M1 Mac vs Ryzen 7?

lumencreative

lumencreative

lumencreative

Associate
Joined
19 May 2014
Posts
290
Just wondering what people’s thoughts are between the M1 Mac Mini vs Ryzen 7.

I built a high spec 3800x pc a few months ago for video editing and music recording, but looking at the new Mac Mini, they look like they might actually be faster/better.

Also been looking at upgrading one of the PC’s at work and was going to buy a Dell Optiplex for about £650 (core i5 10400), but could stick my ryzen in work and get the Mac Mini instead.
 
Mac mini is not a video editing or music recording machine. And M1 Mac Mini is even less so. It's a good first gen tech demo but it's too limited for any power user. M1 Mac Mini has a 16Gb physical memory limit, and practically no desktop-like connectivity - only two USB-C thunderbolts (with a limit of only one TB3 monitor and no EGPU support) and two USB-A ports capped at 5Gb/s.
 
It might be fast in CPU benchmarks but all that is for naught in video and audio editing if he's limited by 16Gb of memory or needs to unplug either keyboard or audio interface to copy video footage to external drive. At the moment M1's are more like - net browsing/video watching devices rather than editing devices due to really, really minimalist spec. Was really surprised to see number of expansion ports slashed by half compared to previous gen and memory going from 64Gb back to 16Gb. Perhaps architecture bottleneck, perhaps just a first generation technical issue. Let's see what comes out next.
 
If you are able get one to try and return it if it doesn't suit your needs.

I have the M1 Air and after using it everyone needs to change their thinking, these are incredible machines, it is faster than my previous 16" MBP i9.
 
v0n said:
It might be fast in CPU benchmarks but all that is for naught in video and audio editing if he's limited by 16Gb of memory or needs to unplug either keyboard or audio interface to copy video footage to external drive. At the moment M1s are more like - net browsing/video watching devices rather than editing devices due to really, really minimalist spec. Was really surprised to see number of expansion ports slashed by half compared to previous gen and memory going from 64Gb back to 16Gb. Perhaps architecture bottleneck, perhaps just a first generation technical issue. Let's see what comes out next.
Click to expand...
I completely disagree on your thinking about the memory. The ports, yes, I agree with, however, the memory architecture is completely different to that in a traditional computer, so not as much is needed.

As others have said above, the reviews and tests so far have the M1 systems competing very well with top end iMac Pros and even Mac Pros with much more memory. I watched a YouTube video last night where one guy was showing clips of his $15k Mac Pro struggling to watch Canon Cinema R5 footage and his base MBA flew through it.
 
v0n said:
It might be fast in CPU benchmarks but all that is for naught in video and audio editing if he's limited by 16Gb of memory or needs to unplug either keyboard or audio interface to copy video footage to external drive. At the moment M1's are more like - net browsing/video watching devices rather than editing devices due to really, really minimalist spec. Was really surprised to see number of expansion ports slashed by half compared to previous gen and memory going from 64Gb back to 16Gb. Perhaps architecture bottleneck, perhaps just a first generation technical issue. Let's see what comes out next.
Click to expand...

M1 Macs have just blown the Intel macs away on video editing, and audio editing I expect will be similar, this is Apple's niche.

As for ram, 16GB may or may not be limiting but the memory architecture is very different to traditional PCs, so you can't compare your previous expectations of 16GB with this. OP can test this out and return if they find 16GB to be limiting, however the £650 Dell alternative that the OP considered buying is unlikely to have more than 16GB of ram either.

lumencreative said:
Just wondering what people’s thoughts are between the M1 Mac Mini vs Ryzen 7.

I built a high spec 3800x pc a few months ago for video editing and music recording, but looking at the new Mac Mini, they look like they might actually be faster/better.

Also been looking at upgrading one of the PC’s at work and was going to buy a Dell Optiplex for about £650 (core i5 10400), but could stick my ryzen in work and get the Mac Mini instead.
Click to expand...

Give the M1 mac a try. You can return it if you don't like it.
 
HACO said:
M1 Macs have just blown the Intel macs away on video editing, and audio editing I expect will be similar, this is Apple's niche.

As for ram, 16GB may or may not be limiting but the memory architecture is very different to traditional PCs, so you can't compare your previous expectations of 16GB with this. OP can test this out and return if they find 16GB to be limiting, however the £650 Dell alternative that the OP considered buying is unlikely to have more than 16GB of ram either.



Give the M1 mac a try. You can return it if you don't like it.
Click to expand...

With regards to the Dell alternative I just thought I’d clarify that there are two options I’m considering...

1. buy a Dell Optiplex 5070/5080 (9gen i5 vs 10gen i5) for work and keep my ryzen at home.
2. Take my ryzen to work and buy a Mac mini for home.

Work and home differs a fair bit. Work will be editing photoshop files while home is music and video.
 
Just bear in mind for the work perspective that Photoshop is Rosetta 2 emulated at the moment with a full release not until next year, I believe the BETA is missing a significant amount of features - Adobe don't have the best history in developing their software for new systems, so if your job is focused around that then it's something you'll want to consider, as Rosetta 2 isn't 'officially supported' by Adobe. On the other hand, so far it just works for people.
 
If you are wanting something to do video/audio editing, then the M1 chips ARE the correct choice. It's pretty much what they are designed to do. Now.....what you need to physically connect to the machine is a different question. Maybe a decent USB-C hub might be an option.

Buy one, if you don't like it, send it back.
 
If you move to a MacMini and can use Final Cut/Logic (Mac specific software) it appears that video editing/export etc will blow the socks off a Adobe Premiere Ryzen machine, so if your happy to do that complete software shift as well as hardware then yeah it looks a great option. As said, buy one and you get 14 days to try it out. Keep the Ryzen machine switched off and use the Mac Mini every day for everything you would normally do and just see how it goes.
 
@lumencreative - Apple Silicon looks promising but you need to look at your workflow as see what's supported as currently the majority of DAWs and editing packages, plugins and hardware (Native Instruments, Cubase, Avid etc) aren't, even under emulation/Rosetta, and timelines for support are unknown.
My two pennies is to wait and reassess in six months time if this is your earner.
 
Precisely as above, doesn't matter if arm is more memory efficient for os, we are talking about very specific purpose, specific tasks and programs and they always need more memory than 16Gb.
We've discussed this before and fanboys already had their shout match with me - M1 is an interesting idea, unwelcome, not really needed, doomed to fail in the long run, but interesting. I can honestly see it working well for end user on ultra laptops and pad-ish devices, but it just doesn't scale to desktops, not for now at least.
I spent 15 years in audio visual industry and can not for the life of me imagine doing a/v work on something with such architectural compromises as M1 mac mini. It wasn't made for this type of work. More ports, more memory, more expansion, few generations from now and then we'll discuss editing and recording.
 
Last edited:
These new Macs are replacing the cheapest/base level ones - and as good as they are, they’re the weakest, slowest, least capable silicone Apple is ever going to make for their laptops and desktops. For users who need beast computers it’s a case of waiting and seeing what Apple do with the M2, M3 and beyond and obviously allowing time for their workflows to be achievable on a new platform. For casual users, it’s happy days.
 
v0n said:
Precisely as above, doesn't matter if arm is more memory efficient for os, we are talking about very specific purpose, specific tasks and programs and they always need more memory than 16Gb.
We've discussed this before and fanboys already had their shout match with me - M1 is an interesting idea, unwelcome, not really needed, doomed to fail in the long run, but interesting. I can honestly see it working well for end user on ultra laptops and pad-ish devices, but it just doesn't scale to desktops, not for now at least.
I spent 15 years in audio visual industry and can not for the life of me imagine doing a/v work on something with such architectural compromises as M1 mac mini. It wasn't made for this type of work. More ports, more memory, more expansion, few generations from now and then we'll discuss editing and recording.
Click to expand...

Excusing your powers of divination despite the evidence to the contrary, as you seem to be the expert in chip design and computer architecture, could you list some of those architectural compromises please?
 
v0n said:
Precisely as above, doesn't matter if arm is more memory efficient for os, we are talking about very specific purpose, specific tasks and programs and they always need more memory than 16Gb.
We've discussed this before and fanboys already had their shout match with me - M1 is an interesting idea, unwelcome, not really needed, doomed to fail in the long run, but interesting. I can honestly see it working well for end user on ultra laptops and pad-ish devices, but it just doesn't scale to desktops, not for now at least.
I spent 15 years in audio visual industry and can not for the life of me imagine doing a/v work on something with such architectural compromises as M1 mac mini. It wasn't made for this type of work. More ports, more memory, more expansion, few generations from now and then we'll discuss editing and recording.
Click to expand...

I'll let you know how I get on with my M1 MBP once it arrives. I do a ton of grading with DaVinci Resolv and a lot of editing with Premiere and AE. Not to mention my main laptop use is for Fusion 360, Solidworks, and other CAD/CAM solutions.
16GB is just about enough for what I do. More would be better, sure. Lack of ports is really a non-issue. My current workhorse laptop (Ryzen 7 4700U, 16GB) only has two USB ports and a single USB-C. A USB-C dock and I'm golden for whatever I need.
 
HACO said:
Excusing your powers of divination despite the evidence to the contrary, as you seem to be the expert in chip design and computer architecture, could you list some of those architectural compromises please?
Click to expand...



I already have. 16gb of memory max. Limit of internal storage size. Two tb3 ports supporting only one monitor over 4k and no support for eGPU, only two usb ports. In all aspects except optimisation of os to this CPU architecture, it's a step backwards for Mac mini and mbp.

It may be impressive desktop machine, tech demo, dev box, etc but it's simply too limited to be power user workstation and that's what we are discussing. Or, to be fair, maybe even a bit if a stretch of the word "pro" in MBPro. Surely you do understand?
 
v0n said:
I already have. 16gb of memory max. Limit of internal storage size. Two tb3 ports supporting only one monitor over 4k and no support for eGPU, only two usb ports.
It may be impressive desktop machine, tech demo, dev box, etc but it's simply too limited to be power user workstation. Or, to be fair, a bit if a stretch of the word "pro" in MBPro. Surely you do understand?
Click to expand...

You're aware you're listing features of an entry-level product, and pretend like they are architectural compromises? Do you seriously think the size of ram, SSDs or the number/availability of ports on a product are architectural compromises?

This is an entry-level product, competing with other entry-level products of its price range.
 
v0n said:
Two tb3 ports supporting only one monitor over 4k and no support for eGPU, only two usb ports. In all aspects except optimisation of os to this CPU architecture, it's a step backwards for Mac mini and mbp.
Click to expand...

This is only correct on the MBP, the Mac Mini can display 2x 4k Monitors, or in fact 1x 6k and 1x 4k.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom