Mac Mini M2/M2 pro

[LoveEnigma18]

I am unable to find refurbished Macs where I live, so that's not an option for me

Is there an official Apple retail presence (Apple Stores) in your country? I'd rethink going the Apple route without this, given limited repair options outside of Apple. At the opposite end, of any repair concerns, Applecare is ~$50/yr for a base Mac Studio Max/Mini M2 Pro. Probably worth it for those who worry..

Yes, there are many Apple authorized resellers and service centers in my city, so I hope they would be able to help in case of any problems. So, while there may be some risk involved, I would like to give Mac a try. And for this reason too, apart from cost, I don't want to get carried away with buying a highly spec'd Mac overthinking about future proofing and all.

I would also like it more to buy my first Mac ever new rather than a refurbished one.

That's fair enough, though they have full warranties. BTW Outside of Apple themselves refurbs require major caution and I would not recommend going that route. Apple refurbs, however, tend to be "like new".

Yeah, if I could see refurbished ones on Apple Online Store here, I could still take a chance, but I'd better buy a base version than risking a on paper better spec'd refurbished one that I can't trust.

I hope even Mac mini M2 Pro should last me at least 5 years.

There's a lot of variables in there. Whilst Mac OS tends to manage resources well (to the point where it can swap stuff in and out of memory without someone necessarily noticing), it won't distort space-time. If your host uses more than 16GB on Windows it's likely to need that on Mac OS too.

To put it in PC terms - if you think a 12500K would get you to 2028 then the same is likely to apply with M2 Pro. If you're hoping for something more towards 13900k DAW performance then this would require the Ultra (Which still falls short, though not to the degree some might like to imply.. AKA "muh Cinebench")

M3 isn't just about the 40% size reduction (Which enables them to fit more cores in the same package space). It's Apple's first proper opportunity to refine the M1 design. To use Intel's terms - you're getting both the "tic" and the "toc" in a single generation. Though how much Apple push this, on the desktop side, remains to be seen..

I understand. By host you mean DAW, right? I want to give some context here about my existing system. I am currently using FL Studio on Windows 11 on an Intel i7-7700 CPU, 32 GB RAM. My system is about 6 years old and it is still working well (fingers crossed). So, I want to delve into the Mac world while my Windows system is still in good shape for music production.

There are two important things worth mentioning. I was using only 16 GB RAM up until last year when I decided to add two more DIMMs to fill up the 2 empty slots just because DDR4 DIMMs were cheap. I did not add the additional 16 GB because of any real problem situation. Of course, the additional memory does help, but I was fine with 16 GB too.

Secondly, my Windows OS SSD is 250 GB Samsung EVO 850. It's is good condition after 6 years with ~ 20 TB written. It has also been the place for the Windows page file on and off during this time. So, I hope the Mac internal storage should perform equally good or better. Adding more internal storage is very expensive on Mac and I would still anyway need more storage for all my sample libraries and loops.

So, considering all the above mentioned points and that it costs $400 to add 16 GB more memory to Mac mini (which I'd rather put towards accessories that I would need or consider it as a saving towards an upgraded Mac few years later), I am leaning towards simply getting the Mac mini M2 Pro base model with 16 GB memory and 512 GB storage. Considering I have been using my existing system for 6 years now, I'd imagine the Mac setup would last at least 5 years, especially if I use it strictly for music production, which is the plan. I think this would be the best sweet spot for me in terms of cost, performance, future proofing to some extent and not having to spent too much upfront on a system that I never used before.

What do you think?

[Jac459]

So, considering all the above mentioned points and that it costs $400 to add 16 GB more memory to Mac mini (which I'd rather put towards accessories that I would need or consider it as a saving towards an upgraded Mac few years later), I am leaning towards simply getting the Mac mini M2 Pro base model with 16 GB memory and 512 GB storage. Considering I have been using my existing system for 6 years now, I'd imagine the Mac setup would last at least 5 years, especially if I use it strictly for music production, which is the plan. I think this would be the best sweet spot for me in terms of cost, performance, future proofing to some extent and not having to spent too much upfront on a system that I never used before.

What do you think?

I think you have done your due diligence seriously and you can now pull the trigger .

I would do exactly the same choice in your situation. It seems to be the best compromise ... without really having to compromise. You will have a speedy system with a ton of headroom...

[PAK]

By host you mean DAW, right?

Host meaning software - Logic, Cubase etc. DAW being the actual machine. People sometimes use "DAW" to mean "host" though (I'm guilty of it myself).

I hope the Mac internal storage should perform equally good or better

It'll be fine. The only Mac specific thing, to be aware of, is the internal storage is linked to the motherboard. Wear it out and, presently, you require a new machine. A small amount of caution (in only putting what you use on there) is not unwise, and the more free space you have the more the drive can level wear on the SSD's memory cells. But it would take years (double digits in the vast majority of use cases) to cause any issue, so don't overthink it It would still be nice if Apple had a solution, to address this scenario, and make it a complete non-issue rather than an "unlikely" one for a far distant future.

You'll likely know Apple's internal SSD speed is partly related to the number of chips used. For 256GB SSD's M1 Macs use 2 x 128GB chips. M2 uses 1 x 256GB. This results in half the read speed and about 15% slower writes. But this worst case is still 1400MB/s read (Vs 2800MB/s for 512GB ) It can take up to 4 chips to get the full read / write speed possible, which acts as another "incentive" to have some users pay for more storage. However, for audio uses, even the worst case 1400MB/s is still overkill

For external, I think you mentioned the Samsung T7. It should give ~950MB/s real-world. That's nearly double the speed of older internal SATA drives, so should also be more than enough. You can get faster external drives, with Thunderbolt interfaces, but the cost still tends to be quite prohibitive.

RE: Base M2 Pro.. The base models usually always provide the best value for money. Apple deliberately price things so that, by the time you've made 2 or 3 changes to the base, it makes more sense to move up to the next base model.. AKA Apple's "price ladder".

I doubt the M2 Pro would disappoint. In terms of memory, watch your current PC's usage with plugins. Don't count all the Windows background crap. Deliberately try to load what you think would be a worst case scenario, and that should give you a rough answer you can live with for the next few years..

[LoveEnigma18]

So, considering all the above mentioned points and that it costs $400 to add 16 GB more memory to Mac mini (which I'd rather put towards accessories that I would need or consider it as a saving towards an upgraded Mac few years later), I am leaning towards simply getting the Mac mini M2 Pro base model with 16 GB memory and 512 GB storage. Considering I have been using my existing system for 6 years now, I'd imagine the Mac setup would last at least 5 years, especially if I use it strictly for music production, which is the plan. I think this would be the best sweet spot for me in terms of cost, performance, future proofing to some extent and not having to spent too much upfront on a system that I never used before.

What do you think?

I think you have done your due diligence seriously and you can now pull the trigger .

I would do exactly the same choice in your situation. It seems to be the best compromise ... without really having to compromise. You will have a speedy system with a ton of headroom...

Thanks. I am unable to justify the almost $500 cost (here) for upgrading to 32 GB even though I understand that it is always better to have more memory.

It is indeed the best tradeoff right now.

[LoveEnigma18]

Thanks, appreciate the detailed reply.

By host you mean DAW, right?

Host meaning software - Logic, Cubase etc. DAW being the actual machine. People sometimes use "DAW" to mean "host" though (I'm guilty of it myself).

Gotcha!

I hope the Mac internal storage should perform equally good or better

It'll be fine. The only Mac specific thing, to be aware of, is the internal storage is linked to the motherboard. Wear it out and, presently, you require a new machine. A small amount of caution (in only putting what you use on there) is not unwise, and the more free space you have the more the drive can level wear on the SSD's memory cells. But it would take years (double digits in the vast majority of use cases) to cause any issue, so don't overthink it It would still be nice if Apple had a solution, to address this scenario, and make it a complete non-issue rather than an "unlikely" one for a far distant future.

I agree. But going by the data I have for my existing 250 GB SSD (which allows for up to 75 TBW!), I think going with 512 GB and that too potentially newer and better SSD should not be a concern at all. I do understand that there's a risk with any exceptional case, but that is true for most electronics in general.

You'll likely know Apple's internal SSD speed is partly related to the number of chips used. For 256GB SSD's M1 Macs use 2 x 128GB chips. M2 uses 1 x 256GB. This results in half the read speed and about 15% slower writes. But this worst case is still 1400MB/s read (Vs 2800MB/s for 512GB ) It can take up to 4 chips to get the full read / write speed possible, which acts as another "incentive" to have some users pay for more storage. However, for audio uses, even the worst case 1400MB/s is still overkill

Thanks, I did see/read about this. It is partly why I thought to select 512 GB storage whichever model I select, as it will also give me more internal storage which is little faster and help with longer life due to memory swapping. I do understand reasons why Apple would have done that, but it seems they took this as an opportunity to grab more money.

For external, I think you mentioned the Samsung T7. It should give ~950MB/s real-world. That's nearly double the speed of older internal SATA drives, so should also be more than enough. You can get faster external drives, with Thunderbolt interfaces, but the cost still tends to be quite prohibitive.

Exactly, buying a USB 4 or Thunderbolt 2/3/4 drive means I will need to buy both an enclosure and a NVMe SSD, which shoots up the cost sky high. So, the best bet for me would be to use those Thunderbolt ports as USB 3.2 Gen 2 (10 Gbps), which also means this will be the maximum speed I could use. ~950 MB/s should be good enough then since I don't use any orchestral libraries, which is also a reason I thought 16 GB memory should be enough.

RE: Base M2 Pro.. The base models usually always provide the best value for money. Apple deliberately price things so that, by the time you've made 2 or 3 changes to the base, it makes more sense to move up to the next base model.. AKA Apple's "price ladder".

I doubt the M2 Pro would disappoint. In terms of memory, watch your current PC's usage with plugins. Don't count all the Windows background crap. Deliberately try to load what you think would be a worst case scenario, and that should give you a rough answer you can live with for the next few years..

Indeed. This is the first time I tried to configure to order on Apple website, and man, the prices are just absolutely ridiculous to say the least. Where I live, it is even costlier than the US$. So, $400 memory upgrade is more like ~$482.

And I also need to keep in mind that I will probably be spending $200 on Logic Pro, apart from purchasing some accessories (cables, hubs, SSDs).

Yes, I tried to evaluate the plugin usage just from thinking and also by loading multiple instances of Omnisphere in FL Studio. I can get a fair bit of idea that 16 GB should be fine, and if at all I do run into any issues, I should just bounce/freeze the part to an audio file. So, since there are ways to get around/manage how we work, we can adapt as needed, and I think it will be better to progress faster in that case, which I often fail to.

I think running 3rd party VST synths and effects and using tons of samples/loops shouldn't be concern at all with Mac mini M2 PRO base model.

How much unified memory do you have on your Mac? Or what's the exact Mac you use?

[timmsusa]

I have NVME put on the M1 with 512GB Samsung and it turned out to be ok for me. If you need more USB it is anyway better to invest huge money for a regular USB Switch which provides continuesly Power Supply on all slots. Furthermore you can invest for such kits that extend your mini mac with more connectivity oppurtunities. For example you like to have external usb hard disks to make your backup or you like to connect LAN or MIDI or Ipad and stuff. To me I am working with M1 now since over one year and nobody will tell me it is all bad. Apart from the fact it is partly super annoying how 3rd party companies behave by having a "huge" challange providing updates for their plugins. The situation gets better from middle cool to very nice! I lost myself in words, best Regards..(just google THIS Samsung-Internal-Solid-State-MZ-V8P2T0BW AND THIS enclosure-cooling-system-USB-C-aluminium and you know what I am talking about)

[PAK]

How much unified memory do you have on your Mac? Or what's the exact Mac you use?

16GB MBP, Mini, and 128GB Hackintosh (This is what sent me towards Apple, when I noticed Cubase had less issues than it did on the exact same machine with Windows!!)

For the main desktop replacement I've tried the base Studio (Always buy with a good return policy ) 32GB was mostly ok, but I wanted more CPU headroom. This left the Ultra. The complicating factor is I use RME PCIe. I briefly considered an external PCIe chasis, but decided awaiting the Mac Pro announcement made more sense. D'oh..

For my patience I learned either you pay Apple nearly double for the same specs as a Studio Ultra (the higher price was expected, but not the same specs for it), or I pay RME a similar amount and say goodbye to PCIe. Given the general direction, everything's moving in, ditching PCIe ultimately makes more sense to me at this point, so that's what I've decided.

Year long story short - If I'd known all of this I'd have went Studio Ultra the year prior. Now I'm seeing if I can hold out for M3 Ultra (M2 disappointed.. ) or if I cave on a good enough M1 Ultra offer before then. I'd say native AS support has finally reached its turning point for VST3 too (it lagged AU with support). So the only thing holding me back now is timing the hardware, since it'll be my main audio machine to see out this decade (If we're all still here by then )

I have considered PC alternatives too, but various factors, on top of energy use / noise / and just Microsoft being Microsoft means it'd take a small miracle to shift back - and certainly more than Intel cringe moves like calling their 14th gen processors "Ultra"

[2DaT]

I have considered PC alternatives too, but various factors, on top of energy use / noise / and just Microsoft being Microsoft means it'd take a small miracle to shift back - and certainly more than Intel cringe moves like calling their 14th gen processors "Ultra"

Their whole "Ultra" renaming shenanigans is just another price hike in disguise. Mark my words.

[LoveEnigma18]

I have NVME put on the M1 with 512GB Samsung and it turned out to be ok for me. If you need more USB it is anyway better to invest huge money for a regular USB Switch which provides continuesly Power Supply on all slots. Furthermore you can invest for such kits that extend your mini mac with more connectivity oppurtunities. For example you like to have external usb hard disks to make your backup or you like to connect LAN or MIDI or Ipad and stuff. To me I am working with M1 now since over one year and nobody will tell me it is all bad. Apart from the fact it is partly super annoying how 3rd party companies behave by having a "huge" challange providing updates for their plugins. The situation gets better from middle cool to very nice! I lost myself in words, best Regards..(just google THIS Samsung-Internal-Solid-State-MZ-V8P2T0BW AND THIS enclosure-cooling-system-USB-C-aluminium and you know what I am talking about)

Thanks for your suggestion. I will take a look at those and see if I can afford them, else I am fine with Samsung T7.

[LoveEnigma18]

How much unified memory do you have on your Mac? Or what's the exact Mac you use?

16GB MBP, Mini, and 128GB Hackintosh (This is what sent me towards Apple, when I noticed Cubase had less issues than it did on the exact same machine with Windows!!)

For the main desktop replacement I've tried the base Studio (Always buy with a good return policy ) 32GB was mostly ok, but I wanted more CPU headroom. This left the Ultra. The complicating factor is I use RME PCIe. I briefly considered an external PCIe chasis, but decided awaiting the Mac Pro announcement made more sense. D'oh..

For my patience I learned either you pay Apple nearly double for the same specs as a Studio Ultra (the higher price was expected, but not the same specs for it), or I pay RME a similar amount and say goodbye to PCIe. Given the general direction, everything's moving in, ditching PCIe ultimately makes more sense to me at this point, so that's what I've decided.

Year long story short - If I'd known all of this I'd have went Studio Ultra the year prior. Now I'm seeing if I can hold out for M3 Ultra (M2 disappointed.. ) or if I cave on a good enough M1 Ultra offer before then. I'd say native AS support has finally reached its turning point for VST3 too (it lagged AU with support). So the only thing holding me back now is timing the hardware, since it'll be my main audio machine to see out this decade (If we're all still here by then )

I have considered PC alternatives too, but various factors, on top of energy use / noise / and just Microsoft being Microsoft means it'd take a small miracle to shift back - and certainly more than Intel cringe moves like calling their 14th gen processors "Ultra"

Great!

I realized that we can always wait for the next best, but it's rather best to do what's most suitable in given the situation. So, I went ahead and bought the Mac mini M2 Pro base model. Should arrive tomorrow. Now ordering some accessories for setting up things tomorrow.

I don't think Mac mini or Studio with M3 will arrive for at least a year from now.

This was a good discussion though and I appreciate you guys for the help. I learnt few things about Mac purchase and Apple in general and next time I will be even more informed with my decision making. Thank you.

[jdoo]

Good video. If you look at 11:57 when he wraps up… Here are the important bits. M2 Pro vs M2

The base model price difference between the M2 and M2 Pro is $700. However that price includes $200 worth of additional RAM (16GB vs. 8GM); $200 worth of more SDD /storage ( 512GB SSD vs, 256GB SSD). So - the price difference of the base model Pro is only $300. For that $300 . . you get:
+ 2 CPU performance cores (25% more)
+ 6 GPU cores ( 60% more)
+ 1 more display capability ( support for 3 displays vs. 2)
+ HDMI 2,1
+ 2 Thunderbolt ports

[LoveEnigma18]

Good video. If you look at 11:57 when he wraps up… Here are the important bits. M2 Pro vs M2

The base model price difference between the M2 and M2 Pro is $700. However that price includes $200 worth of additional RAM (16GB vs. 8GM); $200 worth of more SDD /storage ( 512GB SSD vs, 256GB SSD). So - the price difference of the base model Pro is only $300. For that $300 . . you get:
+ 2 CPU performance cores (25% more)
+ 6 GPU cores ( 60% more)
+ 1 more display capability ( support for 3 displays vs. 2)
+ HDMI 2,1
+ 2 Thunderbolt ports

Exactly. M2 to M2 Pro is certainly worth it, but M2 Pro to M2 Max (Studio) wasn't really for me, especially for my first ever Mac and budget constraints.

[PAK]

Exactly. M2 to M2 Pro is certainly worth it, but M2 Pro to M2 Max (Studio) wasn't really for me, especially for my first ever Mac and budget constraints.

For audio users the M2 Pro is definitely the best balanced option Apple offers. You're getting ~75% of the CPU performance of a Studio Max, whilst not paying for GPU cores audio users don't need. It would be nice if Apple applied that balance to more options, but it seems they're more interested in chasing the bigger photo / video editing market with those products..

[PAK]

Their whole "Ultra" renaming shenanigans is just another price hike in disguise. Mark my words

Hehe.. I'm sure. That kind of seems the way with everything lately.

Will be interesting to see if they'll now insist on users taking GFX cores on their highest performing CPU's.. Otherwise it's just not ultra

[LoveEnigma18]

Exactly. M2 to M2 Pro is certainly worth it, but M2 Pro to M2 Max (Studio) wasn't really for me, especially for my first ever Mac and budget constraints.

For audio users the M2 Pro is definitely the best balanced option Apple offers. You're getting ~75% of the CPU performance of a Studio Max, whilst not paying for GPU cores audio users don't need. It would be nice if Apple applied that balance to more options, but it seems they're more interested in chasing the bigger photo / video editing market with those products..

Yeah, and the video below proves the point. One side advantage of Apple offering relatively more GPU cores means we can save money by not being otherwise tempted if they were offering CPU mores. Also, if we aren't really touching the limit of the CPU cores we've got, additional will just be an overkill unless you really know you need it, for which there is really no clear answer. The more space you have the more you tend to fill it.