How good is the current model Mac Mini? ( thinking of upgrading from 2012)

I have compared the 2 minis using Geekbench to test their speeds.

The 2012 mini has a multi-core score of 1388 which is 10% above average for that model.

The M2 mini (running from the external SSD) scored 9873 which makes it 7.1 times faster though speeds for different apps may vary.

For comparison the 2017 iMac got 3461

Apple, like many other companies uses scare tactics to "encourage" you to buy upgrades . . . they produce an excellent base model but then sow seeds of doubt . . . "its CPU may not have enough performance, the SSD may not be large enough and 8 GB RAM may not be sufficient, so just to be "safe" increase it to 16 GB or even 32 GB! You can never have too much RAM, storage or processing power".

The situation is exacerbated by the countless users and commentators who parrot those concerns.

Those worries are absolute BS unless you really are a power user with loads of cash to splash.

Before you know it your £600 bargain has turned into a £2,000 + white elephant which will be outdated in a couple of year's time when another model comes out.

I added a base model M2 Mini to my 2012 Mini and 2017 27" iMac Retina.

There is no comparison between the 2 Minis . . . they are light years apart, the M2 being10 times faster.

It is also 2 - 3 times faster than my highly specified iMac and remember I am talking about the cheapest M2 Mini.

It is a bargain at that price . . . once you start adding RAM or SSD storage the price rockets an unbelievable amount.

So it's only got a 256 GB SSD . . . no problem, just buy a 1 TB USB 3.0 SSD for about 80 quid.

But that USB 3.0 SSD will be terribly slow. True but the speed only affects direct copying of huge files.

I have my Mini running off a bootable SSD and for all normal computer usage (including 4K video editing) it is just as fast as the internal.

Regarding the 8 GB RAM . . . that is more than adequate for 4K editing and most other tasks.

The only proviso I would give is that if you are a high end professional video editor earning loads of money and time to you is valuable, it would make sense to spend some of your high income on an even faster, more powerful machine.

This is my setup with the bootable 1 TB SSD that is running the mini arrowed.

The new Silicone Mac mini's will run circles around a 2012 Mac mini with an upgraded SSD and 16GB of RAM.

The catch is, that some older third-party software may need to be upgraded and/or replaced.

To check the compatible of your current software, go to > https://roaringapps.com/apps

I know nothing about VM and its RAM requirements so maybe the other comments are correct . . . though the integrated RAM on the M1/M2 does appear to be more efficient.

There is a guy here who uses VM

VM on a Mac

rocker71 wrote:

@Servants of Cats

This is for home use. I only run one display.

I believe any of those Macs would support

• A single USB-C (DisplayPort) display with resolution of up to 4K,
• A single HDMI display with resolution of up to 4K, or
• A single Thunderbolt display with a resolution of up to 6K

and it is easy to get adapters from USB-C (DisplayPort) to DisplayPort, Mini DisplayPort, HDMI, etc. So that may not be a deciding factor for you.

If I see a good deal on a M2 I'll get that. How does the performance of a M2 and M2 Pro compare? I'm not a power user but will run a VB so I want it to run smoothly. My 2012 bogs down a bit sometimes. Thanks

Getting an adequate amount of RAM is important. You cannot upgrade the RAM on any Apple Silicon Mac after purchase.

Since you are planning to run Windows inside a virtual machine, I'd think you'd want at least 16 GB of RAM. It's not clear that you'd need 24 GB or 32 GB.

rocker71 wrote:

@Servants of Cats

This is for home use. I only run one display. Maybe M1 is good enough? If I see a good deal on a M2 I'll get that. How does the performance of a M2 and M2 Pro compare? I'm not a power user but will run a VB so I want it to run smoothly. My 2012 bogs down a bit sometimes. Thanks

What is "VB""

Do you mean "VM", as in virtual machine? It appears that this "Articulate Storyline" application to which you refer is a Windows-only application. Probably Windows for Intel only, at that. I'm guessing that if you run this program inside a virtual machine running Windows 11 for ARM, it won't be a native ARM code program. Windows 11 will be using its own built-in Intel emulation or translation code to run the Windows/Intel application.

https://access.articulate.com/support/article/System-Requirements-for-Articulate-Storyline-360

If this is what you mean, then you are going to be running one operating system within another at times. That is something that takes more RAM than running a single operating system. While this Windows application, itself, does not seem RAM-hungry as far as Windows applications go (it will supposedly run on an Wintel PC that only has 2 GB of RAM), I would not suggest getting a Mac with only 8 GB of RAM if you want a VM "to run smoothly."

rocker71 wrote:

@ Servant Of Cats

I appreciate your explanation! 😉👍

I did mean VM. I do run that application with 16GB of RAM on my 2012 and it does bog down especially if I’m simultaneously watching YouTube 😝. I’m assuming it’s the processor that’s the culprit?

So, if I at least got a M1 or newer, wouldn’t that fix my issue?

You need much more memory when using a virtual machine (hypervisor) and its guests.

Your processing will get faster, but your memory requirements will incrementally increase for each guest running.

If your base configuration requires 12 or 16 GB for instance, adding a guest can add 12 or 16 GB of memory required.

I wouldn’t go below 24 or 32 GB, if using guests at all frequently.

Check the virtual machine system requirements documentation for minimum system configurations, and plan to go higher than the minimum.

You’ll also need to load and run guests that are built for Apple silicon such as Windows for ARM64, or will need a hypervisor that contains UTM or another emulator, as you cannot otherwise run Intel guests on an Apple silicon Mac. Not without using emulation.

Windows on Intel guests won’t work without emulation, and emulation makes things both much more processor-intensive, and slower.

rocker71 wrote:

@ Servant Of Cats

I appreciate your explanation! 😉👍

I did mean VM. I do run that application with 16GB of RAM on my 2012 and it does bog down especially if I’m simultaneously watching YouTube 😝. I’m assuming it’s the processor that’s the culprit?

So, if I at least got a M1 or newer, wouldn’t that fix my issue?

I would not recommend that you get only 8 GB of RAM. You're complaining about the performance of running a Windows VM on a Mac that has 16 GB of RAM.

That Mac probably has a mechanical hard drive – but even if we consider the ways in which upgrading to a SSD could improve the performance of a virtual machine setup, cutting RAM from 16 GB to 8 GB could be much like putting up a poster saying "The beatings will continue until morale improves."

The bean-counters think the "problem" is solved, but the employees who have actually been generating revenue for the company know better.

I had a 27" Late 2009 iMac with 8 GB of RAM. In later years, it ran High Sierra, and had an installation of Parallels Desktop, with Intel-based Windows 10 and Linux guests. Just starting up a Windows 10 VM on that machine was painful. It took forever and ever, and then Windows ran like a slug. After I added a Firewire 800 startup SSD, the experience of launching a Windows 10 VM changed from "a technology demonstration; like getting a root canal" to "like using a slow, outdated Windows PC."

Which doesn't sound like what you're looking for.

rocker71 wrote:

I just realized I could get a 2018 model that can be upgraded to 64 GB of RAM. I do see some good deals on them on EBay. Would this be a good or better idea than getting the latest model? Thanks!

Going from a ~14 year old Mac to a ~six year old Mac will be rather better than what you have.

It’ll be less than Apple silicon, and it’s the oldest Mac mini with current macOS support, and for as long as that lasts.

Support for Intel is going away.

If you’re primarily running Intel guests or Boot Camp, this Mac mini will run those natively.

But…

There’s no right answer here.

rocker71 Said:

"How good is the current model Mac Mini? ( thinking of upgrading from 2012)"

-------

Updating to a New Mac:

A new Mac would not come with new license keys. So, request a new key from the Developer for a new install.

Backup, First:

Important: Be certain to create a backup of your Mac prior to all of this. That way, you can have something to restore from the Mac from, should anything go wrong with the reinstall. Once reinstalled, try this once more.transferred data.

Transferring App Between Macs:

Note that Migration Assistant doe not allow for all items to be transferred (all due to the concern for licensing ---mainly a concern for piracy, in itself).

That “run circles around” comment above, illustrated:

• https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=Mac+mini+2012
• https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=Mac+mini+m2

Given you seem to keep Macs for a long while, go for at least 16 GB and preferably more, as memory and storage are not expandable.

Models with M2 support two displays, and M2 Pro does three.

To date, Apple has released three Apple-Silicon-based Mac minis.

M1 Mac mini – Two USB-C / Thunderbolt ports. 8 or 16 GB of RAM. Maximum of two displays. To attach two, one must be connected via USB-C or Thunderbolt while the other is connected via HDMI.

M2 Mac mini – Similar, but you can get it with 8, 16, or 24 GB of RAM. Both displays can be USB-C or Thunderbolt displays (though the second one might be more limited in terms of Retina scaling options).

M2 Pro Mac mini – Four USB-C / Thunderbolt ports. 16 or 32 GB of RAM. More CPU and GPU cores. Can drive up to three displays.

https://browser.geekbench.com/search?q=Mac+mini+m1