Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I currently have two of these...

Hoping they work with a shiny new Apple Mac mini Pro...!

Mac mini Pro
  • M1 Max SoC
  • 10-core CPU (8P/2E)
  • 32-core GPU
  • 16-core Neural Engine
  • 64GB LPDDR5 RAM
  • 400GB/s memory bandwidth
  • 1TB NVMe SSD
  • 10Gb Ethernet (RJ-45) port
  • (4) Thunderbolt 4 (USB-C) ports
  • (2) USB 3.2 (USB-A) ports
  • HDMI 2.1 port
  • 3.5mm headphone jack w/ low/high impedance switching & optical audio out
  • Space Black
$2999
 
  • Love
Reactions: Cape Dave
I got a refurbished M1 mini 16gb/512gb. I've tried 3 new m1 minis, 2 refurbished and they all have the flicker problem on my dell s2817q. I'm going to invest in a new monitor, nothing fancy just a 4k one, and donate this to my mom who's a windows user. It'll be a nice upgrade to her 23" 1080p
Apologies if this has been discussed previously......
How is your monitor connected to the M1, and why would a new monitor make a difference?

Is it an issue with your monitor?
 
part of what has me hesitating is I remember having a Core Solo Mini when they first came out and that sucked, because I missed out on a lot that came later
Definitely a consideration. After all, the new Mac mini is almost certainly coming.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Wolf1701
It’s coming because they still sell the high end Mac mini with intel chips right now. Prob won’t be til next year when MacBook Pros are not on back order anymore.
 
It’s coming because they still sell the high end Mac mini with intel chips right now. Prob won’t be til next year when MacBook Pros are not on back order anymore.

My main argument towards a M1 Pro/Max-powered Mac mini, but many others seem to think the Mac mini is only ever destined to be an entry-level desktop...

Yes, the Mac mini debuted as an entry-level model, but has seen a number of higher-end models; thinking of the "Server" models (mainly a second storage device...?) and, of course, the Space Gray 2018 Mac mini that was directly marketed towards creatives & coders at that 2018 event...?

My hopes & dreams for a M1 Max-powered Mac mini:

Mac mini Pro
  • M1 Max SoC
  • 10-core CPU (8P/2E)
  • 32-core GPU
  • 16-core Neural Engine
  • 64GB LPDDR5 RAM
  • 400GB/s memory bandwidth
  • 1TB NVMe SSD
  • 10Gb Ethernet (RJ-45) port
  • (4) Thunderbolt 4 (USB-C) ports
  • (2) USB 3.2 (USB-A) ports
  • HDMI 2.0 port
  • 3.5mm headphone jack
  • Space Black
$2999
 
  • Love
Reactions: Cape Dave
Hmmm... My 2007 Mac Pro is behaving erratically. I've temporarily replaced it with a 2017 12" MacBook, and I'm pleasantly surprised at how well it is all working (including with a 30" Apple Cinema Display and multiple USB devices, all through one USB-C port), but I'm not keen on using this somewhat awkward setup permanently.

I'll eventually have to get that M2 or M1 Pro (8-core) Mac mini with the new form factor, but I was tempted to get a 2014 Mac mini to tide me over. Or perhaps I can just wait it out with this 12" MacBook.*

Decisions, decisions...

*Note that this is a secondary machine. My main machine is a 2017 iMac.
 
Apologies if this has been discussed previously......
How is your monitor connected to the M1, and why would a new monitor make a difference?

Is it an issue with your monitor?
Hi, Dell S2817Q connects via HDMI > HDMI or USB C > DP. Flickers on both. I have now got my cheap HP 1920x1080 which has HDMI and VGA (old school) and it works without a single flaw! I might even settle on a 1920x1080 display if it isn't suffering
 
I picked up the 8 GB M1 Mac Mini for my son since it was on sale at Amazon for $599. Got it yesterday and plugged it in and set it up for him. I was shocked at how fast and responsive it was compared to my 16 GB Intel Mac Mini. I figured with 8 GB of RAM it would be sluggish. Makes me want an Apple Silicon Mac now.
 
I picked up the 8 GB M1 Mac Mini for my son since it was on sale at Amazon for $599. Got it yesterday and plugged it in and set it up for him. I was shocked at how fast and responsive it was compared to my 16 GB Intel Mac Mini. I figured with 8 GB of RAM it would be sluggish. Makes me want an Apple Silicon Mac now.
That is because M1's swap is very efficient and thanks to the unified memory you don't have the chicken-fox thing on Intel machines with regards to Video and OS memory. Given how some programs go SSD write happy I would recommend going with a 1TB SSD for main drive and put all document files on an external drive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cape Dave
alright people, let's hear the analysis
2012 i5 Mini with 16GB RAM and a 500GB Crucial SSD
Use it for web/youtube/email/whatever
I want apple silicon, ideally a new mini, but have waited to this point.
since the new mac mini is almost certainly coming, what would you do
For my own situation:

I have seen on the instance of rumors, and almost no rumors have come of a mac mini pro lately. So I have decided to stop waiting.

To make it harder I sort of have to buy a machine in december/january. So I will order the
Macbook Pro 14 - upgraded to 1 tb disk and to 32 gb ram in december. It will cost me extra $1000 but, I might be travelling with the machine or use it live.

I would do:

I think, if you want a mac mini, I would wait until the iMac with M1 Pro comes. Because the Mac Mini should come first. Only if you do really need to upgrade disk/ram, you need to wait for a mini.

And in June then I would have bought the entry model of the Macbook 14 or the iMac with M1 Pro.

Because an desktop Mac lasts 10 years, I would have been saving hard until May and June, and then made my buy.
 
saving hard until May and June, and then made my buy.

Mac mini Pro
  • M1 Max SoC
  • 10-core CPU (8P/2E)
  • 32-core GPU
  • 16-core Neural Engine
  • 64GB LPDDR5 RAM
  • 400GB/s memory bandwidth
  • 1TB NVMe SSD
  • 10Gb Ethernet (RJ-45) port
  • (4) Thunderbolt 4 (USB-C) ports
  • (2) USB 3.2 (USB-A) ports
  • HDMI 2.0 port
  • 3.5mm headphone jack
  • Space Gray
$2999
 
Yes, as your friendly neighborhood moderator I have also noticed this and refrained from taking any action, but would like to remind you that it's against forum policy.
_____________

"One post. Do not post multiple messages with the same content. One post in the most appropriate thread is sufficient."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cape Dave
What's the point in repeating again and again in multiple threads and posts your theory?

Excitement...?

Yes, as your friendly neighborhood moderator I have also noticed this and refrained from taking any action, but would like to remind you that it's against forum policy.
_____________

"One post. Do not post multiple messages with the same content. One post in the most appropriate thread is sufficient."

I (honestly) was not aware, my bad...?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boyd01
What's the point in repeating again and again in multiple threads and posts your theory?
Also to note, this could be completely wrong speculation.
Until anything is released, nobody knows.

The way the post is shown above, a casual browser could take it as, 'that's what to expect' from Apple, rather than an individuals wish list.
 
Excitement...?



I (honestly) was not aware, my bad...?
I share your enthusiasm. My M1 mini has been a fantastic device as a Plex server and basic office (Word, Excel) machine. It's on 24/7 and uses so much less power than my 2018 i5 mini. I'm excited to see if Apple offers more power in this segment for those who need it.
 
That is because M1's swap is very efficient and thanks to the unified memory you don't have the chicken-fox thing on Intel machines with regards to Video and OS memory.

It is true that the M1 Ram is more efficient due to the unified memory architecture, but, swap is swap, happening as there is no room left in memory for things that would/should happen in memory (with a few small exceptions). There is really not much Apple can do in terms of making swap efficient other than reducing it happening where appropriate.

Besides on a brand new machine in the 'setup' phase swap really shouldn't yet be too apparent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: reallynotnick
It is true that the M1 Ram is more efficient due to the unified memory architecture, but, swap is swap, happening as there is no room left in memory for things that would/should happen in memory (with a few small exceptions). There is really not much Apple can do in terms of making swap efficient other than reducing it happening where appropriate.

Besides on a brand new machine in the 'setup' phase swap really shouldn't yet be too apparent.
There are different kinds of swap: disk swap and video card-system RAM swap. Ideally, especially if you are talking about SSDs, you want as little disk swap as possible hence and focus be between video card and system RAM swap which can slow things down if the program isn't written correctly and is limited tot eh bus bridge between the two.

It was asked, about 18 months ago, "Can the GPU use the main computer RAM (as an extension)?"

And the main answer was:
"Short answer: No, you can't.

Longer answer: The bandwidth, and more importantly, latency between the GPU and RAM over the PCIe bus is an order of magnitude worse than between the GPU and VRAM, so if you are going to do that you might as well be number crunching on the CPU.

CPU can use a part of VRAM (part mapped into the PCI aperture, usually 256MB) directly as RAM, but it will be slower than regular RAM because PCIe is a bottleneck. Using it for something like swap might be feasible."

This is what I mean about chicken-fox thing (forgot about the corn). For people who don't know the premise is
A man has to get a fox, a chicken, and a sack of corn across a river. (This is the swap between RAM and VRAM)

He has a rowboat, and it can only carry him and one other thing. (PCIe)
If the fox and the chicken are left together, the fox will eat the chicken. (graphic perforce problems)
If the chicken and the corn are left together, the chicken will eat the corn. (large disk swap occurs)

Unified RAM doesn't have to do that tag team nonsense and can trade off the RAM total as needed.
 
There are different kinds of swap: disk swap and video card-system RAM swap. Ideally, especially if you are talking about SSDs, you want as little disk swap as possible hence and focus be between video card and system RAM swap which can slow things down if the program isn't written correctly and is limited tot eh bus bridge between the two.

It was asked, about 18 months ago, "Can the GPU use the main computer RAM (as an extension)?"

And the main answer was:
"Short answer: No, you can't.

Longer answer: The bandwidth, and more importantly, latency between the GPU and RAM over the PCIe bus is an order of magnitude worse than between the GPU and VRAM, so if you are going to do that you might as well be number crunching on the CPU.

CPU can use a part of VRAM (part mapped into the PCI aperture, usually 256MB) directly as RAM, but it will be slower than regular RAM because PCIe is a bottleneck. Using it for something like swap might be feasible."

This is what I mean about chicken-fox thing (forgot about the corn). For people who don't know the premise is
A man has to get a fox, a chicken, and a sack of corn across a river. (This is the swap between RAM and VRAM)

He has a rowboat, and it can only carry him and one other thing. (PCIe)
If the fox and the chicken are left together, the fox will eat the chicken. (graphic perforce problems)
If the chicken and the corn are left together, the chicken will eat the corn. (large disk swap occurs)

Unified RAM doesn't have to do that tag team nonsense and can trade off the RAM total as needed.
That is for PCIe attached video cards though the concept is valid. Most Mac minis use Intel chips with their integrated graphics controller. RAM is allocated for graphics from main memory and PCIe is not involved - instead there is a shared bus/controller. What the M1 does is introduce a new memory controller model https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/production-expert-1/why-the-apple-m1-chip-is-so-fast
 
That is for PCIe attached video cards though the concept is valid. Most Mac minis use Intel chips with their integrated graphics controller. RAM is allocated for graphics from main memory and PCIe is not involved - instead there is a shared bus/controller. What the M1 does is introduce a new memory controller model https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/production-expert-1/why-the-apple-m1-chip-is-so-fast
True but remember we are comparing Macs to PCs and some PCs use dedicated video RAM

"Using video RAM for this task is much faster than using your system RAM, because video RAM is right next to the GPU in the graphics card. VRAM is built for this high-intensity purpose and it's thus "dedicated." (...) If VRAM fills up, the system has to rely on standard RAM and performance will suffer."

More over in the article you linked there is this: "That is why these cards have high performance. But they have an achilles heel: Whenever they have to get data from the memory used by the CPU, this happens over a set of copper traces on the computer motherboard called a PCIe bus. Try chugging water through a super thin straw. It may get to your mouth fast, but the throughput is totally inadequate.”

"Apple’s Unified Memory Architecture aims to solve these problems without the restrictions of ‘old school shared memory’ in 3 ways…
  1. There is no special area reserved just for the CPU or just the GPU. Memory is allocated to both processors. They can both use the same memory. This means that no copying is needed and so things go faster.
  2. Apple uses memory, which is designed to serve both large chunks of data and do it very quickly. It is called ‘low latency and high throughput’. This removes the need to have two different types of memory and all the copying of data between them, making the M1 faster.
  3. With their iPhone and iPad design experience, Apple has been able to get the GPU power consumption down so that a relatively powerful GPU can be integrated into an SoC without overheating."
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: Cape Dave
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.