Live data from Hacker News

M4 Mac mini's efficiency

jeffgeerling.com

261–270 of 632 posts

Re: M4 Mac mini's efficiency

#261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a burden. I consider it a typical Tim Cook decision, in that the man led the company that made one of the fastest CPUs in the world, makes it draw as much as a Raspberry Pi. Absolutely crazy feats of engineering, design, manufacturing… and - There is that ONE detail that would’ve made it perfected but it’s botched! I don’t mind it too much, since it’s still 99% close to perfect. But, but…

Hah, Tim Cook decision pretty much sums it up; its the kind of thing that wouldn't have lasted 5 seconds when placed in front of Jobs (although there is a strong chance Jobs would have demanded his own nonsensical addition/subtraction to the design).

Jobs would have removed the power button entirely.

And then when there's a fault requiring a hard reset to fix you have to insert a bent paperclip into a tiny unlabeled hole on the bottom, or spell out a message in morse code by unplugging and re-plugging the power cord with some special timing. (This is not sarcasm)

Re: M4 Mac mini's efficiency

#262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The storage is not soldered to the M4 mini SOC.

M4 Macs only accept SSDs of the exact same make and model as the one installed at the factory. So to expand storage in an M4 Mac, you indeed need to desolder the flash chips and solder in new ones.

What stops someone from selling replacement cards?

Re: M4 Mac mini's efficiency

#263
post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They almost certainly won’t get rid of it because people are abusing it. If they do it’s because they don’t want to offer it. If they want to end the abuse they will simply toughen the verification procedure.

> They almost certainly won’t get rid of it because people are abusing it. It always depends on the ratio (valid cases vs abusers), if the amount of the abusers gets too high, then the discount is not correctly fulfilling its purpose. > If they want to end the abuse they will simply toughen the verification procedure. It also depends on how expensive or difficult it is to maintain such verification procedure. At some…

It's not cheating if they intend for you to do it (but just can't explicitly say it's allowed because then everyone would do it and that would collapse their self-assortative price-discrimination strategy.)

> If you can "cheat" on getting the discount, people just keep finding reasons why they are justified to cheat. "They should toughen the verification procedure if cheating is possible".

You seem to misunderstand the argument. It's not "they should toughen the verification procedure if cheating is possible." The argument is that they would toughen the verification procedure if cheating were possible and they cared; which proves, at the very least, that they don't care (and potentially proves that they in fact want you to do it, at least sometimes.)

To be clear, this argument doesn't apply to bureaucracies — governmental, academic, or Enterprise — where there's so much red tape in the way of making changes that it's almost impossible to fix issues like this even if several people care quite a lot.

But this argument very much does apply to a relatively-agile, not-so-Enterprise-y-for-its-size corporation like Apple. In fact, it applies especially to Apple, who has an almost Disney-like obsession with micromanaging all customer interactions as an extended customer-lifecycle marketing opportunity. (For example: you'll never find a rotting out-of-date page on an Apple-owned website.)

Apple know exactly who they're giving this discount out to. They've almost assuredly sat down at least once and done a hand-analysis of one or more months' purchases, to determine the proportion of education-store purchases that are from genuine education customers. (Heck, they probably have gone far beyond this; far lazier corporations than Apple set up heuristics for this kind of "promotion fraud"; run continuous analyses on them; and spit out a weekly reports to mull over in marketing-KPIs progress meetings!)

If Apple's education store gives discounts to group XYZ, then you can assume that that's the intended outcome. At least under the Apple marketing department's current paradigm of thought.

Re: M4 Mac mini's efficiency

#264

I know everyone is complaining about the power button why not just flip it upside down ?

I haven’t powered down my iMac once all year

How often are these people powering down their iMacs? Why!?

People love complaining. Apple doubles the base ram and keeps the price the same, people complain that base storage is too low. If that doubled then they would find something new.

Re: M4 Mac mini's efficiency

#265
post #9

I use Linux, but I think the cheapest M4 Mini offers an incredible value and efficiency per €. With education discount, it's around €650, including VAT. It's pretty hard to find such a silent and powerful machine for that little. Any comparable options? A good fanless build with a i3-14100T is more expensive and 40-50% slower on Geekbench. An i5 is a bit closer. Some 2024 Ryzen CPUs can match or exceed its multicore…

> Pricewise, things start favoring PCs if you need more RAM, as Mac upgrades are costly. That's the position I'm in, along with some other people I've talked to recently, too. For our situations, the M4 would likely offer more than enough processing power, and the efficiency and physical size are attractive, but a maximum of 32 GB of RAM definitely isn't sufficient. The M4 Pro's 64 GB of RAM is somewhat better, but t…

In same boat, I have the 5950x with 64gb memory running PopOS and there are times I'm hitting swap a lot more than I'd like. 16 or 32gb of memory is just not feasible, and even 2TB of storage would likely cause headaches, I have a 4TB and a 2TB nvme at the moment which will come with me next upgrade.

I'm leaning towards an upgrade next year to the 9950x3d if reviews pan out. Sure, it's going to be a bigger machine with louder components, but the upgrade will likely be half the cost of anything close from Apple since I can take my existing GPU, PSU and storage at the very least along with me.

And "upgrade costs" is highly misleading for most of the components. You are buying a different machine config that you can't change, up or down, later on. I get that most people don't want to bother opening up a PC to swap out components, but the easier they made it, the more people will do it, and Apple is running the other way.

Re: M4 Mac mini's efficiency

#266

Any feedback on how it comes along for regular Software Development (backend stuff) activity and as a common home PC? Looking at the benchmarks looks like there shouldn't be any issue but any first hand experience would be greatly appreciated.

IMHO, developing with Node.js, Java, Python, Go, etc.. within MacOS is more convenient compared to Windows machines.

Also I can highly recommend using version managers (e.g. nvm, jenv, pyenv, gvm, etc..) for these languages to quickly install and manage different versions.

Re: M4 Mac mini's efficiency

#267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

M4 Macs only accept SSDs of the exact same make and model as the one installed at the factory. So to expand storage in an M4 Mac, you indeed need to desolder the flash chips and solder in new ones.

What stops someone from selling replacement cards?

not wanting extensive interactions with Apple's legal team. Charging $400 for $10 of storage means they have a lot of money to harass you with very well payed lawyers even if you are in the right.

Re: M4 Mac mini's efficiency

#268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems viable that doing so increases the price for those of us who don't.

You are free to purchase as many Apple products as you want to offset any perceived revenue losses from promotional discounts. I'm not so sure why you would want to do this but I keep hearing that behavioral economics is a thing, maybe paying more is your definition of rationality.

It’s basic market economics. More discounted purchases tends to lead to an increase in the non discounted price. Of course, that’s baked in at outset. Apple knows x% of sales come with a edu discount so the non-edu price is offset to account for the edu discount. I don’t have any problem with a vendor doing that. It’s how they forecast a profit margin. Apple, apparently, has allowed “people who know someone in education to also claim an edu discount” to be part of their pricing model that ultimately leads to increased prices for those those do not know someone with an edu email.

Re: M4 Mac mini's efficiency

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pricewise, things start favoring PCs if you need more RAM, as Mac upgrades are costly. That's the position I'm in, along with some other people I've talked to recently, too. For our situations, the M4 would likely offer more than enough processing power, and the efficiency and physical size are attractive, but a maximum of 32 GB of RAM definitely isn't sufficient. The M4 Pro's 64 GB of RAM is somewhat better, but t…

For what it's worth, the apple silicon machines are much more efficient on RAM than most - a 16gb m1 absolutely mops the floor with the 32gb of ram I have in my thinkpad with an i7. It's not really even close.

Not sure what you mean by 'efficient', they are faster for sure (amazing memory bandwidth thanks to on chip memory), but to my knowledge they would be the same for amount of data stored. So that same think pad will likely be faster at tasks that need 24GB for example, highly depend on the use case as always.

Re: M4 Mac mini's efficiency

#270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pricewise, things start favoring PCs if you need more RAM, as Mac upgrades are costly. That's the position I'm in, along with some other people I've talked to recently, too. For our situations, the M4 would likely offer more than enough processing power, and the efficiency and physical size are attractive, but a maximum of 32 GB of RAM definitely isn't sufficient. The M4 Pro's 64 GB of RAM is somewhat better, but t…

For what it's worth, the apple silicon machines are much more efficient on RAM than most - a 16gb m1 absolutely mops the floor with the 32gb of ram I have in my thinkpad with an i7. It's not really even close.

I just struggle to believe this. What OS is the Thinkpad running and did you put everything there (i.e., no corporate crud?).
Post reply on HN