So, say, an M1 mini will blow an Intel mini out of the water.īut what about an M1 versus, say, my current machine, a 16" MacBook Pro?įrom what I've read and seen, an M1 mini, a machine costing about a third of what my mac cost, would be slower in some but faster in other cases. Now, of course we are talking about the "low end". When you put native or universal applications, there is no contest. An M1 mac running an Intel application is, for the most part, as fast or faster than an Intel mac of similar configuration. That concurs with what I have read multiple times. I did not, alas, have the time to do a good test, but it seemed faster than the Intel mac, even though it was not running a native application. Then I quit the application and started it again, and it was pretty quick to launch, and worked buttery smooth. I started it, and it took a while (presumably that was Rosetta 2 doing what it does). They had Final Cut Pro 10.4.10 on it, so it was NOT a "universal" application - it was all Intel.
Still, I was impressed, as most applications launched basically instantly. The main test involved exporting a 4K project from iMovie and the mini did it in half the time of the iMac. My only direct experience with an M1 mac was at a large store, where they had one MacBook Pro on display, side by side with an Intel one. M1 Mac mini and Final Cut Pro X As usual, I am behind everyone else regarding innovation and have just watched a YouTube video comparing the new base model M1 Mac mini (699) with a maxed out 27 inch iMac.
FINAL CUT PRO X MAC M1 FULL
First, full disclosure: I don't own a mac with M1 (yet).Īll I know is from reading stuff that people have published online.
0 kommentar(er)
