Re: MacMini vs MacStudio for photography: worth the pain?
RustyBug wrote:
The one thing that "might" make a reason for getting the Studio is to get some serious RAM, instead of the baseline 16GB. In my case, I opted for 64GB RAM in my MBP Max (and typically advocate for folks to get at least 32GB).
These days I would want more than 16GB ram in a machine for post-processing. Apple is now making 24GB the default minimum in the new M4 miniPro. I have 48GB in mine.
If you aren't a super heavy user doing a lot of leading edge processing stuff, the M4 Powerbooks should be more than sufficient.
I was concerned about ports when I got my mini, but once I got mine set up. The key is moving everything to USB-C. There are five USB-C ports on the mini. I have a 27" Apple Studio Monitor connected via a Thunderbolt/USB-C cable, and since the monitor has four ports, three of those remain for peripherals. So, with the monitor connected (taking one port on the mini) I still have 7 additional USB-C ports!
In my case, I have a second 27" monitor from LG... which has three more USB-A ports on the back.
Lots of ports! If that's still not enough — and it probably is — you could get some kind of USB-C hub with whatever extra ports you need.
Cooling should be a non-issue. A nice external usB-C card reader is a whole lot less expensive than a Studio! ;-)
I think that a challenge that many us face — especially those of us who remember the days when you really had to get a big, top-end machine to run Photoshop — is in believing that something so small and, well, "mini" as the Mac mini actually has the power it contains.
Jan 30, 2025 at 07:17 PM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #16742782 « MacMini vs MacStudio for photography: worth the pain? »
