Mac mini M4 Pro review: Mac Studio power, miniaturized

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited November 26

The M4 Pro Mac mini is possibly the best deal in computing in late 2024, boasting an impressive amount of power for pros that rivals the Mac Studio and Mac Pro in a tiny package.

Silver square device with an apple logo on top placed on a white table, next to a plant in a brown pot and a glowing blue light.
The M4 Pro Mac mini



When it comes to desktop Mac models, the Mac mini is always considered the entry-level and cheap option, while the Mac Studio and Mac Pro are performance beasts. With the introduction of the M4 Pro Mac mini, Apple has flipped the script -- at least for now.

We've already looked at the entry-level M4 Mac mini. The M4 Pro Mac mini is a reasonably priced upgrade for people who desire great performance, all in a tiny package.



The Mac Studio and Mac Pro are still stuck on M2. Upgrades to both aren't expected until halfway through 2025, so the New Mac mini with M4 Pro could be the interim upgrade for a Pro that needs power now and can't wait for M4 Ultra.

M4 Pro Mac mini review - Design and dimensions



Part of Apple's overhaul of the Mac mini design, the M4 Pro version has the same external appearance as its M4 counterpart. The 7.75-inch rounded flat square has transformed into a 5-inch rounded square, shrinking its desk presence.

Three stacked electronic devices with sleek, rounded designs placed on a white surface. Background features a softly glowing blue light.
Apple TV [top], new Mac mini [middle], old Mac mini [bottom]



At 2 inches, it's also a little taller than the 1.41-inch previous Mac mini design. It's still made of aluminum, though, and has a round base section that handles ventilation.

The recomposition of the Mac mini has also forced a few interesting changes.

A compact silver electronic device with multiple ports, including HDMI and power, resting on a white surface.
The rear ports of the new Mac mini



For a start, Apple couldn't fit all of the ports on the back of the Mac mini simply because there wasn't enough room. As a compromise, some USB-C connections have been brought to the front alongside the headphone jack.

It's a compromise and a massive departure from the usual Mac mini design philosophy.

Silver, compact computer on a white shelf with blurred background featuring out-of-focus colors and shapes.
The front ports of the new Mac mini



The height increase and width decrease also make it resemble a Mac Studio but in miniature. One larger compromise is with power, in that the power button is now located underneath the Mac mini.

Close-up of hands pressing the power button on a black and white electronic device, with red objects blurred in the background.
The M4 Pro Mac mini's power button is now underneath a corner



This sounds like a bad design idea, as you have to lift it up to access the button. But even so, most users will be putting the Mac mini to sleep, rarely needing the physical power button at all.

How much this matters really depends on how often you shut down your machine. It's aggravated somewhat by needing to use the Terminal to set startup and wakeup times, but it's not really a major crisis.

M4 Mac mini review - Specifications, versus M2 Mac mini





SpecificationsM4 Mac mini (2024)M4 Pro Mac mini (2024)M2 Mac mini (2023)M2 Pro Mac mini (2023)
Launch starting price$599
Best M4 Mac mini prices
$1,399
Check M4 Pro Mac mini prices
$599
Best M2 Mac mini prices
$1,299
Best M2 Pro Mac mini prices
Dimensions (inches)5.0 x 5.0 x 2.05.0 x 5.0 x 2.01.41 x 7.75 x 7.751.41 x 7.75 x 7.75
Weight (pounds)1.51.62.62.8
ProcessorApple M4 10-core CPUApple M4 Pro 12-core CPU,
Apple M4 Pro 14-core CPU
Apple M2 8-core CPUApple M2 Pro 10-core CPU,
Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU
Graphics10-core GPU16-core GPU,
20-core GPU
10-core GPU16-core GPU,
19-core GPU
RAM16GB,
24GB,
32GB
24GB,
48GB,
64GB
8GB,
16GB,
24GB
16GB,
32GB
Networking802.11ax Wi-Fi 6E wireless networking
IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n/ac compatible,
Bluetooth 5.3,
Gigabit Ethernet, 10Gig upgradable
802.11ax Wi-Fi 6E wireless networking
IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n/ac compatible,
Bluetooth 5.3,
Gigabit Ethernet, 10Gig upgradable
802.11ax Wi-Fi 6E wireless networking
IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n/ac compatible,
Bluetooth 5.3,
Gigabit Ethernet, 10Gig upgradable
802.11ax Wi-Fi 6E wireless networking
IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n/ac compatible,
Bluetooth 5.3,
Gigabit Ethernet, 10Gig upgradable
Storage256GB,
512GB,
1TB,
2TB
512GB,
1TB,
2TB,
4TB,
8TB
256GB,
512GB,
1TB,
2TB
512GB,
1TB,
2TB,
4TB,
8TB
Display SupportMaximum of 3:
Two 6K 60Hz over Thunderbolt
and one 5K 60Hz over HDMI,
or one 5K 60Hz over Thunderbolt
and one 8K 60Hz or 4K 240Hz over HDMI
Maximum of 3:
Three 6K 60Hz over Thunderbolt or HDMI,
or one 6K 60Hz over Thunderbolt
and one 8K 60Hz or 4K 240Hz over Thunderbolt or HDMI
Maximum of 2:
One 6K 60Hz over Thunderbolt
and one 5K 60Hz over Thunderbolt
or 4K 60Hz over HDMI
Maximum of 3:
Two 6K 60Hz over Thunderbolt
and one 4K over HDMI.
Up to 8K resolution or 240Hz possible over HDMI
PortsHDMI,
Three Thunderbolt 4,
Two USB 3 Type-C (front)
Gigabit Ethernet,
3.5mm headphone (front)
HDMI,
Three Thunderbolt 5,
Two USB 3 Type-C (front)
Gigabit Ethernet,
3.5mm headphone (front)
HDMI,
Two Thunderbolt 4,
Two USB-A,
Gigabit Ethernet,
3.5mm headphone
HDMI,
Four Thunderbolt 4,
Two USB-A,
Gigabit Ethernet,
3.5mm headphone

M4 Pro Mac mini review - Connectivity and Thunderbolt 5



As for the wireless side, there's Wi-Fi 6E and Bluetooth 5.3. These are fairly standard, but also connections that you will only really benefit from if you have the infrastructure or supporting peripherals that use it.

There's no Wi-Fi 7 here as there is in the iPhone. We're not sure why this was decided, especially on the higher-end Mac mini, but it's not a huge crisis at the moment.

Hands holding a small silver computer device with multiple ports, including HDMI and USB-C, against a blurred background with red gadgets.
Thunderbolt 5 will be really useful for those who need high-bandwidth connections



The position of ports isn't the only change to the connectivity in the M4 Pro Mac mini. The selection has also changed to match the new design.

The back of the M4 Mac mini has an HDMI connection, a trio of Thunderbolt ports, and Gigabit Ethernet, which you can pay to upgrade to a 10-gig version.

Around the front are a pair of USB-C ports, offering USB 3 support and 10Gb/s speeds. There's also the headphone jack, which supports high-impedance headphones, a now-standard feature change.

Silver compact rectangular device with rounded edges on a white surface; features minimal ports and a sleek design.
The M4 Pro Mac mini's front ports are sparse but reachable.



The pair of USB-A ports from the old Mac mini have been consigned to the trash can of history. If you really need them, your best bet is to take advantage of a Thunderbolt dock.

Thunderbolt 5 will be the star of the show -- eventually



Speaking of Thunderbolt, the M4 Pro model improves here over the M4 Mac mini. Rather than Thunderbolt 4, the trio of ports in the M4 Pro Mac mini use Thunderbolt 5.

There are several advantages to using Thunderbolt 5 over Thunderbolt 4, with the chief one being bandwidth. While Thunderbolt 4 maxes out at 40Gb/s, Thunderbolt 5 doubles it to 80Gb/s for bi-directional connections.

For asynchronous uses, it goes even higher, to 120Gb/s.

Then, there are the expanded video capabilities of the technology. Thunderbolt 4 manages one 8K screen or two 4K 60Hz displays, which is decent in its own right.

Square silver computer with Apple logo next to a white box labeled 'Mac mini' on a white surface.
The M4 Pro Mac mini and its box



But Thunderbolt 5 can handle multiple 8K screens or three 4K screens at up to 144Hz. If it's one 4K screen, the Thunderbolt 5 standard allows it to go up to 540Hz.

Thunderbolt 5 can also handle higher power limits. Thunderbolt 4 allows up to 100W of power delivery, while Thunderbolt 5 can do up to 240W, with 140W mandatory support.

This is great future-proofing, but it's extremely hard to test. We'll be looking at this more in the future, as Thunderbolt 5 enclosures, docks, and other accessories are more available.

M4 Pro Mac mini review - M4 and other internals



The big attraction here is the M4 Pro chip, marking a two-generation chip upgrade from the M2 Pro in the previous model.

This time, the M4 Pro packs more cores than the M2 Pro in both variants. Add in Apple's claim that it uses the "world's fastest CPU core," and things start to get spicy.



The M4 Pro base version is a 12-core CPU with eight performance cores and four efficiency cores. That's paired with a 16-core GPU and the 16-core Neural Engine primed for Apple Intelligence and the Media Engine for video encoding and decoding.

The upper-tier version has a 14-core CPU, with ten performance cores and four efficiency cores. The GPU is similarly bumped up, supplied with 20 cores.

Memory is also improved in multiple ways. There's the capacity of unified memory for starters, with the base being 24GB, rising to 48GB and 64GB, double the last model's maximum.

Memory bandwidth is also up, from 200GB/s in the M2 Pro to 273GB/s in the M4 Pro. Even this increase helps push the M4 Pro further in terms of performance.

M4 Pro Mac mini review - Performance



Apple trumpeted the speed of the M4 during its announcement. They gave vague promises of two times that, three times this, but they never really benchmark things.

Bar chart comparing Geekbench single-core benchmarks for various Mac mini models, showing highest score of 3,509 for M4 Pro (14-core and 12-core), and lowest 2,364 for M1.
M4 Pro Mac mini vs older Mac minis in Geekbench single-core benchmarks



When compared to the previous models of Mac mini in Geekbench, it's clear that the M4 Pro is considerably more powerful. With a single-core score of 3,509 in testing, almost 900 points clear of the M2 Pro version.

Bar chart showing Geekbench multicore benchmarks for various Mac mini models with M4, M2, and M1 CPUs. M4 Pro Mac mini (14-core) scores highest at 22,004.
Geekbench multi-core benchmarks for M4 Pro Mac mini and older models



For multicore, there's still an observable difference in performance for the M4 Pro models. This is partly due to the increased core counts, but even the 12-core M4 Pro at 20,195 dwarfs the 12-core M2 Pro version at 14,483.

Bar chart comparing Geekbench Metal scores for different Mac mini models, showing progressive improvement from M1 to M4 Pro, with the M4 Pro 14-core CPU scoring the highest.
Geekbench Metal benchmark results for the M4 Pro and previous Mac mini releases



This continues on with the Metal benchmark, as the top-spec version of the M4 Pro finally breaks the 100,000 score barrier.

Bar chart comparing Geekbench single-core benchmarks for Mac models. M4 Pro Mac mini (14-core and 12-core) scores 3,509 each; M1 Ultra Mac Studio scores 2,394; M1 Max Mac Studio scores 2,418.
Geekbench single-core results for the M1 Mac Studio and M4 Pro Mac mini



In the single-core test, the M4 Pro again blasts past the M1 Mac Studio models at 3,500 versus 2,400. That is a considerable step up in the speed of everyday tasks.

For the non-Pro, single core is still the metric that matters.

Bar graph comparing Geekbench multi-core scores: M4 Pro Mac mini 14-core (22,004), M4 Pro Mac mini 12-core (20,195), M1 Ultra Mac Studio 20-core (18,342), M1 Max Mac Studio 10-core (12,627).
Geekbench multi-core figures comparing the M4 Pro Mac mini against the M1 Mac Studio



Multicore testing is much closer, partly because the M1 Ultra has a 20-core CPU versus the 14-core and 12-core M4 Pro. However, despite the sheer number of cores, the M1 Ultra still can't keep up with the M4 Pro, even the 12-core version.

Bar graph compares Geekbench Metal scores: M1 Ultra Mac Studio leads with 160,945, followed by M4 Pro (14-core) 105,009, M1 Max 105,098, M4 Pro (12-core) 96,903.
Geekbench Metal results for M4 Pro Mac mini vs M1 Mac Studio



When it comes to Metal, the GPUs in the M4 Pro and M1 Max models are comparable. The outlier is the M1 Ultra, simply because it has so many cores at its disposal. It's hard to keep up on GPU improvements alone against a chip that offers that sheer quantity of GPU cores.

So, maybe, hang on to that M1 Ultra Mac Studio for a little while longer, if you need the CPU grunt.

M4 Pro Mac mini review - SSD speeds



Our review M4 Pro unit has a 512GB SSD. As promised, it has a faster SSD than the M4 mini has.

Our BlackMagic Disk speed test for read looked at data at about 6.3 gigabytes per second. It consistently wrote at 5.2 gigabytes per second.

This is in contrast to our M4 Mac mini review, where we saw symmetrical read and write speeds about 3 gigabytes per second.

As I just about always have, I recommend external local storage, or network attached storage instead of paying Apple's exorbitant SSD prices. External storage is almost always a better and hugely more cost-effective option for desktops. On the M4 Pro Mac mini, though, it's not equivalent speed across Thunderbolt 4 enclosures.

Use your upgrade money for extra RAM, maybe. Apple's RAM prices are steep too. In a desktop form factor, that's money better spent than internal storage.

Street prices for 1TB external high-speed Thunderbolt or USB4 SSDs are about $160, if you shop right, or build your own. Or, 2TB drives can be had for about $250. These will deliver about 2.7 gigabytes per second read and write, which is more than enough speed for just about any task.

We'll be looking at Thunderbolt 5 enclosures when they're more widely available.

M4 Pro Mac mini review - The tiny machine to beat in December 2024



Time marches on, and so does computing power. While Moore's law is pretty dead, annual increments in Apple Silicon have brought fairly impressive results to even the low-end, like the Mac mini.

A Mac Mini on a white box labeled 'Mac mini' with a glowing blue sphere and a framed picture in the background.
The M4 Pro Mac mini is a great compact block of computing performance



When you're looking at the Mac mini M4, it's worth considering what your jobs look like. If you're doing mostly business casual work, like Office, then there won't be a huge difference in performance from the M4 to M4 Pro models.

However, renders, video editing, and the like, will be enhanced by the boost in multicore and GPU speeds from the $599 model to the $1200+ version.

Orange spherical speaker on wooden stand beside a silver square device with an apple logo, blurred background.
The M4 Pro Mac mini, with a HomePod mini for scale



I've liked the Mac mini from the start. There's been at least one in the house since the G4 version shipped, and as I count right at the moment, there are five. One is a beefed-up G4 model for when I get nostalgic for OS9, and the other is the core of my home network, serving content and Time Machine backups for a host of machines. Now, there's this one.

Now that this review has concluded, the cascading upgrades begin. The M4 will be overkill for the home server, that M2 mini will replace a M1 mini in use as a general computing appliance, and the M1 mini will get handed down to a family member for general use.

What it won't do is replace my M1 Ultra Mac Studio -- today. It probably shouldn't for the few that own one. The next one probably will, though, and as it stands today, just about everything else in Apple's lineup is slower than the M4 Pro Mac mini.

As we said in the M4 mini review, if you are still on Intel Mac hardware, it's probably time to migrate, regardless of your power needs.

M4 Pro Mac mini review - Pros

  • About M2 Mac Studio Power, for half the price

  • More USB-C and more USB overall than the previous design

  • Thunderbolt 5 will be amazingly fast, but...

M4 Pro Mac mini review - Cons

  • Thunderbolt 5 accessories aren't really shipping yet, and will take well into 2025 to proliferate

  • Exorbitant SSD and RAM upgrade pricing

Rating: 5 out of 5

Where to buy Apple's M4 Pro Mac mini at a discount



Every 2024 Mac mini configuration is on sale in our M4 Mac mini Price Guide, with prices starting at $499 at press time.



Save on the retail M4 Pro model with 24GB unified memory and 512GB storage at Amazon with an on-page coupon, or opt for a configure-to-order (CTO) model at up to $200 off with promo code APINSIDER at Apple Authorized Reseller Adorama.



Read on AppleInsider

Alex1N

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 18
    The article is full of comments and opinions that will be out of date extremely soon. 

    Apple subsidised the CD-ROM optical drive market before PC users knew of their existence and discontinued them just as PC users expected them as standard. Thunderbolt 5 is another forward-thinking but transitory spec. 

    The Mac Studio has always been a hideous monstrosity and the kindest thing would be to end it. The new Mac mini, finally relieved in terms of historic size requirements to accommodate an optical drive is the way to go. The Mac Studio was half marketing and half a cover-up over the lack of a new Mac Pro. Apple have made plenty of missteps with Mac over the last five or so years. They make their money from iPhone and 'services' now and appear to have betrayed their core DNA. 
  • Reply 2 of 18
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,928administrator
    timmillea said:
    The article is full of comments and opinions that will be out of date extremely soon. 

    Apple subsidised the CD-ROM optical drive market before PC users knew of their existence and discontinued them just as PC users expected them as standard. Thunderbolt 5 is another forward-thinking but transitory spec. 

    The Mac Studio has always been a hideous monstrosity and the kindest thing would be to end it. The new Mac mini, finally relieved in terms of historic size requirements to accommodate an optical drive is the way to go. The Mac Studio was half marketing and half a cover-up over the lack of a new Mac Pro. Apple have made plenty of missteps with Mac over the last five or so years. They make their money from iPhone and 'services' now and appear to have betrayed their core DNA. 
    I understand what you're saying, but I don't think so. The Ultra chips have needed that relatively massive heat sink inside the Studio, and more I/O is better than less.
    nubusbaconstangtimpetusStrangeDaysunbeliever2Alex1Nkillroy
  • Reply 3 of 18
    nubusnubus Posts: 618member
    timmillea said:
    The Mac Studio has always been a hideous monstrosity and the kindest thing would be to end it. ... The Mac Studio was half marketing and half a cover-up over the lack of a new Mac Pro.
    There has always been a compact professional Mac. The Studio is like IIcx/IIci/IIsi, Quadra 700, PowerMac 7x00, and the G4 Cube. With M-series processors it really is all the Pro Mac we can get as Apple won't allow upgrades. But going mini won't work. The mini isn't designed for 200 GB memory or workstation level sustained performance. Apple already made that mistake with the Mac Pro Trashcan design that cou

    PowerMac 4400 (a PC with a nose job) is still the least inspired Mac ever. Studio is indeed close.
    The kindest thing for Apple to deliver would be a redesign. Make it look Pro and bring back upgradeable storage.
    rezwits
  • Reply 4 of 18
    keithwkeithw Posts: 155member
    Totally disagree about the Studio. For pros who need the graphics power, RAM, and CPU, the Studio will again be a good choice once they finally update it to the M4 Max and M4 Ultra.  Right now, it's a terrible choice and nobody should buy it.  I need the power of the M4 Max but I'd rather get a Studio than a MBP, which I don't really want of need. I'm guessing the M4 Max chip wouldn't even fit inside the new mini and the thermals would not work either.  Bring on the M4 Studio, sooner rather than later.
    danoxkillroyrezwits
  • Reply 5 of 18
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,928administrator
    keithw said:
    Totally disagree about the Studio. For pros who need the graphics power, RAM, and CPU, the Studio will again be a good choice once they finally update it to the M4 Max and M4 Ultra.  Right now, it's a terrible choice and nobody should buy it.  I need the power of the M4 Max but I'd rather get a Studio than a MBP, which I don't really want of need. I'm guessing the M4 Max chip wouldn't even fit inside the new mini and the thermals would not work either.  Bring on the M4 Studio, sooner rather than later.
    I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with?
    pulseimages
  • Reply 6 of 18
    M4 Pro Mac mini has gotten a lot of attention even from non Mac users and with such a sff; it becomes even more enticing. Still waiting for more thunderbolt 5 products like ssd enclosures but l can see Apple getting a good chuck of Windows market share (especially after the latest windows 11 update breaking a bunch of applications). 
    danoxkillroy
  • Reply 7 of 18
    mike1mike1 Posts: 3,440member
    keithw said:
    Totally disagree about the Studio. For pros who need the graphics power, RAM, and CPU, the Studio will again be a good choice once they finally update it to the M4 Max and M4 Ultra.  Right now, it's a terrible choice and nobody should buy it.  I need the power of the M4 Max but I'd rather get a Studio than a MBP, which I don't really want of need. I'm guessing the M4 Max chip wouldn't even fit inside the new mini and the thermals would not work either.  Bring on the M4 Studio, sooner rather than later.
    I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with?

    I think the comment that you also replied to. :)
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 8 of 18
    timmillea said:
    The article is full of comments and opinions that will be out of date extremely soon. 

    Apple subsidised the CD-ROM optical drive market before PC users knew of their existence and discontinued them just as PC users expected them as standard. Thunderbolt 5 is another forward-thinking but transitory spec. 

    The Mac Studio has always been a hideous monstrosity and the kindest thing would be to end it. The new Mac mini, finally relieved in terms of historic size requirements to accommodate an optical drive is the way to go. The Mac Studio was half marketing and half a cover-up over the lack of a new Mac Pro. Apple have made plenty of missteps with Mac over the last five or so years. They make their money from iPhone and 'services' now and appear to have betrayed their core DNA. 
    You do realize they had to get “here”, to this point in time, before being able to do that, right? I know we all want whatever we want when we want it, but development is incremental, and we live in a linear timeline. 
    macxpressAlex1Nkillroyprogrammer
  • Reply 9 of 18
    keithwkeithw Posts: 155member
    keithw said:
    Totally disagree about the Studio. For pros who need the graphics power, RAM, and CPU, the Studio will again be a good choice once they finally update it to the M4 Max and M4 Ultra.  Right now, it's a terrible choice and nobody should buy it.  I need the power of the M4 Max but I'd rather get a Studio than a MBP, which I don't really want of need. I'm guessing the M4 Max chip wouldn't even fit inside the new mini and the thermals would not work either.  Bring on the M4 Studio, sooner rather than later.
    I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with?

    The guy who said it was a "hideous monstrosity."
    pulseimages
  • Reply 10 of 18
    timmillea said:


    The Mac Studio has always been a hideous monstrosity and the kindest thing would be to end it. 

    LOL nah. Anyone who owns a Mac Studio will call you on your over hyped self congratulatory fake professional analysis. Sheesh, calm down. 
    XedAlex1Nbrianmkillroypulseimagesrezwits
  • Reply 11 of 18
    Still love my M1 Ultra Mac Studio with two Studio Displays ordered in August of 2022. The $1.100 trade in price to get the M2 Ultra Mac Studio was a slap in my face. Apple is selling this same M1 Ultra model for over $6k on the refurbished pages.

    I will order a Mac Mini Pro (64GB ram, 8TB SSD, and 10 Gbit ethernet) along with a nano Studio Display for our summer place in the mountains on 1 December. The Studio Display will replace a 24" LG Ultra Fine display on my M2 Pro file server  for the winter time.
  • Reply 12 of 18
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,136member
    timmillea said:
    The article is full of comments and opinions that will be out of date extremely soon. 

    Apple subsidised the CD-ROM optical drive market before PC users knew of their existence and discontinued them just as PC users expected them as standard. Thunderbolt 5 is another forward-thinking but transitory spec. 

    The Mac Studio has always been a hideous monstrosity and the kindest thing would be to end it. The new Mac mini, finally relieved in terms of historic size requirements to accommodate an optical drive is the way to go. The Mac Studio was half marketing and half a cover-up over the lack of a new Mac Pro. Apple have made plenty of missteps with Mac over the last five or so years. They make their money from iPhone and 'services' now and appear to have betrayed their core DNA. 
    While I do believe the Mac Studio was a Mac Pro replacement, I don't see how a footprint the size of the Mac mini will handle the higher thermal temps of the Max/Ultra chips.  I see the Mac Studio continuing with the higher-tier chips.

    Apple will have to do something groundbreaking to continue with the Mac Pro.   
    Alex1Nkillroy
  • Reply 13 of 18
    danoxdanox Posts: 3,407member
    timmillea said:
    The article is full of comments and opinions that will be out of date extremely soon. 

    Apple subsidised the CD-ROM optical drive market before PC users knew of their existence and discontinued them just as PC users expected them as standard. Thunderbolt 5 is another forward-thinking but transitory spec. 

    The Mac Studio has always been a hideous monstrosity and the kindest thing would be to end it. The new Mac mini, finally relieved in terms of historic size requirements to accommodate an optical drive is the way to go. The Mac Studio was half marketing and half a cover-up over the lack of a new Mac Pro. Apple have made plenty of missteps with Mac over the last five or so years. They make their money from iPhone and 'services' now and appear to have betrayed their core DNA. 
    And yet no one in the PC world is currently close to Mac studio and the Mac mini or even the family of Mac laptops from a software and hardware standpoint, the Mac studio M4 ultra will only bring more pain and confusion to the tech PC world.

    By the way, the M4 Mac mini is the 2024 Christmas computer of year it has been received very well by many people who have been thinking of dipping their toes into the Mac  ecosystem,…

    https://www.tomsguide.com/computing/desktop-computers/mac-mini-m4-review

    https://www.xda-developers.com/mac-mini-m4-2024-review/  The tech crowd is up in arms that’s when you know Apple hit a home run.


    Alex1N
  • Reply 14 of 18
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,939member
    sflocal said:
    timmillea said:
    The article is full of comments and opinions that will be out of date extremely soon. 

    Apple subsidised the CD-ROM optical drive market before PC users knew of their existence and discontinued them just as PC users expected them as standard. Thunderbolt 5 is another forward-thinking but transitory spec. 

    The Mac Studio has always been a hideous monstrosity and the kindest thing would be to end it. The new Mac mini, finally relieved in terms of historic size requirements to accommodate an optical drive is the way to go. The Mac Studio was half marketing and half a cover-up over the lack of a new Mac Pro. Apple have made plenty of missteps with Mac over the last five or so years. They make their money from iPhone and 'services' now and appear to have betrayed their core DNA. 
    While I do believe the Mac Studio was a Mac Pro replacement, I don't see how a footprint the size of the Mac mini will handle the higher thermal temps of the Max/Ultra chips.  I see the Mac Studio continuing with the higher-tier chips.

    Apple will have to do something groundbreaking to continue with the Mac Pro.   
    A couple of things that I think would set the Mac Pro apart is if they could put like an M4 Extreme inside it across the board except for maybe the lower end model...something like 2 M4 Ultra's put together or just a bad ass M4 Ultra. It would be expensive to mass produce most likely and would fit well in the Mac Pro. The other thing that would set it apart is expansion if they could figure out a way to allow for user expansion. Even if most Pro users don't "upgrade" their Macs for longevity after a couple of years the fact that they can still plug in the latest audio/video cards, or something like that would possibly set the Mac Pro apart from the Mac Studio. 

    Question is...is Apple willing to put forth the effort and money for such a low volume Mac. I would think it's the worst selling Mac they have, even if/when they release a brand new model. So is it worth it to Apple to spend IDK $500 million developing a new Mac Pro which they may or may not get a return on their investment? 
    edited November 28
  • Reply 15 of 18
    thttht Posts: 5,681member
    macxpress said:
    sflocal said:
    timmillea said:
    The article is full of comments and opinions that will be out of date extremely soon. 

    Apple subsidised the CD-ROM optical drive market before PC users knew of their existence and discontinued them just as PC users expected them as standard. Thunderbolt 5 is another forward-thinking but transitory spec. 

    The Mac Studio has always been a hideous monstrosity and the kindest thing would be to end it. The new Mac mini, finally relieved in terms of historic size requirements to accommodate an optical drive is the way to go. The Mac Studio was half marketing and half a cover-up over the lack of a new Mac Pro. Apple have made plenty of missteps with Mac over the last five or so years. They make their money from iPhone and 'services' now and appear to have betrayed their core DNA. 
    While I do believe the Mac Studio was a Mac Pro replacement, I don't see how a footprint the size of the Mac mini will handle the higher thermal temps of the Max/Ultra chips.  I see the Mac Studio continuing with the higher-tier chips.

    Apple will have to do something groundbreaking to continue with the Mac Pro.   
    A couple of things that I think would set the Mac Pro apart is if they could put like an M4 Extreme inside it across the board except for maybe the lower end model...something like 2 M4 Ultra's put together or just a bad ass M4 Ultra. It would be expensive to mass produce most likely and would fit well in the Mac Pro. The other thing that would set it apart is expansion if they could figure out a way to allow for user expansion. Even if most Pro users don't "upgrade" their Macs for longevity after a couple of years the fact that they can still plug in the latest audio/video cards, or something like that would possibly set the Mac Pro apart from the Mac Studio. 

    Question is...is Apple willing to put forth the effort and money for such a low volume Mac. I would think it's the worst selling Mac they have, even if/when they release a brand new model. So is it worth it to Apple to spend IDK $500 million developing a new Mac Pro which they may or may not get a return on their investment? 
    My hope is that Apple's private cloud compute uses Mac Pros with Apple Silicon on PCIe boards slotted into the Mac Pro. This would amortize the cost of a Mac Pro and let them continue developing the Mac Pro as a tower with expansion slots. A Mac Pro can have about 6 M4 Pro systems in it, or 4 M4 Max systems, or 2 M4 Ultras, in addition to the native M4 Ultra/Extreme. Would make for a decent compute density.

    Not as good as a designed 1U rack mount system with say 4 M4 Ultras in it, but it definitely provides enough of a unit run to continue the Mac Pro as a consumer system. Would be nice if they went down market with the Mac Pro and offered an M4 Max for about $3000. The market niche would appreciate the internal storage expansion and the slot I/O expansion.
  • Reply 16 of 18
    sflocal said:
    timmillea said:
    The article is full of comments and opinions that will be out of date extremely soon. 

    Apple subsidised the CD-ROM optical drive market before PC users knew of their existence and discontinued them just as PC users expected them as standard. Thunderbolt 5 is another forward-thinking but transitory spec. 

    The Mac Studio has always been a hideous monstrosity and the kindest thing would be to end it. The new Mac mini, finally relieved in terms of historic size requirements to accommodate an optical drive is the way to go. The Mac Studio was half marketing and half a cover-up over the lack of a new Mac Pro. Apple have made plenty of missteps with Mac over the last five or so years. They make their money from iPhone and 'services' now and appear to have betrayed their core DNA. 
    While I do believe the Mac Studio was a Mac Pro replacement, I don't see how a footprint the size of the Mac mini will handle the higher thermal temps of the Max/Ultra chips.  I see the Mac Studio continuing with the higher-tier chips.

    Apple will have to do something groundbreaking to continue with the Mac Pro.   
    Having done a fair bit of testing of the M4 and M4 Pro mini's, you are correct.  Even with High Performance on with the M4 Pro where it is an option to get the aggressive fan (which gets audible) - the M4 Pro still gets hot  to the touch (and internal temperatures) under sustained usage.
    The hot to touch is likely because the power supply is directly under the top surface, and it has also picked up the M4/M4 Pro heat (from CPU, GPU or both) that then combines with the power supply heat before getting directed out the bottom back.

    By comparison, even under sustained load the M2 Max in a Mac Studio barely needs to raise fan speeds to keep the chips running at a steady temperature - the air coming out the back barely gets warm, the Ultra gets a bit warmer and the fans go a bit faster to keep it steady - but fans still not audible in any sustained performance testing I've done if you are in anything other than a completely quiet room. (I'd suspect they designed for the Ultra, then found they could use the cheaper aluminum heatsink for the Max to save money and still was more than needed to keep it cool - also avoiding the problem with the 2013 Mac Pro where the central cooling system was pretty much at it's thermal limit with the chips at the time - so couldn't scale to more powerful GPUs or CPUs as their power requirements kept climbing)

    The Mac Studio general design is a good system for those that need the Chip/ram performance of the Pro tower, without the need of PCIe cards. - at a cheaper price.  When upgrading my own home system, I opted for almost the base model M2 Max Studio instead of an upgraded M2 Pro Mac mini - more performance for around the same price, and it had better cooling. especially when I found a refurb of the specs I wanted in the Studio to save more.
  • Reply 17 of 18
    This is a remarkable device. I sold my M1 Studio Ultra w/ 128GB for $3500. It served me well. I still have my M1 Max MBP. But since I’m shifting to UNREAL engine design, I’ve discovered that my builds crash too much on the M1, so I’m building an AMD/Nvidia Windows machine to get optimum performance under UE 5.5. But if Unreal was to really optimize UE for Mac and other developers of UE add-ons, I’d go right back to a Mac Studio M4 Ultra. I truly detest Windows, but it’s the cost of doing business.
  • Reply 18 of 18
    neilmneilm Posts: 1,001member

    “For a start, Apple couldn't fit all of the ports on the back of the Mac mini simply because there wasn't enough room. As a compromise, some USB-C connections have been brought to the front alongside the headphone jack.”


    You have that backwards.

    This new mini is a clean sheet design, so Apple could have put the ports anywhere they wanted to by going with a case size/shape/footprint to suit. There’s nothing magic about this particular case profile. But they chose to do it this way. 

    Some users will be happy to have a couple of front ports for easier access, others won’t for aesthetic reasons.

Sign In or Register to comment.