I doubt Apple will invest a different approach for Mac Pro. It’s too much of a niche, and lot of folks have moved on from Mac Pro after the 2013 debacle.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Best M series chip for mixed office use
- Thread starter dj95
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You are probably correct. However I am hoping that Apple applies some high-end engineering to make the MP more than just a Studio Ultra in a more versatile box.
Doing an experiment here. Someone sold me a base model M2 Mac Mini for stupid money yesterday. Going to use it for a month and see if it'll do everything I want.
I'm writing a fairly complex mathematical text at the moment using MacTeX, have numbers, apple music open, notes, reminders, mail, iMessage, several safari tabs, terminal and Discord and Photos.app is sync'ing my library from iCloud.
Honestly I can't tell the difference between it and my base 14" M1 MBP (16Gb/512Gb) at the moment.
This is both enlightening and depressing as the display cost 6.8x what I just paid for the Mac Mini and the MBP cost 8.6x what I paid for the Mac Mini
Perhaps they should put the Mac Mini inside the studio display
I'm writing a fairly complex mathematical text at the moment using MacTeX, have numbers, apple music open, notes, reminders, mail, iMessage, several safari tabs, terminal and Discord and Photos.app is sync'ing my library from iCloud.
Honestly I can't tell the difference between it and my base 14" M1 MBP (16Gb/512Gb) at the moment.
This is both enlightening and depressing as the display cost 6.8x what I just paid for the Mac Mini and the MBP cost 8.6x what I paid for the Mac Mini
Perhaps they should put the Mac Mini inside the studio display
Except DJ said he would be buying used ... so maybe not looking at that longer time frame.
Perhaps a bit late to the party here, but ... when I read your requirement, I think RAM, not CPU.
I came from a late 2013 (Haswell) laptop to a 2023 M2 Macbook Air, and CPU-wise the difference is hard to pin down. I see it mostly when doing software updates. Both laptops had 16GB memory and I think that is telling. My takeaway is that CPU differences aren't necessarily as crucial as one might imagine.
In your case, I wouldn't worry too much about the CPU generation, because the differences just aren't that big. M1 to M3 might be what, 15%? 20%? even if 30%, who cares? on the other hand, RAM can definitely hinder if there isn't enough. From what I read, Apple Silicon CPU's operate well with roughly 2/3 or 3/4 of the RAM of the comparable Intel CPU. I'd suggest you get a machine with 16 GB memory, or if you want to be forward looking and have the budget, 24GB RAM, and that ought to satisfy.
I came from a late 2013 (Haswell) laptop to a 2023 M2 Macbook Air, and CPU-wise the difference is hard to pin down. I see it mostly when doing software updates. Both laptops had 16GB memory and I think that is telling. My takeaway is that CPU differences aren't necessarily as crucial as one might imagine.
In your case, I wouldn't worry too much about the CPU generation, because the differences just aren't that big. M1 to M3 might be what, 15%? 20%? even if 30%, who cares? on the other hand, RAM can definitely hinder if there isn't enough. From what I read, Apple Silicon CPU's operate well with roughly 2/3 or 3/4 of the RAM of the comparable Intel CPU. I'd suggest you get a machine with 16 GB memory, or if you want to be forward looking and have the budget, 24GB RAM, and that ought to satisfy.
The OP's usage is somewhat similar to mine.
Most of my time is spent with around 20 chrome tabs, I manage a busy support helpdesk and need multiple client sites, reporting, service desk website tabs open at any one time. On top of that, I usually have open 5-7 word documents, 4-6 excel spreadsheets, slack, a SQL database manager and an email client.
I also have lots of tabs open (but not Chrome, I use Brave and Safari), two email clients, numerous Word docs and often 1-2 Excel spreadsheets. I normally don't use SQL db mgr and I don't use Slack, but I do also regularly have Parallels open for Windows emulation (gaming).
I do all of this on a M1 Macbook Air 16 Gb without any issues in responsiveness, although I should add that I do reboot once every few weeks If I don't it may become less responsive. I can have a large download and/or an iMovie export or DVD rip or so in the background while doing other work like browsing, word processing, no hiccups at all.
From my experience also I don't believe M2 or M3 would add much, but I'd hesitate to recommend less RAM. 16 Gb seems to work for my comparable workload. But if I'd buy right now I'd go for 32 Gb and an M3 just to future proof my set-up. If money was tight I would consider a used/refurbished M1 with 16 Gb.
Most of my time is spent with around 20 chrome tabs, I manage a busy support helpdesk and need multiple client sites, reporting, service desk website tabs open at any one time. On top of that, I usually have open 5-7 word documents, 4-6 excel spreadsheets, slack, a SQL database manager and an email client.
I also have lots of tabs open (but not Chrome, I use Brave and Safari), two email clients, numerous Word docs and often 1-2 Excel spreadsheets. I normally don't use SQL db mgr and I don't use Slack, but I do also regularly have Parallels open for Windows emulation (gaming).
I do all of this on a M1 Macbook Air 16 Gb without any issues in responsiveness, although I should add that I do reboot once every few weeks If I don't it may become less responsive. I can have a large download and/or an iMovie export or DVD rip or so in the background while doing other work like browsing, word processing, no hiccups at all.
From my experience also I don't believe M2 or M3 would add much, but I'd hesitate to recommend less RAM. 16 Gb seems to work for my comparable workload. But if I'd buy right now I'd go for 32 Gb and an M3 just to future proof my set-up. If money was tight I would consider a used/refurbished M1 with 16 Gb.
Then they should call it an iMac. Or maybe an iMac Studio if they want a larger iMac to be the spiritual succession to the iMac ProDoing an experiment here. Someone sold me a base model M2 Mac Mini for stupid money yesterday. Going to use it for a month and see if it'll do everything I want.
I'm writing a fairly complex mathematical text at the moment using MacTeX, have numbers, apple music open, notes, reminders, mail, iMessage, several safari tabs, terminal and Discord and Photos.app is sync'ing my library from iCloud.
Honestly I can't tell the difference between it and my base 14" M1 MBP (16Gb/512Gb) at the moment.
This is both enlightening and depressing as the display cost 6.8x what I just paid for the Mac Mini and the MBP cost 8.6x what I paid for the Mac Mini
Perhaps they should put the Mac Mini inside the studio display
I agree with your statement. The Mac Pro still has its place, but a lot of tasks that professionals used the lower-end and mid-end Mac Pro configurations for have been amply covered by the M1 and M2 Ultra Mac Studio. Thunderbolt 5 will further reduce the need for internal storage expansion. I would personally like Apple to return to the spirit of the 2019 Mac Pro by adding either a dual SoC option or a Mac Pro-exclusive M3 Extreme chip, and the possibility to expand RAM, and connect an eGPU over Thunderbolt.
Personally I totally disbelieve in all-in-one (AIO) computers. However a lot of professionals clearly like the clean look of the iMac Pro approach, so I agree with the statement "...like Apple to return to the spirit of the 2019 Mac Pro by adding either a dual SoC option or a Mac Pro-exclusive M3 Extreme chip, and the possibility to expand RAM, and connect an eGPU over Thunderbolt."
Edit: Except I do not want "the possibility to expand RAM." UMA RAM architecture rocks and should not be degraded (in iMacs and below) to achieve expandability.
For others, definitely not for me; I prefer Studio plus multiple displays for desktop setup. To me it is nuts to waste a good display when the computing portion needs upgrading/replacement or wasting a good computer when the display needs upgrading/replacement. AIO make no sense to me; except on low end PCs where the display is crap cheap and so is the computer.
Last edited:
I would hate to discard a studio display because I need to upgrade the hardware of Mac, or it stops receiving security updates. I keep the displays longer, and there is always an iMac for those who prefer AIO.Doing an experiment here. Someone sold me a base model M2 Mac Mini for stupid money yesterday. Going to use it for a month and see if it'll do everything I want.
I'm writing a fairly complex mathematical text at the moment using MacTeX, have numbers, apple music open, notes, reminders, mail, iMessage, several safari tabs, terminal and Discord and Photos.app is sync'ing my library from iCloud.
Honestly I can't tell the difference between it and my base 14" M1 MBP (16Gb/512Gb) at the moment.
This is both enlightening and depressing as the display cost 6.8x what I just paid for the Mac Mini and the MBP cost 8.6x what I paid for the Mac Mini
Perhaps they should put the Mac Mini inside the studio display
Well the iMac motherboard look VERY similar to the 13” MacBook Air motherboard (CPU on a stick)Perhaps they should put the Mac Mini inside the studio display
I think you are spot on with your recommendation. An M1 or M2 is more than capable for the OP.
Chrome is a memory s**t. I’d recommend as much memory as you can afford. Or you could switch to Safari.
Depending on your expectation of what “performs well” is, you may want to consider any of the Pro line of chips.
The absolute best recommendation if you are running Chrome is more memory the better. Google’s memory philosophy is “can’t stop till you get enough. SHAMAN”
Depending on your expectation of what “performs well” is, you may want to consider any of the Pro line of chips.
The absolute best recommendation if you are running Chrome is more memory the better. Google’s memory philosophy is “can’t stop till you get enough. SHAMAN”
I respectfully disagree. The only apps that come close in feature parity are OneNote and PowerPoint. Although I know video and animation triggers were missing, presenter view is limited and privacy features are also limited for PowerPoint.
Outlook has very basic Exchange server support on the Mac side compared to its Windows counterpart. Features such as public calendars, circulation lists, retention features and tracking are missing or limited. Other missing or limited features: Save as for emails, social connector, voting buttons, using word to compose emails, non-Gregorian calendars, tables, receipts, side by sides and VB. There are also many advanced settings in Outlook for Windows that aren’t on Mac.
In Word, the following features are non existent or limited on Mac: digital document signing, endnotes, open and repair, embed fonts, book fold, blog publishing, screen clippings, document inspector, digital ink, smart lookup, publishing layout view, dynamic order. Many advanced settings are also missing.
Excel for Mac, to Microsoft’s credit has recently received a working Power Query. However, the following features are non existent or limited: Power Pivot, COM add-ins, VB and Macro functions such as user form and editor. No import export for the Quick Access tool. Data connections are also limited on Mac.
Publisher and Access are Windows only but not particularly popular these days anyway. Lots of the new Sharepoint functionality is limited or non existent on Mac. Power BI is not on Mac either.
The OP is looking for a Mac primarily for Office use. I made the point re: feature parity of Office as the OP may have never used Office for Mac before.
Note: Edited to remove Pivot Charts from Excel which now has feature parity. The Office 365 for Mac team are churning out regular updates and will hopefully address more of the Mac limitations. Here's a handy comparison of Outlook features between the platforms from Microsoft. There are over 25 differences. It would be great if they made one for the rest of their software.
Last edited:
That is why I just say, stay with the Apple applications if at all possible. I realize you may have a list of things that MS has here but maybe he doesn't need all of this?
Plus Office generally runs better in Windows than in MacOS. I managed to quantify one action (opening a large document), and found that Word runs that action about twice as fast in Windows as in MacOS:
MS Office on M1 Mac vs. MS Office on Intel Windows PCs
Chiming in on this somewhat old thread: I'm a heavy user of Office (mostly Word and Excel). I use them on both a lower-end Windows desktop (Core i5-6600 running Windows 10) and a relatively high-end Mac (core i9-9900K iMac running Monterey). Based on their relative GeekBench 6 single-core...
forums.macrumors.com
That's not surprising. Office is MS's most important app suite, so I expect MS co-develops Windows and Office to run optimally together. They really have no choice--Office for Windows probably has to run on a lot of really low-end office machines.
Yep, software optimization can be an important consideration. I guess we are getting away from which M series hardware is best.Plus Office generally runs better in Windows than in MacOS. I managed to quantify one action (opening a large document), and found that Word runs that action about twice as fast in Windows as in MacOS:
MS Office on M1 Mac vs. MS Office on Intel Windows PCs
Chiming in on this somewhat old thread: I'm a heavy user of Office (mostly Word and Excel). I use them on both a lower-end Windows desktop (Core i5-6600 running Windows 10) and a relatively high-end Mac (core i9-9900K iMac running Monterey). Based on their relative GeekBench 6 single-core...
That's not surprising. Office is MS's most important app suite, so I expect MS co-develops Windows and Office to run optimally together. They really have no choice--Office for Windows probably has to run on a lot of really low-end office machines.
The OP mentioned mixed office use, Excel, an SQL database manager and clearly comes from an x86 background. It's easy to give him a Mac spec for trivial tasks, and less easy to give him tips on the things to consider when moving to MacOS on Arm and possibly virtualising Windows for Arm.
Yes. Maybe he should just go back to a Windows laptop machine ... can we spec that, maybe?
The YouTube reviewers frequently judge performance based on video rendering and other tasks that they do for their video channels. It’s a different use case than a generalized office productivity case like yours.
There are rumors that Apple will be doing more things with packaging which might let them be more modular and scalable with their processors. That might make it feasible to crank up the processors and RAM on a build for a MP that offers more than just a “Studio in a big box”.