![]() Rendering speed matters to video creators the quicker something can be rendered, the quicker it can be exported. It felt super quick as soon as I kicked it off on the M2 Mac mini, and shaving over one minute off its predecessor’s time is a genuinely impressive step forward. You want to know how these two machines performed against one another, don’t you? Here are the results. Both are timed with the stopwatch on my iPhone and, if I’m quick enough with my finger once the progress bar reaches 100%, I gain a relatively accurate timing for each one.Įnough waffle. The test is then broken down into two tasks – a render and an export. ![]() All other apps are closed, and I ensure both machines are running the same versions of everything. This is shot on my Sony FX3 in the aforementioned 10-bit colour depth and imported straight into Final Cut Pro. It starts with a piece of roughly-timed 10-minute 4K footage. It involves two tests which, I suspect, will one day make their way into literary studies of Apple Silicon and become part of the syllabus for related university degrees. I’ve spent many countless, tiring minutes perfecting my approach to benchmarking. So, what does this all mean? Let’s put it to the test M1 vs M2 Mac mini Mark Ellis Reviews Benchmark™️ I’m not an expert in this area at all, but I understand that the use of a single NAND chip results in slower read and write performances for the SSD, and, therefore, degraded system performance during transfer-intensive tasks. ![]() Whereas the 512GB of space on my M1 Mac mini is spread across two NAND chips, the M2 Mac mini uses just one. However, storage is where the biggest and most controversial change lies. While they have the same 8 cores of CPU (split equally between performance and high efficiency), the M2 Mac mini has two extra GPU cores, bringing the total to 10. There are two key differences between these two Macs. This brought the total to £1,049 – £50 cheaper than my M1 Mac mini. So, I specced up my M2 Mac mini with the same 16GB of unified memory and 512GB of SSD storage. Even when working with 4K, 10-bit footage from my Sony FX3, even the fan refused to spin up. It helped me create over 80 videos for my YouTube channel and never, ever put a foot wrong (bar those annoying Bluetooth issues). Rather than opt for the base model, I decided to spec it up in the same way as my M1 Mac mini.Īs I’ve noted previously, the M1 Mac mini pretty much ran this business for an entire year. When the M2 Mac mini was launched, I devised a cunning plan. If you’re looking for the answer to that question, I can give you it immediately.īut from a point of pure curiosity, I’d really like to see what Apple has managed to achieve in the more than two years since the M1 Mac mini was launched. This isn’t because I think M1 Mac mini owners should upgrade to the M2 Mac mini. I think we absolutely should put this stuff to the test. Who cares how far we’ve come between the M1 and the M2 chips? Everyone knows this is an incremental upgrade, at best the M2 is, essentially, an M1 with everything turned up a bit – and some NAND storage deficiencies thrown in for good measure.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |