Looks like I’ll get the intel Mac mini

[gaucho2]

In need of a computer upgrade at an inopportune time, I’m thinking that I’ll hold off on the M1 Mac mini for this go around. Some have warned that there’s still a lot to be worked out regarding streaming samples on the SSD hard drive and RAM requirements, etc. with the m1.
Also DP may take awhile.

Any ideas before I make the splash?

[HCMarkus]

If you just need a temporary solution, you might consider an old Mac Pro 5,1 (could be a 4,1>5,1 upgrade). I'm running a 12 core 3.33 in the studio and it does very well. But I'd study the Apple Silicon reports carefully before dismissing an M1-powered machine. We've had at least one person report here that DP has been working with a M1 CPU computer. Search the posts...

[bayswater]

It's a toss up.

On one hand, the Geekbench rating on the M1 mini is only about 20% higher than the last Intel i7 (that I have), so this initial M1 mini might not be the big powerhouse some seem to think it is. Some writers have noted the apparent speed is a bit of an illusion resulting from the way task are allocated to cores. When this particular M1 Mac is flat out, it may not show much of an advantage over the Intel. And as you say, MOTU has not yet said DP will run on it.

On the other hand, I'm not convinced the RAM limit is much of an issue given the way the new Macs access RAM. I haven't heard of any streaming issues -- Logic users wouldn't put up with that for long, let alone kids watching 4K kitten videos. And, the way Apple moves along now, the Intel might not be able to run many of the upcoming versions of OS X. This is not much of an issue for me -- Mohave does what I want, and I'm off the upgrade Merry-Go-Round, but if you think you'll need to be running the latest versions of Mac OS in a few years, you might not be happy with the Intel. I"ve noticed even when a particular version of OS X is said to work on a particular older Mac, it doesn't necessarily work well, and they're not promising much more than a couple of years support for Intel.

[gaucho2]

Bayswater: Excellent point about Apple not supporting the Intel macs for a long into the future. Their loyalty to their customers leaves a bit to be desired.

HC: I do remember seeing the post you mentioned. I believe it was being run under Rosetta. That would be fine to get started. I may check in with that user to see how stability has been. (and plug-in compatibility.).

[Michael Canavan]

It's a toss up.

On one hand, the Geekbench rating on the M1 mini is only about 20% higher than the last Intel i7 (that I have), so this initial M1 mini might not be the big powerhouse some seem to think it is.

So looking at the M1 vs your machine, it's a little over 26% faster in multi core, and 36% faster in single core. Those aren't numbers to sniff at. I wouldn't upgrade if I were you, because to me I want at least 35% in multi core before upgrading so the difference is noticeable. Here's where it gets interesting for someone like me though, it's faster in multi core than my 12 core 3.33ghz. Mac Pro 6665 vs 7409 (your mini is 5466), and single is nuts, 647 vs 1710 (mini at 1099).

So with that in mind the rumor is the next generation in the 16MBP and possibly 14"MBP and maybe Mini this coming WWDC will have 8 Performance cores instead of 4, plusonly 2 Efficiency cores but even with that, you can ad roughly 35% gains onto the current M1 Minis performance. So a score of 10,002 in multi core. I could expect almost twice the count from a laptop. So yeah, they are the cats meow, it's just a matter of whether your applications will run on them. That's the big one.

[gaucho2]

It is impressive, and it clearly is the future.
My quandary is the immediate yet untimely need to upgrade. It’s all about stability.

But... I may take a shot with the the m1 running DP under Rosetta.

[HCMarkus]

Apple has a pretty nice return policy IIRC...

I just got an M1 Air. Like it a lot, but it's for live (MainStage), not studio, use.

[bayswater]

Mac Pro 6665 vs 7409 (your mini is 5466),

When I run the test on my Mini, I get closer to 6000, so the margin to the M1 is not that big enough to matter to me. But on a purely practical basis, its totally irrelevant. I see CPU usage running about 60% with a stupidly big test sequence with hundreds of audio tracks, a few dozen VI instances, a couple of hundred MIDI tracks, a hundred auxes, and hundreds of plugin instances. Getting another computer that can do more, even a great deal more, is of little value. It's like worrying about whether my car running around town can do 200 mph or 250 mph.

[Michael Canavan]

When I run the test on my Mini, I get closer to 6000, so the margin to the M1 is not that big enough to matter to me. But on a purely practical basis, its totally irrelevant. I see CPU usage running about 60% with a stupidly big test sequence with hundreds of audio tracks, a few dozen VI instances, a couple of hundred MIDI tracks, a hundred auxes, and hundreds of plugin instances. Getting another computer that can do more, even a great deal more, is of little value. It's like worrying about whether my car running around town can do 200 mph or 250 mph.

Of course. In my experience though, years later some things will come out that pin your CPU. It's the nature of the game. Right now for me it's certain synth patches, Repro-5, Pigments, Diva, a few Falcon patches can overload my system at playable (128 or 64) buffer settings.

I'm of the mind that anything I buy has to skunk my Max Pro here. So my next purchase will definitely be the Apple Silicon machines.

[bayswater]

So my next purchase will definitely be the Apple Silicon machines.

Sure. Other than switching to Windows, soon there won't be much choice in the matter. If my Mac blew up today, I'd do that too, and just use Logic and Mixbus until DP gets updated.

[gaucho2]

That is my situation. Bad timing.
I may have to use logic for a few months on the m1 unless DP is stable in Rosetta.