M1/M2 Mac Mini/iMac Speed

[D.Houch]

I have owned numerous Macs for quite a few years, and ALL of them, no exceptions, slow down and boot so slowly after a few years of ownership it's ridiculous... especially when restarting. Yes, I know all of the supposed tricks for "speeding up one's "aging" Mac", including the simple removing of memory hog items at startup.

Since building Hackintoshes (Intel-based) my boot times and all-around performance are insanely fast compared to a native Mac... any model! I am also so tired of Apple's business model and how they gouge people on prices. Now, they are soldering just about everything to the mobos, and have the nerve to call their memory (RAM) schemes "unified memory" to cover the fact they have finally found a way to force their potential buyers into purchasing their mediocre-at-best memory from them. Can't add memory later, can't add a faster or new drive... blah, blah, blah! Everything soldered to the "Main Board" now.

I love the Mac OS but have come to hate Apple in recent years... especially since they've decided to go back to their 1990's proprietary hardware model... you know, the one that almost caused them to go belly up and cease to be a computer company? And that, IMNSHO is a very stupid move on their part. I was a serious Apple fan for years, but obviously am not so any longer. Again, I DO LOVE the Mac OS!

My question, for anyone who has purchased a new so-called "Apple Silicon" Mac (even though nVIDIA owns ARM now - or they did the last time I checked)... are the new M1/M2 etc. Macs, ANY model, truly a lot faster than the overheating - therefore throttled - iMacs, Minis, etc. Apple has been producing for years? As an example, I have a 27" iMac i7 that displays perfectly, but runs and boots so slow it's actually embarrassing when compared to ANY PC I own, including Hackintoshes, and even after getting to the desktop it takes another 3-5 minutes before it is actually useable.

My ultimate question for those who have either used or own M1/M2 iMacs or Minis is simple... are they fast enough to actually warrant purchasing one? Or should I continue using a Hackintosh? Because using Apple hardware gets worse by the year in my estimation, M1/M2 Macs aside.

I need an updated Mac, preferably a mini (I have great displays), but am afraid to allow Apple to ream me financially and still have to deal with sluggishness because, let's face it, Apple seems to be more concerned over how quiet Macs are than they are hardware performance.

Thanks for all replies!

 

[pastrychef]

Assuming there's no degradation on the SSD, your Macs should boot as fast as when it rolled off the assembly line. If it's taking 3-5 to reach a useable state after it reaches the macOS desktop, something else is the problem. A clean install will probably resolve all your slow booting issues.

Most consumers don't like the fact that SSD and RAM are not user upgradeable, but that's what we have to deal with if we want to continue using macOS. FYI, the SSD in the Mac Studios are upgradeable (assuming you manage to find a place to purchase the correct SSD modules).

Unified Memory is not a conspiracy or "scheme" to circumvent socketed RAM. Unified Memory has real advantages.

I have never heard of or seen any Mac Studio come even close to throttling. I don't think it's possible to cause the Mac Studios to throttle. The cooling system is overkill. I have one and have never even seen the fan spin beyond the default speed, even when pushed hard.

It's possible to make the Apple Silicon laptops to throttle if/when you place them under extreme loads. Most users would probably never notice it, it really takes a lot to make them throttle.

The iMacs are equipped with fan(s) so I doubt you'll get them to throttle.

I think it would take a lot to get the Mac minis to throttle. I have read that the fan on M2 Mac mini does ramp up under load though.

I think even a base M1 will run circles around your i5-6600K.

Spec your Apple Silicon Mac with enough RAM from the get go and you won't have to worry about the RAM not being upgradeable. External storage is always an option if you start running out of space.

If/when you get external storage, do your homework. Some crappy external storage solutions have a tendency to randomly disconnect. Purchase the app called Jettison. It helped solve all of the sleep/wake issues I had with my external storage on my Mac Studio.

My Mac Studio is the best Mac (including all my hackintoshes) that I've ever had, by far.

 

[UtterDisbelief]

There's an interesting curve to the AS speed and benchmarks conversation that most (actually all that I've seen) "expert" reviewers miss ...

I owned an M1 Mac Mini base model.

I now own an M2 Mac Mini, the base model again.

Reviewers bleated-on about the SSD in the M2 model being a slower type than the M1 model. They then go off on a rant about Apple undermining the hardware, saving money, shafting buyers etc., etc.

This is rubbish.

I *know* that the M2 base Mac Mini is faster and more efficient than the M1 version. In part because of the extra 2x GPU cores.

What no-one has considered or suggested is that the change to slighlty slower SSD chips might be for a valid reason. Perhaps it's a supply issue or maybe it's because Apple wanted greater longevity from the built-in storage and the slower version lasts longer? Why would those reasons not be just as relevant?

People always want to assume Apple is "stupid", or "greedy". No-one, but people who appreciate what the company has done to upset the cliche PC apple-cart (!), seems willing to see anything but bad in every move they make.

 

[pastrychef]

There's an interesting curve to the AS speed and benchmarks conversation that most (actually all that I've seen) "expert" reviewers miss ...

I owned an M1 Mac Mini base model.

I now own an M2 Mac Mini, the base model again.

Reviewers bleated-on about the SSD in the M2 model being a slower type than the M1 model. They then go off on a rant about Apple undermining the hardware, saving money, shafting buyers etc., etc.

This is rubbish.

I *know* that the M2 base Mac Mini is faster and more efficient than the M1 version. In part because of the extra 2x GPU cores.

What no-one has considered or suggested is that the change to slighlty slower SSD chips might be for a valid reason. Perhaps it's a supply issue or maybe it's because Apple wanted greater longevity from the built-in storage and the slower version lasts longer? Why would those reasons not be just as relevant?

People always want to assume Apple is "stupid", or "greedy". No-one, but people who appreciate what the company has done to upset the cliche PC apple-cart (!), seems willing to see anything but bad in every move they make.

IMO, the use of single NAND vs dual is obviously a cost cutting measure. That being said, it probably also helps keeps the prices lower on the models that have single NAND... Using dual NANDs may cause price increases, then the reviewers will complain about price increases...

The one thing I don't see mentioned enough is that users who underspec RAM will see increased RAM swap which will lead to increased SSD wear. On systems with very little storage, this means less available space for "wear leveling". When there's a lot of swapping, it can lead to premature wear/degrading of the NAND.

 

[UtterDisbelief]

IMO, the use of single NAND vs dual is obviously a cost cutting measure. That being said, it probably also helps keeps the prices lower on the models that have single NAND... Using dual NANDs may cause price increases, then the reviewers will complain about price increases...

The one thing I don't see mentioned enough is that users who underspec RAM will see increased RAM swap which will lead to increased SSD wear. On systems with very little storage, this means less available space for "wear leveling" when there's a lot of swapping can lead to premature wear/degrading of the NAND.

Fair points.

A smaller SSD will suffer from wear more quickly, granted. Especially given how Unified Memory actually works. That should be taken into consideration when buying, certainly.

Unlike a lot of people, I'm no audio or video professional and share my macOS time with hackintoshes so I'm happy!

 

[D.Houch]

Assuming there's no degradation on the SSD, your Macs should boot as fast as when it rolled off the assembly line. If it's taking 3-5 to reach a useable state after it reaches the macOS desktop, something else is the problem. A clean install will probably resolve all your slow booting issues.

Most consumers don't like the fact that SSD and RAM are not user upgradeable, but that's what we have to deal with if we want to continue using macOS. FYI, the SSD in the Mac Studios are upgradeable (assuming you manage to find a place to purchase the correct SSD modules).

Unified Memory is not a conspiracy or "scheme" to circumvent socketed RAM. Unified Memory has real advantages.

I have never heard of or seen any Mac Studio come even close to throttling. I don't think it's possible to cause the Mac Studios to throttle. The cooling system is overkill. I have one and have never even seen the fan spin beyond the default speed, even when pushed hard.

It's possible to make the Apple Silicon laptops to throttle if/when you place them under extreme loads. Most users would probably never notice it, it really takes a lot to make them throttle.

The iMacs are equipped with fan(s) so I doubt you'll get them to throttle.

I think it would take a lot to get the Mac minis to throttle. I have read that the fan on M2 Mac mini does ramp up under load though.

I think even a base M1 will run circles around your i5-6600K.

Spec your Apple Silicon Mac with enough RAM from the get go and you won't have to worry about the RAM not being upgradeable. External storage is always an option if you start running out of space.

If/when you get external storage, do your homework. Some crappy external storage solutions have a tendency to randomly disconnect. Purchase the app called Jettison. It helped solve all of the sleep/wake issues I had with my external storage on my Mac Studio.

My Mac Studio is the best Mac (including all my hackintoshes) that I've ever had, by far.

First of all, I'm talking about pre-ARM Macs... hence why I am inquiring about M1/M2's.

Secondly, I used Macs for so long I never even looked back at Windows PC's after switching. The only reason I re-familiarized myself with Windows is when Boot Camp became available and I did an install only to see changes MS had made to Windows since my leaving the platform.

Between that and recently converting PC's to Hackintoshes I never knew how slow my Macs actually were. I mean I knew, but I never knew just how drastic the performance issues were... and for whatever reason, it was drastic.

As far as bashing or hating on Apple, that wasn't the reason for this thread. For years they sold mediocre quality RAM and people who were able simply had the minimum installed at purchase and then bought their own memory at radically reduced prices compared to Apple's later on... and received much better quality memory at that. And on that note Apple's memory prices are still high compared to other memory prices, and again, I don't like the idea of not [at least] being able to upgrade my own memory.

When I started gaming again a few years back is when I built several PC's, and I forgot how convenient and cheaper it was compared to Macs... and the hardware choices, well, that issue needs no explanation.

Again... I just don't like the route Apple is taking regarding hardware... lack of upgradeability choices, and a lot of issues PC users do not have to deal with. One may ask, "Why don't you just go back to Windows?" Not that easy... I dislike Windows and absolutely love the Mac OS, but I've come to really dislike Apple's hardware direction as of late. And even if I were satisfied with some aspects of Apple's direction I still say Apple is way overpriced. One only need YouTube some hardcore Apple/Mac user's opinions to see I am not alone in my opinion of Apple's, in some instances, ridiculous prices.

To top it all off, I don't really think Apple truly cares about their Mac base any longer, or rather, they do not care as much as they used to. Remember... Apple used to be a computer company first-and-foremost to begin with. Now it would seem ONLY profit matter to Apple. iPhones put Apple over the top as a corporation. Hey, I'm all for profit... I am not one of these "Corporations are greedy, dude" people in the least. But overpricing is yet another issue.

Finally, all of this I say comes down to the fact my opinions mean about as much as one grain of sand on the entire world's seashores, but it is my opinion nevertheless, for what's it's worth.

I'm only trying to figure out which direction to take in the future. My comps are aging, PCs and Macs, and I must make some serious decisions in the near future. I am very happy with my aging Hackintosh... there is absolutely nothing slow about it even though it's quite a few generations behind newer builds.

I also must consider all of the software I will eventually have to replace. I am a musician (for a living until a few years back... I don't travel as much for my livelihood any longer). Although Logic Pro is extremely reasonable, price wise, in regards to DAW software. Then there is the graphic design software and businesas software, etc..........

So any opinions/advice I receive from current experienced "Apple Silicon" Mac owners is truly appreciated... hence the main reason for this thread.

I do have one remaining question... if the "Apple Silicon" Macs are so great for some, why are you/they still building Hackintoshes and hanging out in Hackintosh forums? Any further info on M1/M2 Macs is certainly welcomed...opinion, or fact!

Thanks for the replies, all!

 

[D.Houch]

There's an interesting curve to the AS speed and benchmarks conversation that most (actually all that I've seen) "expert" reviewers miss ...

I owned an M1 Mac Mini base model.

I now own an M2 Mac Mini, the base model again.

Reviewers bleated-on about the SSD in the M2 model being a slower type than the M1 model. They then go off on a rant about Apple undermining the hardware, saving money, shafting buyers etc., etc.

This is rubbish.

I *know* that the M2 base Mac Mini is faster and more efficient than the M1 version. In part because of the extra 2x GPU cores.

What no-one has considered or suggested is that the change to slighlty slower SSD chips might be for a valid reason. Perhaps it's a supply issue or maybe it's because Apple wanted greater longevity from the built-in storage and the slower version lasts longer? Why would those reasons not be just as relevant?

People always want to assume Apple is "stupid", or "greedy". No-one, but people who appreciate what the company has done to upset the cliche PC apple-cart (!), seems willing to see anything but bad in every move they make.

I definitely do not think Apple is "stupid"... that's one bad trait I never question Apple for having. I think Tim Cook is a good supply person and business man so-to-speak, but he is no Steve Jobs in the creativity department... far from it. I know, I know... Jobs is gone and one cannot expect another person to try and be someone they're not. You're either a visionary, or you're not.

But those who made Apple what it was during the Jobs years are almost all gone, if not ALL gone... and no doubt because they didn't agree with the direction of the company after Jobs' passing. Jony Ive, etc. all left shortly before or after Apple changed directions radically compared to the Intel days. IMO, most of the future insight and creativity went with them.

Even Wozniak recently stated, in so many words, Apple is no longer the "New Ideas" company it was. Jobs was good with the new ideas and pushed everyone around him to get it done... one way or another. I just don't think Apple still has that "Next Incredible Thing" capability any longer. I mean look how long they have been milking the iPhone cow now without any serious "wow-factor" changes. iPhones are still great... but they remain pretty much the same.

Real serious visionaries only come around so often... as a long-time Apple fan maybe I'm being too hard on Apple.

 

[pastrychef]

I definitely do not think Apple is "stupid"... that's one bad trait I never question Apple for having. I think Tim Cook is a good supply person and business man so-to-speak, but he is no Steve Jobs in the creativity department... far from it. I know, I know... Jobs is gone and one cannot expect another person to try and be someone they're not. You're either a visionary, or you're not.

But those who made Apple what it was during the Jobs years are almost all gone, if not ALL gone... and no doubt because they didn't agree with the direction of the company after Jobs' passing. Jony Ive, etc. all left shortly before or after Apple changed directions radically compared to the Intel days. IMO, most of the future insight and creativity went with them.

Even Wozniak recently stated, in so many words, Apple is no longer the "New Ideas" company it was. Jobs was good with the new ideas and pushed everyone around him to get it done... one way or another. I just don't think Apple still has that "Next Incredible Thing" capability any longer. I mean look how long they have been milking the iPhone cow now without any serious "wow-factor" changes. iPhones are still great... but they remain pretty much the same.

Real serious visionaries only come around so often... as a long-time Apple fan maybe I'm being too hard on Apple.

It's hard to continuously pump out new, revolutionary products. I can't think of any company other than Apple that has done it so many times.

Apple II.
Mac.
iPod.
iPhone.
Apple Watch.

It remains to be seen how "successful" the Vision Pro will be. Technologically, I feel it's already disrupting the category.

I don't know if anyone will be able to come up with something nearly as successful as the iPhone. What other device does everyone need to have on them 24/7? People can be without their desktops or laptops for a while. People can be away from their cars. But if they are away from their smartphones for more than a few minutes, panic sets in. Smartphones have become so integral to our lives. We rely on them for everything from staying in touch with friends/family to counting how many steps we've taken today to paying for the bottle of water after our workout.

Macs and iPhones are mature products. Still, Apple managed to introduce true innovation to the Macs in the form of Apple Silicon nearly 40 years after the first Mac was introduced. A true bean counter would probably not have spent on the R&D. They could've easily sat on their laurels and continued to "milk the cow" using Intel CPUs, but Tim Cook didn't. Which other company has come up with new processors that are competitive to Intel or AMD on a consumer level in the last few years?

From a business perspective, I don't think Apple "needs" to have anymore new revolutionary products. They can remain extremely successful by continually refining and improving their existing devices. Consumers need to update all these devices every so often as technology and standards evolve and improve and batteries degrade. Think about the first few generations of iPhones. They are pretty useless now that all the major cell carriers have sunsetted 3G service. For "growth" they have their Services business.

 

[trs96]

With Apple just weeks away from bankruptcy back in 1997, Bill Gates loaned Apple millions of dollars to stay in business. It was 26 years ago to this day.

On August 6, 1997, Microsoft's Bill Gates invested $150 million in Apple which was on the brink of bankruptcy. Following the deal, Steve Jobs told Gates, “Bill, thank you. The world’s a better place.” TIME magazine.

So why did Bill do this ? If you remember Windows/PC history, MS was constantly being scrutinized in the latter 1990s for monopolistic practices. Gates knew that if Apple went under and closed up shop, that was only going to get worse with MS possibly even being broken up the way ATT was. He knew Steve well and that Apple was a creative and innovative company. Who was he going to steal good ideas from if Apple was no more ? We'd probably all still be using (much larger) flip phones with a physical Qwerty keyboard on them today. Possibly running a version of Windows CE, how painful would that be ?

 

[craighazan]

I can't even imagine a word without the G3 iMac, the G5, iPod or iPhone, sure someone would come up with a version of, but I doubt they'd contain the fun or intuitiveness that Steve Jobs gave us. Bill Gates definitely made the world a better place with that decision.