[ChrisA]

Any thoughts or advice are greatly appreciated.

Open Activity Monitor and watch it while you work. Of course it will show that all the RAM you have is in use. Any modern operating system will find a use for all of your RAM, but look to see what it is being used for. Is Adobe using it or is the system using it for a file cache?

Then look at CPU and GPU utilization. You not want to buy a faster CPU if the current one is running idle.

Look at the storage read/write per second. And look at swap.

Tell people here what you see. If we don't know all of this we can only guess.

 

[apostolosdt]

If, in your belief, your problem can be solved with more RAM, you might trade your M1 Ultra for an M2 with its 192 GB RAM.

…Or be patient for 4-5 months. I honestly can’t see how a 64-GB-RAM maxed M4 is a solution.

 

[Admiral]

There will inevitably be some current M2/M3 Mac Studio owners who absolutely MUST have the Latest Thing, and if you are patient you will find a used Mac Studio with that abundant RAM.

 

[Fishrrman]

You should probably wait until the m4xx Studio model is released this year.
Looks to be coming in the second quarter. Perhaps at WWDC.

And THEN make the decision.

I'm thinking that you may find moving from the Studio to the Mini will leave you feeling ... "constrained"...

 

[Jeff Sorley]

There will inevitably be some current M2/M3 Mac Studio owners who absolutely MUST have the Latest Thing, and if you are patient you will find a used Mac Studio with that abundant RAM.

😄 You make an excellent point.

 

[Andrey84]

Moving from M1 Ultra 64GB to M4 Pro 64GB is not really an upgrade, as others have said.

You won't notice any difference at all.

Agree with the others that you should:

1. Monitor your memory pressure and CPU utilisation more closely to try to understand what constrains the performance.
2. If you find memory being in high yellow/red, try getting an M1/M2 Studio Ultra with 128GB.
3. If you want to do this on a budget, you'll have to wait until the M4 Studio release anyway, as very few people will be selling their Studios before that.

A separate point from me - try to raise this issue with Adobe and/or in Photoshop forums. More often than not, the lags are caused by software issues. Maybe there are settings you can tweak. I'm sure you're well within reason to blame this on Photoshop. Your workflow is probably a normal professional workflow, and an M1 Ultra 64GB Studio is a very high spec machine - it shouldn't be lagging!

 

[Jeff Sorley]

@ChrisA and @Andrey84 -

Thanks for the information. I'm kind of stress-testing as I currently have two files open in photoshop that are 7200 x 10800 px, and each has several dozen layers. As you can tell by the attached screenshot, the CPU an GPU don't seem to be straining too much.

So what it does look like it is an issue of not enough RAM, and maybe also Photoshop settings. Andrey84, thanks for the advice about checking in with the Photoshop forums. I thought I had them set properly (Let Photoshop Use: 34GB, 1 TB SSD connected via Thunderbolt 4 as a scratch disk) but there may be something I'm missing!

 

[avkills]

I would let Photoshop use all the memory minus 16GB. The OS and other apps don't need that much (well maybe Chrome and Safari...lol)

Mine was set for 70% memory usage, but I have 128GB laptop and 240GB desktop.

 

[Jeff Sorley]

I would let Photoshop use all the memory minus 16GB. The OS and other apps don't need that much (well maybe Chrome and Safari...lol)

Mine was set for 70% memory usage, but I have 128GB laptop and 240GB desktop.

Surprisingly Safari is the lesser of the RAM hogs for me. Firefox and Chrome are all gobbling it up... enough so that I am slowly migrating from Firefox to Safari as my default.

 

[Jeff Sorley]

Just for gits and shiggles, here are my stats right at a moment when I was experiencing quite a bit of lag in Photoshop. Two large files open, and being worked on.

I'm no expert, but it looks to me like the GPU and CPU aren't doing too badly. Additionally, my Memory Pressure was low, and there's 10-14% free memory sitting around.

 

[Jeff Sorley]

@avkills I'll bump up the allotment and see what comes about.

 

[Alameda]

@ChrisA and @Andrey84 -

Thanks for the information. I'm kind of stress-testing as I currently have two files open in photoshop that are 7200 x 10800 px, and each has several dozen layers. As you can tell by the attached screenshot, the CPU an GPU don't seem to be straining too much.

So what it does look like it is an issue of not enough RAM, and maybe also Photoshop settings. Andrey84, thanks for the advice about checking in with the Photoshop forums. I thought I had them set properly (Let Photoshop Use: 34GB, 1 TB SSD connected via Thunderbolt 4 as a scratch disk) but there may be something I'm missing!

View attachment 2472705

To determine RAM use, you need to look at Activity Monitor’s Memory Pressure graph. If it goes Yellow, you are experiencing some slowdown and I it turns red, then you need more RAM.

With the memory pressure in your screenshot, more RAM is not going to improve performance at all

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Forgive the question but can you just close the images that you are not currently working on and focus on the one image in play? Basically give the one on which you are focused at any given time the entire system.

I'll assume you must be working between images (from this one to that one) etc. Or maybe the work is such that you have to jump from one image to another and back again? Else, I'd just close all but the current one and then see how things go.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

I'm looking fort advice on whether to "upgrade."

What I need it for (tl;dr version): I use my Mac for the typical stuff. Web browsing. Word processing, etc. What I primarily use it for, though, is digital illustration via Photoshop.

What I have:

2022 Mac Studio "M1 Ultra" - M1 Ultra 3.2 GHz 20-core CPU/64-core GPU, 32-core Neural Engine, 64GB RAM, 1TB SSD drive.

What I'm looking at:

2024 Mac Mini "M4 Pro" - M4 Pro 4.5 GHz 14-core CPU/20-core GPU, 16-core Neural Engine, 64GB RAM, 1TB SSD drive.

What I need(?) it for (long version): Due to the nature of the images I create in Photoshop, they tend to be very large. I am finding that when have multiple files open, extra layers start get added on, etc. that my Mac Studio starts to lag. This could be because Photoshop gobbles all of the RAM, which I try to mitigate by closing other apps or browser windows, but this doesn't always solve the problem.

I'm not so good at comparing tech specs, because I know that it's not always apples to apples. It seems that RAM and storage aside, the M4 Pro and M1 Ultra chips compare differently in benchmarks, with one being better somewhere, and the other being better in another.

I was curious if the advances in chip tech have made M4 Pro, with less cores overall, may still see a performance boost. I also (think) I recall somewhere that the smaller Neural Engine of the Mac Mini M4 Pro does a great deal in regards to image/graphics processing... but I could be mistaken.

Overall, if the Mac Mini can help with some of these lag issues, despite being a "lesser" system, I'd gladly, swap them out. But obviously don't want to make the switch if there is no performance gain (or it is negligible). It could also just be a RAM issue, in which case there's not much to be done.

Any thoughts or advice are greatly appreciated.

You need RAM. Going to a Mini with the same RAM and not optimized for your heavy images workflow is a bad idea. Wait to see the next Studio if you can, or if you are hamstrung right now buy an M4 MBP with Max chip and 128 GB RAM. In any event do not settle at 64 GB of RAM.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

Thanks for your reply!

Yeah, that's the rub. I could barely swing the M1 Ultra when it came out. And while I'll afford Apple a lot of slack because I like a computer that just works out of the box, them moving away from user-upgradeable RAM is a hard pill to swallow considering the exorbitant prices they charge for it. I guess it really depends on what the base RAM of the M4 Studio will be (and probably the lower M4 Max end of things).

No, it does not depend "on what the base RAM of the M4 Studio will be." Your needs are not defined by the base, your needs are defined by what you do. You say you bought a Studio Ultra with 64 GB RAM. IMO that was less than ideal, the Studio Ultra cost [with only 64 GB RAM] not being cost-effective for your described usage.

So for your next purchase start with a Max chip and the maximum available RAM, but plan on not going the pricey Ultra route. Whether you wait and get a Studio, buy an existing M2 Studio or choose an M4 MBP, stick to the much cheaper [than Ultra] Max chip but pay for the RAM.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

Forgive the question but can you just close the images that you are not currently working on and focus on the one image in play? Basically give the one on which you are focused at any given time the entire system.

I'll assume you must be working between images (from this one to that one) etc. Or maybe the work is such that you have to jump from one image to another and back again? Else, I'd just close all but the current one and then see how things go.

IMO when planning new purchases we should not be planning on how we can constrain our workflow to cope with limiting hardware. We should be planning on how we can configure hardware to help optimize our desired workflow.

Your advice is solid, however, for what the OP may want to do before getting around to a hardware upgrade.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Sometimes what some call "workflows," others call bad habits. Does OP need to have multiple super-sized, complex images open at the same time as part of a workflow? Or are they just left open (hogging up resources) out of habit? OP knows.

If your guess is correct and he needs them simultaneously, then he needs big tech resource upgrades to readily handle all of that. And if my guess is correct, he might be able to adjust a habit and do just fine with the Mac he already owns free & clear. He also posted...

I could barely swing the M1 Ultra when it came out. And while I'll afford Apple a lot of slack because I like a computer that just works out of the box, them moving away from user-upgradeable RAM is a hard pill to swallow considering the exorbitant prices they charge for it.

I read that as abundant money for a much upgraded M4 Ultra Studio is not exactly easy for OP to source... thus he's looking at a cheaper desktop Mac in hopes that M1 Ultra to M4 Base or Pro might resolve his issues. Again, I perceive money is not abundant else, he might be talking about trying to solve his problem by adopting Mac Pro instead of Mac Mini.

So perhaps some practical ideas might resolve his problem without assuming he just spends another big pile of money on new tech from Apple with even more "exorbitant priced" RAM. Yes, that suggestion would be much better for Apple. But who is seeking help here is not (the often) richest company in the world but a fellow consumer apparently not swimming in cash for a new Mac loaded up with even more expensive RAM upgrades.

Since neither of us know, he very well may need a new computer loaded with bigger resources. If so, perhaps he should consider switching to a loaded PC where all the additional RAM you suggest will not cost 3X-5X market prices and Adobe Photoshop runs just fine too? Then, the M1 Studio he owns could just do other tasks not so demanding... including anything and everything else he likes to do on Mac. He wouldn't be the first to jump to PCs to get piles of RAM & Storage at much lower costs for tasks that demand either or both.

Since I needed a PC with a LOT of internal storage, I did exactly this... buying my first PC in about 20 years. It now gets tasks that demand POWER over PPW and the whole PC cost less than only the 8TB SSD upgrade in a Mac (without counting the price of the Mac itself). Incidentally, I put 10TB of fast SSD in that PC too, and have the flexibility to grow RAM if I get into a situation like OP that demands more of it vs. having to replace the entire computer.

OR, he may be able to just change a habit to free up enough internal horses to keep doing what he's doing without needing an additional computer at all... which would probably be best for him if this wild guess actually does apply.

 

[Jeff Sorley]

To determine RAM use, you need to look at Activity Monitor’s Memory Pressure graph. If it goes Yellow, you are experiencing some slowdown and I it turns red, then you need more RAM.

With the memory pressure in your screenshot, more RAM is not going to improve performance at all

Yeah, so the memory pressure never really gets very high. So even though most of the RAM is being used (right now I've got, like 3% "free" but memory pressure is still low and green), maybe there is something in the Photoshop settings?
It's just that the times when it really lags seem to correspond to when there isn't a lot of free memory left, but maybe those two data points aren't actually related?

 

[Allen_Wentz]

Sometimes what some call "workflows," others call bad habits. Does OP need to have multiple super-sized, complex images open at the same time as part of a workflow? Or are they just left open (hogging up resources) out of habit? OP knows.

If your guess is correct and he needs them simultaneously, then he needs big tech resource upgrades to readily handle all of that. And if my guess is correct, he might be able to adjust a habit and do just fine with the Mac he already owns free & clear. He also posted...



I read that as abundant money for a much upgraded M4 Ultra Studio is not exactly easy for OP to source... thus he's looking at a cheaper desktop Mac in hopes that M1 Ultra to M4 Base or Pro might resolve his issues. Again, I perceive money is not abundant else, he might be talking about trying to solve his problem by adopting Mac Pro instead of Mac Mini.

So perhaps some practical ideas might resolve his problem without assuming he just spends another big pile of money on new tech from Apple with even more "exorbitant priced" RAM. Yes, that suggestion would be much better for Apple. But who is seeking help here is not (the often) richest company in the world but a fellow consumer apparently not swimming in new Mac loaded up with even more expensive RAM upgrades cash.

Since neither of us know, he very well may need a new computer loaded with bigger resources. If so, perhaps he should consider switching to a loaded PC where all the additional RAM you suggest will not cost 3X-5X market prices and Adobe Photoshop runs just fine too? Then, the M1 Studio he owns could just do other tasks not so demanding... including anything and everything else he likes to do on Mac. He wouldn't be the first to jump to PCs to get piles of RAM & Storage at much lower costs for tasks that demand either or both.

Since I needed a PC with a LOT of internal storage, I did exactly this... buying my first PC in about 20 years. It now gets tasks that demand POWER over PPW and the whole PC cost less than only the 8TB SSD upgrade in a Mac (without counting the price of the Mac itself). Incidentally, I put 10TB of fast SSD in that PC, and have the flexibility to grow RAM if I get into a situation like OP that demands more of it vs. having to replace the entire computer.

OR, he may be able to just change a habit to free up enough internal horses to keep doing what he's doing without needing an additional computer at all... which would probably be best for him if this wild guess actually does apply.

You discount my primary suggestion of an M2 or M3 or M4 plus RAM and with [non-Ultra] Max chip and you instead suggest M4 Base or Pro. I disagree strongly, and I have done about the same workflow as the OP for decades. With images work, RAM rules, especially Adobe apps. The M4 Base or Pro you suggest are only available with half or less the RAM and half or less the memory bandwidth.

My opinion is that for the workflow described RAM and memory bandwidth are much more important than having a later chip. I have not specifically tested that premise with the M-series SoC. However I did live "resolve his problem without assuming he just spends another big pile of money on new tech from Apple with even more "exorbitant priced" RAM." I used a 2016 MBP for a workflow like the OP's, and resorted to all kinds of user techniques for coping with inadequate RAM as that box aged and apps/OS liked more RAM. When M2 came out I bought a box with maximum available RAM (96 GB) and already I routinely exceed 64 GB. Note that when memory space is available the OS uses it, even if said usage is not critical.

Sure anyone can buy Windows/PC and add RAM more cheaply. That is a separate issue each user decides. I managed PCs and Macs for a decade and personally I would rather eat dirt than save a few dollars going to a Windows box. But you are correct, high-RAM usages like Adobe apps can be cheaper to build via PC - - if one can tolerate MS Windows.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

You discount my primary suggestion of an M2 or M3 or M4 plus RAM and with [non-Ultra] Max chip and you instead suggest M4 Base or Pro.

No OP did, implying replacing the M1 Studio Ultra he already has with another Studio may be out of (financial) reach.

I disagree strongly, and I have done about the same workflow as the OP for decades. With images work, RAM rules, especially Adobe apps. The M4 Base or Pro you suggest are only available with half or less the RAM and half or less the memory bandwidth.

Again, OP suggested those M4s (and the "Switch to Mini" idea too), not me. I referenced OPs suggestion to illustrate that he is looking for EXPENSE relief vs. paying up for perhaps M4 MAX or Ultra AGAIN (and so soon) with 128GB or more of RAM (he already has 64GB in the M1 Ultra Studio on hand).

To UP his RAM as you recommend, he can't even consider Mini (base or pro) because it can't offer that much RAM. So he needs Studio, Pro or a MBpro if he has to stay with Mac and needs more than 64GB of RAM. How much is the 128GB versions of any replacement Macs capable of giving him that RAM (with otherwise minimum specs to include that much RAM)?

• M4 MBpro MAX with 128GB: $4999
• M2 Ultra Mac Studio with 128GB: $4799
• M2 Ultra Mac Pro with 128GB: $7799

I believe those are the ONLY "new Mac" configs to increase to the next tier up of RAM from what he already has.

My opinion is that for the workflow described RAM and memory bandwidth are much more important than having a later chip.

I agree. Too bad a guy who stretched to buy a fairly loaded M1 Ultra only a few years ago now has no path to upping RAM he probably needs in 2025 except laying out at least $4799 more. But I'm sure Apple will appreciate that.

I have not specifically tested that premise with the M-series SoC. However I did live "resolve his problem without assuming he just spends another big pile of money on new tech from Apple with even more "exorbitant priced" RAM." I used a 2016 MBP for a workflow like the OP's, and resorted to all kinds of user techniques for coping with inadequate RAM as that box aged and apps/OS liked more RAM. When M2 came out I bought a box with maximum available RAM (96 GB) and already I routinely exceed 64 GB. Note that when memory space is available the OS uses it, even if said usage is not critical.

Sure anyone can buy Windows/PC and add RAM more cheaply. That is a separate issue each user decides. I managed PCs and Macs for a decade and personally I would rather eat dirt than save a few dollars

Hahaha on "few dollars." 128GB of fast DDR5 RAM for PC from many brands is available under $400 on Amazon right now. The Apple upgrade to 128GB from 64GB (not from 0GB like the PC RAM) is more than twice that price in the cheapest available Mac option.

going to a Windows box. But you are correct, high-RAM usages like Adobe apps can be cheaper to build via PC - - if one can tolerate MS Windows.

Adobe Photoshop UI is not so different between Mac and PC version. If big RAM is OPs problem- as you say (and I think so too)- it would be far cheaper to dedicate a PC with 128GB+ of RAM to his Adobe work. And should his work get even more complicated in another 2 or 3 years such that he needs even more RAM, he could just upgrade only the (relatively cheap) RAM to get more RAM vs. replacing the entire computer with another one for another $5K+ which is the ONLY option for us Mac lovers: need more RAM or storage??? Buy a new Mac for about $5K or more. Now you need more RAM? Buy ANOTHER Mac for about $5K or more.

 

[TechnoMonk]

OP wait for M4 ultra. Worst case if you don’t like M4 ultra, you can grab an M2 Ultra at discount. Mac mini has limited RAM, you will likely have better option with studio, either M4 ultra or M2 Ultra.