Should I buy a Mac Apple M1?

Updated on : December 3, 2021 by Alfie Young



Should I buy a Mac Apple M1?

If you are looking for a new MacBook or Mac Mini: YES!

I sold my MacBook i9 and replaced it with a Mac Mini and a 13 ″ MacBook Pro M1 for the money I got for the i9… and I am happier than ever with my setup. Now I don't just have two machines so I can render on one computer while doing other things like script work or actual work on the other, it's almost as fast, sometimes faster, than my i9 in both cases.

Playing is fun again.

IPadOS / iOS apps fill niches.

And, don't forget, battery life, heat and fan issues, thermal throttling… no longer a problem.

I'd say postpone that purchase. The Mac M1s are first-generation products. Typically, first-generation products (even from Apple) are known to be buggy and difficult to use, especially in the long run. I'd say wait a year. If people aren't complaining that the basic functions don't work, the Mac M1 is probably safe to buy.

If you are looking for a new Apple laptop, you should consider M1 Mac instead of Intel. If you already own a decent laptop, you should probably wait until the M2 or M3 for better configuration options. And all the softwares will be optimized to run on the M chip at that time.

I hope this helps

The Apple TV 4K uses the A10X processor, the 2020 Mac mini uses the Apple M1.

Apple M1 vs. Apple A10X Fusion - Benchmark and Specs

3.2 GHz vs 1.3 GHz

8 cores vs 6 cores

8-core vs 1-core GPU (3.2 GHz vs 0.9 GHz)

5 nm vs 10 nm

3 screens maximum vs 1 screen maximum

8 GB of maximum GPU memory vs 4 GB of maximum GPU memory

M1 has more video codec encoders and decoders

The M1 is based on the A14X, an unreleased iPad chip. You can't really compare the Apple TV to the Mac mini. The reason is simple, Apple Silicon's performance growths are exceptional every year. Developer preview Mac minis work with the A12Z, which is b

Keep reading

The Apple TV 4K uses the A10X processor, the 2020 Mac mini uses the Apple M1.

Apple M1 vs. Apple A10X Fusion - Benchmark and Specs

3.2 GHz vs 1.3 GHz

8 cores vs 6 cores

8-core vs 1-core GPU (3.2 GHz vs 0.9 GHz)

5 nm vs 10 nm

3 screens maximum vs 1 screen maximum

8 GB of maximum GPU memory vs 4 GB of maximum GPU memory

M1 has more video codec encoders and decoders

The M1 is based on the A14X, an unreleased iPad chip. You can't really compare the Apple TV to the Mac mini. The reason is simple, Apple Silicon's performance growths are exceptional every year. The developer preview Mac minis work with the A12Z, which is basically the same as the A12X that powers the previous generation iPad Pro, but the M1 is almost twice the speed of the A12Z. Looking at the benchmarks, you can see that the A12Z is ​​roughly equal to a 6-core i5 at 3GHz and boots up to 4GHz. To put it another way, the iPad Pro's A12X is comparable to the performance of an 8th Gen Intel 6-core, and the M1 is almost twice as fast as that…. twice. It is very likely that the A10 can power a desktop operating system,

The Apple TV is so amazing, because it has desktop-class computing in a small box, but it lacks everything you need to turn it into a computer ... the most important thing is the capacity ... it lacks RAM and storage, and you cannot increase storage as there are no expansion slots.

If you were to pair a bluetooth keyboard and mouse, and had some way to load MacOS on an Apple TV, it really wouldn't be the worst experience, as long as it had more than 6GB of RAM. With only 2GB of RAM (which is all it has), the operating system would run out of memory and the operating system would not perform well. You are having difficulty working on a system with 4GB of RAM.

When it comes to applications running on ARM (Apple Silicon) architecture, yes, they are much better than Intel i7.

The M1 could get into a tie with the intel i7 when running Rosetta-based applications, which is an intel-to-arm architecture converter to maintain compatibility at the cost of a bit of performance. But they are faster than many PCs anyway!

Now if you see the benchmarks claimed by Intel

Looking here doesn't look very good, does it? But here's the twist. Intel had to do bias tests with the MacBook to keep selling its chipsets for around $ 400 every year -_-

See li battery

Keep reading

When it comes to applications running on ARM (Apple Silicon) architecture, yes, they are much better than Intel i7.

The M1 could get into a tie with the intel i7 when running Rosetta-based applications, which is an intel-to-arm architecture converter to maintain compatibility at the cost of a bit of performance. But they are faster than many PCs anyway!

Now if you see the benchmarks claimed by Intel

Looking here doesn't look very good, does it? But here's the twist. Intel had to do bias tests with the MacBook to keep selling its chipsets for around $ 400 every year -_-

View the battery life test

Now dodge those anniversary photos and Intel observations. Personally, I own both machines (MacBook and swift 5) and my MacBook M1 gives me over 16 hours of the same tasks but with an unrealistic brightness of around 50 percent. The swift also gives 13 hours, but that's not the point. My overall satisfaction from using the M1 is more than what I get from the Swift 5. M1 IS FASTER! You may not see it on the paper provided by Intel, but in its use you will find a significant difference.

Here are my observations of what I do on both of my laptops.

M1 chips are faster in

  1. Video editing and rendering (found a difference of more than 30 seconds and higher)
  2. Android Studio builds (although they run on Rosetta).
  3. Image processing

and almost every other aspect that a heavy user can imagine.

While the i7 has only one advantage, that's game Lol!

Well, regardless, just enjoy your life with "what you have" or even better "what you can get";)

Not necessarily.

You see, the Mac M1s are a bit different when it comes to this. The MacBook Air is the lowest of these Macs due to a 7-core GPU, rather than an 8-core one. Also, this Mac has no fans at all. This does not mean that it will overheat, but it will sacrifice performance a bit. Then we have the MacBook Pro. This little beast has an 8-core GPU and a real fan! It will have some extra horsepower and will perform better on all things graphics. Then in the middle of these two we have the formidable Mac Mini. This is the cheapest computer of the three, but it has ex

Keep reading

Not necessarily.

You see, the Mac M1s are a bit different when it comes to this. The MacBook Air is the lowest of these Macs due to a 7-core GPU, rather than an 8-core one. Also, this Mac has no fans at all. This does not mean that it will overheat, but it will sacrifice performance a bit. Then we have the MacBook Pro. This little beast has an 8-core GPU and a real fan! It will have some extra horsepower and will perform better on all things graphics. Then in the middle of these two we have the formidable Mac Mini. This is the cheapest computer of the three, but it performs excellently. With, again, an 8-core GPU and a fan, this model performs better than the Air, but underperforms the Pro.

These are all good computers, but they are intended for slightly different markets.

MacBook Air - For anyone who needs something portable and doesn't need a ton of performance.

MacBook Pro: For people who want something portable, but need something that can handle heavy loads.

And the Mac Mini: for someone who needs performance, on a budget. (I still think this is pretty portable considering its form factor, but you'll probably need your monitor, keyboard, and mouse as well depending on where you're going.)

However, all Mac M1s will suffice for most people and I would recommend using Air for most people who just surf the web and play light games or watch YouTube videos.

No.

Apple killed Boot Camp. Therefore, it is not possible to run Windows natively on M1-based Macs (unless Microsoft intervenes in what is less likely).

Speaking of running Windows on VM, none of the virtualization software is ready to run Windows on M1. Rosetta 2 cannot translate virtualization softwares correctly (yes, Apple lied to the face; many softwares will break; forget about performance reduction, they will BREAK). Parallels is working on a version for M1 to add support for Windows.

So, if you believe in an open ecosystem (but like Apple hardware), rush to buy Intel-based Macs right away. You can at

Keep reading

No.

Apple killed Boot Camp. Therefore, it is not possible to run Windows natively on M1-based Macs (unless Microsoft intervenes in what is less likely).

Speaking of running Windows on VM, none of the virtualization software is ready to run Windows on M1. Rosetta 2 cannot translate virtualization softwares correctly (yes, Apple lied to the face; many softwares will break; forget about performance reduction, they will BREAK). Parallels is working on a version for M1 to add support for Windows.

So, if you believe in an open ecosystem (but like Apple hardware), rush to buy Intel-based Macs right away. You can always buy M1-based Macs in the future, but this is your last chance to get first-hand Intel-based Macs.

Currently, you cannot run VMWare on Mac with Apple's M1 chip. However, VMWare has announced that they are actively working on the VMWare Fusion update for Apple's M1, but cannot yet provide a timeline of when it will be. It's also unclear what exactly it will be able to run: x86 / 64 like Windows 10 or just ARM.

Parallels is also in the same situation as VMWare - it won't run on Apple's M1 chip either, but they have announced that they are working on it without a clear timeline.

There are some solutions that currently work, such as CodeWeaver's CrossOver, which still works on the M1 chip. Allows users to ru

Keep reading

Currently, you cannot run VMWare on Mac with Apple's M1 chip. However, VMWare has announced that they are actively working on the VMWare Fusion update for Apple's M1, but cannot yet provide a timeline of when it will be. It's also unclear what exactly it will be able to run: x86 / 64 like Windows 10 or just ARM.

Parallels is also in the same situation as VMWare - it won't run on Apple's M1 chip either, but they have announced that they are working on it without a clear timeline.

There are some solutions that currently work, such as CodeWeaver's CrossOver, which still works on the M1 chip. It allows users to run some Windows applications without having to create a virtual machine.

Right now (mid-November 2020), for all practical purposes, no.

Although the operating system and hardware support virtualization, you currently cannot run Virtual Box or similar virtualization software on an ARM Mac.

Most importantly, none of the commonly used guest operating systems can run on an ARM Mac.

This is changing rapidly (in the Linux community), and we know that Windows 10 runs on ARM hardware (but not Apple's ARM hardware yet), so there is hope.

Update: I upgraded to Big Sur on one of my Intel macs yesterday and it turns out that you can't run Virtual Box on it either. I'm sure that will change soon

For CPU performance, they are all exactly the same fast, it is the same chip with the same cores. However, the MacBook Air is fanless, so you won't be able to maintain that performance any longer than the MacBook Pro and Mac mini that have fans. And of the latter two, the Mac mini can hold up even longer as well, as it doesn't suffer from the same space limitations as the MacBook Pro, and it still includes the same fan as the 2018 model.

Graphics performance is a different story as a MacBook Air model only has 7 GPU cores. Based on benchmarks, you can see a difference

Keep reading

For CPU performance, they are all exactly the same fast, it is the same chip with the same cores. However, the MacBook Air is fanless, so you won't be able to maintain that performance any longer than the MacBook Pro and Mac mini that have fans. And of the latter two, the Mac mini can hold up even longer as well, as it doesn't suffer from the same space limitations as the MacBook Pro, and it still includes the same fan as the 2018 model.

Graphics performance is a different story as a MacBook Air model only has 7 GPU cores. Based on benchmarks, you can see a difference in games ultra-low settings, but it gets smaller when you increase details.

Well, look, it depends on what security and "safe" means to you.

M1 will surely have its own set of vulnerabilities and Intel Macs have their set. How MacOS works changes over time, and therefore vulnerabilities and security risks change as well.
Seriously, there is no way you can compare it.

And speaking of the ways YOU can get infected, unless you are clueless about the technology and ignore every warning and alert an operating system gives you, then Windows on x86, Windows on ARM, MacOS x86, Linux, and MacOS ARM they are all equally safe.

Any Apple computer like desktop Mac, iMac, Macbook Pro, Macbook Air is good value for money. It will last longer, the chances of hardware problems are minimal. I have been surrounded by hundreds of devices, few of them are 10 years old and still work like gold!

I bought the higher end Macbook Pro, paid Rs. 2,00,000 more than India's annual salary!

And I hope it works until my salary becomes Rs. 4,00,000 per month. I can't throw it away before that, and that number would be around 10 years from now.

As a developer, I always want an up-to-date operating system and other necessary applications. I have a couple of older devices

Keep reading

Any Apple computer like desktop Mac, iMac, Macbook Pro, Macbook Air is good value for money. It will last longer, the chances of hardware problems are minimal. I have been surrounded by hundreds of devices, few of them are 10 years old and still work like gold!

I bought the higher end Macbook Pro, paid Rs. 2,00,000 more than India's annual salary!

And I hope it works until my salary becomes Rs. 4,00,000 per month. I can't throw it away before that, and that number would be around 10 years from now.

As a developer, I always want an up-to-date operating system and other necessary applications. I have a couple of older devices in my office, they are 5 years old and still work fine with 10.11 and Xcode. This is the best part of Apple products, compatibility issues don't put you off unless a major change happens. So if you have the higher end of the device, easily work for 5 years.
For games it should work.
For home use easily 10 years.

Here is my system configuration:


Other Guides:


GET SPECIAL OFFER FROM OUR PARTNER.