#Imac vs mac mini for video editing pro#
#Imac vs mac mini for video editing mac#

But just because we saw this already two days ago doesn't make it any less amazing. Intel results.ДЄrs writer Jim Salter already came to similar conclusions in his hands-on (and while testing the M1 against non-Mac machines, to boot), so this won't be a surprise to anyone following our coverage thus far.

#Imac vs mac mini for video editing mac#

But these benchmarks still show Rosetta apps on the new Mac mini's CPU beating Intel apps running natively on an Intel Mac mini, MacBook Air, or 13-inch MacBook Pro, per the previous Apple Silicon vs. 3D apps that use Metal exhibit very similar GPU performance regardless of whether we're talking native or Rosetta, though. AdvertisementДЄ Rosetta app definitely isn't always as performant as a native app-and as far as the browser tests go, well, you know how Chrome is to begin with.

#Imac vs mac mini for video editing pro#

And again: the 16-inch MacBook Pro (admittedly a laptop, but the Mac mini has mostly laptop-y guts anyway) costs more than twice as much. In fact, the M1's GPU is knocking on the door of the 16-inch MacBook Pro's discrete graphics solution. The two 13-inch Macs we're comparing against above have some of the fastest integrated graphics Intel offers, and the comparison is. This is technically an integrated GPU (though of a very different sort), and it betrays that stereotype. Intel's integrated graphics get the job done for basic productivity tasks, but they fall on their faces pretty quickly when you throw heavy-duty 3D graphics or video tasks at them. Performance-obsessed computing enthusiasts have long looked at integrated graphics with a certain amount of scorn. The biggest surprise we see here is the graphics performance. The heavily specced-out iMac beats it pretty handily in the multi-core CPU test, but that's a bit of an apples-and-oranges comparison, given that the iMac draws dramatically more power and is, well, quite a bit larger-not to mention 3.5 times more expensive (albeit with a pricy high-end display built in). It also leaves its own Intel-based predecessor in the dust.В A single M1 high-performance core beats all of these CPUs in the single-core test-even the iMac. The charts tell the story: the M1 Mac mini outperforms the MacBook Air, 13-inch MacBook Pro, and all the iPhones and iPads-in most cases by a substantial margin.

Now, let's look at some results comparing the M1's performance with Intel Macs and iOS/iPadOS devices.

In other words, we're not comparing the M1 against the base spec for any of these Macs, or against older Macs, or against comparably priced Macs-we're comparing it to the nearly speediest configurations of those Macs available this year, all of which are much more expensive than this Mac mini. The important takeaway from that table is that the Mac mini and other M1 devices replace computers at the low end of Apple's lineup, but we're here comparing the M1 against the most beefed up (or close to it) configurations of each computer (iMac, MacBook Pro, MacBook Air). But the real pitch here is performance, and it's time to look at some benchmarks.В Before we go over the results, let's take a look at the specs of the different machines we're testing here: Model Okay, so iOS apps aren't the best on this Apple Silicon Mac.