Blackmagic Forum

Hello,

My computer is starting to show its age (13 years) and I am looking for a new one. I do video editing of short videos (maximum 6 minutes,4K being the highest resolution) for YouTube, social media, all for my personal use (not making a living of it) I do some simple Fusion effects, nothing fancy and I am using the free version of DR.


I am quite tempted by the new Mac mini M4 16GB Ram/256GB SSD because its relatively low price and the many positive reviews.

An other option is the Mac mini M4 24GB Ram/512GB SSD, but then, for $200 more I can purchase a Windows PC with an Intel Core i7 14700KF PCU + RTX 3060 V2 OC 12GB GPU and 32GB RAM (2 units of 2X8GB). This would be budget limit.

The specs of the Mac Mini M4 chip say, “Apple M4 chip with 10-core CPU, 10-core GPU, and 16-core Neural Engine” What do these specs mean and what is the Intel equivalent CPU and the Nvidia equivalent GPU of the Mac mini m4 chip? I have never owned a Apple Mac but I do own an Ipad Air

Which of these options would be the best for me, considering the $200 price differences and my personal use of Davinci Resolve?

Thank you very much.

I'm collecting the base version of the Mac Mini M4 later today, I'm curious to see how it performs.

As you say, the base model is quite competitive but the moment you start adding RAM or get a better CPU you get into "serious PC" territory. It's difficult to compare Apple with Pears (Windows) as it's a different architecture and OS. Even BMD asks for "minimum 32GB for Fusion" when it comes to PC but on a Mac it's only "Minimum 16GB".

My understanding is that "editing" on a Mac is buttery smooth - when it comes to rendering, a good nVidia GPU will have more "raw processing power" than a base Mac.

What I don't like is that if I ever needed to update ANYTHING on that thing, I basically have to sell it and buy another one!

For a simple timeline (no fusion, single track) I understand the base Mac Mini won't have any issues. I'll share my feedback over the coming days

It depends on how expensive electricity is where you live

Joking aside, for transportability the Mac mini is nice, and there is no competition for the base model on the Windows side. But as you already observed, if you want to go higher and space allows, a PC is more flexible when upgrading. OTOH, you don't have to find the right GPU driver for a Mac.

Depends on what you usually do with the computer besides editing. But I would get a PC. Once that SSD on a Mac fails...

But as a word of caution. Skip Intel's 13th and 14th gen CPUs. Those generations are also prone to failure pretty fast.

Stick to AMD Gen 4 or 5 or the slower Core 200 series.

My 2 cents.

With a base Mac Mini you need an external SSD - they're even faster than the internal one.

And why the SSD should fail anyways? But yes, from a reparability/upgradability perspective, the Mac series is not great. Never been

Tony359 wrote:With a base Mac Mini you need an external SSD - they're even faster than the internal one.

That's not possible.

I watched reviews where the internal one ended up being slower than an external one (you need thunderbolt 4 or USB4 with a gen 4 nVme of course).

Why you say it's not possible?

Edit: found the review

Fair enough the 512GB SSD model is faster than the external one. But would you really notice that difference? I have all my assets on Sata SSD, they're never the bottleneck

Tony359 wrote:I'm collecting the base version of the Mac Mini M4 later today, I'm curious to see how it performs

Great, I am curious to see what your first impression is. Curious to see how it works in comparison with your Ryzen 5700X - 32GB RAM - 1.5TB Sata SSD - RTX 3070 8GB !

By base model, do you mean the 16GB Ram/256GB SSD? The truth is that I am more worried about the 16GB Ram than the 256GB (adding an external SSD)

VMFXBV wrote:Depends on what you usually do with the computer besides editing. But I would get a PC. Once that SSD on a Mac fails...

Affinity Photo, Powerpoint (content creating), Internet browsing, email, browsing/watching YouTube...

Jacques Wegier wrote:By base model, do you mean the 16GB Ram/256GB SSD? The truth is that I am more worried about the 16GB Ram than the 256GB (adding an external SSD)

Yes, 16GB/256.

I am also a bit concerned but unless you start using heavy Fusion effects it seems to be fine. I look forward to test!

Tony359 wrote:It's difficult to compare Apple with Pears (Windows) as it's a different architecture and OS. Even BMD asks for "minimum 32GB for Fusion" when it comes to PC but on a Mac it's only "Minimum 16GB"

I understand that Apple and Windows have a different architecture and OS, so you mean that because of this difference, certain processes that need 32GD on a Windows PC may need less Ram on an Apple Mac mini?

Tony359 wrote:
I am also a bit concerned but unless you start using heavy Fusion effects it seems to be fine. I look forward to test!

I do only light Fusion effects. About rendering or exporting time, I don't really care, I can enjoy a coffee while it's done

Waiting for your test!

Jacques Wegier wrote:I understand that Apple and Windows have a different architecture and OS, so you mean that because of this difference, certain processes that need 32GD on a Windows PC may need less Ram on an Apple Mac mini?

That is what BlackMagic Design is saying on the Resolve 19 "minimum specifications" page

Same, I don't care about rendering times. As long as it can render - my Windows laptop cannot render because it only has 4GB of VRAM.

I also do light fusion effects - the white border I use on my "picture in picture" multicam is annoyingly a Fusion effect which cripples the rendering times and editing speeds... So I am curious to see how the base M4 behaves with that!

Tony359 wrote:Fair enough the 512GB SSD model is faster than the external one. But would you really notice that difference? I have all my assets on Sata SSD, they're never the bottleneck

I think you'll notice a difference if it's swapping and, to a lesser degree, if you put cache and waveforms on that.

Jacques Wegier wrote:

VMFXBV wrote:Depends on what you usually do with the computer besides editing. But I would get a PC. Once that SSD on a Mac fails...

Affinity Photo, Powerpoint (content creating), Internet browsing, email, browsing/watching YouTube...

For that kind of usage, base M4 base model is more then enough.

No problem with office programs, Not tried affinity photo, but photoshop is lightning fast. You can edit and grade even in UHD in davinci resolve, RAM may be a "problem" with more complex timelines. you can see the other thread here: viewtopic.php?f=21&t=213540

SSD is very small, MacOS + Davinci and you are already at around 200G free space left. Using external SSD for data is a must. And yes, they are faster then internal ssd if using thunderbolt housing and nvme ssd.

Quite all programs are very responsive and very fast, very good performance.

The only "problem" may be 16GB RAM if used for editing in UHD, and fusion will eat ram very fast. It all depends ow what you are doing. All in all very good performance from M4 base model.

I can test on mine base model if you have any particular need.

If I'd need to choose, I'd rather go for the 512 GB SSD than more RAM.

Both Affinity Photo and Pixelmator (now owned by Apple) are really snappy, and this is only M1. I don't think I want to go back to Photoshop.

Lucius Snow wrote:

Tony359 wrote:With a base Mac Mini you need an external SSD - they're even faster than the internal one.

That's not possible.

Here is an external Thunderbolt 5 SSD that is faster than the internal 1TB SSD on an M4 Mac Mini. This included the difficult case of sustained writing that many reviewers do not test.

Tony359 wrote:
Yes, 16GB/256.

I am also a bit concerned but unless you start using heavy Fusion effects it seems to be fine. I look forward to test!

Please, update after you test

I'd be interested to know how your choices work out, Mac Mini vs that PC configuration. The thing about Apple now is that if you get 24GB Ram, it's unified memory so in theory you could use, I don't know 20GB of that as the VRAM if Resolve needed that - so that's more than the VRAM in your PC configuration.

The number of Neural Cores, doesn't correlate to Nvidia cores (for instance Google says "The RTX 3070 GPU supports 5888 CUDA cores, 184 tensor cores, 96 ROPs, and 46 raytracing acceleration cores.") Is the M4 better... let us know!

I'll be following the tests here. I just posted a similar dilemma (still under moderation RN).

My difference would be that I can have the base M4 Mac mini at education price. Which makes it very VERY appealing, and making the price difference significant for me.

Keep us informed

It really does depend on what you need it to do. If you do a lot of noise reduction , fusion effects or titles then a PC may well be better. I have posted this elsewhere but a test of a clip with noise reduction then Fusion scrolling credits with source GH6 10bit 4:2:2 file on external SSD and render to same SSD h265 resulted in the following speed with my systems in my signature. iPad less than 1fps, Studio Max 3 to 4 fps and PC with 4070Ti 13fps. So you can see the difference between 10GPU cores, 24GPU cores and NVIDIA CUDA cores as I do not think my old Threadripper 12 core is any faster than the CPU in the M1 Max. The iPad and Studio Max also have the advantage of hardware decode too so the PC starts off having to use the CPU to decode. All have hardware encode. Difference comes when editing as these issues can be dealt with. Even the PC can manage a single track just not multicam. If you only need to render small files it is not a problem. However if the project is 2 hours with bits of NR and fusion etc throughout there is a significant difference. I often now edit multicam on Studio Max , silent, and render final flattened project file on the PC. Convenient for me as the rest of the process of producing DVD, Bluray or USB drives is on the PC anyway. I now really like the combination.

I've now spent a few hours working with Resolve on my new Mac mini base.

I have to say I am impressed.
It's the size of a RPi (more or less!) but it can chew my projects totally fine - with some small gotchas.

- I normally edit my 4K timeline in FHD - I then change it back to 4K for rendering. I found "proxy resolution" to be buggy so that works better for me. In FHD the performance is very similar to my Desktop PC but on a small box where the fan can rarely be heard. General editing is even faster on the M4 than Windows. It's a bit snappier (all content is H264). If I change the timeline to 4K, then it cannot keep up, I can still play but I have dropped frames and the playback is laggy. BUT only because of that silly white frame around my "Picture in Picture". If I disable Fusion with SHIFT-D, then it's smooth again.
- Transitions are a bit choppier than my desktop. but they're choppy anyways even on my desktop, once they're cached, they're fine.
- The system is telling me that 85% of RAM is being used while rendering but there are 2-3GB of SWAP - not sure whether this would happen anyways or not.
- If you didn't tell me which system I was working on, I'd think my desktop got an upgrade
- When I previously tried with my Windows Laptop (powerful machine but only 4GB VRAM) it was crashing often, I could not render at all and dual monitor was impaired (the laptop doesn't allow the 3050 to drive the external monitor). I spent a morning between restarts, drivers, crashes. With the Mac Mini I had ZERO issues. I installed DR, connected my database, done. Not a single issue.

Rendering
Rendering is about 3 times SLOWER - I haven't fully tested yet but for a 20 minutes video (4K, 70Mbps) it took 58 minutes when my desktop should be done in about 20/25 minutes I think.
yet, it can render. I had no issues, no crashes. After working for a while on the 3-streams PIP, sometimes I see some momentary struggle but nothing horrible and my desktop does the same - actually it does that more often

This is working on an external USB4 SSD - and some content is on my NAS, via VPN, so pretty slow.

Very impressed. If bigger models were not so expensive...

So far I am also very impressed by MacOS. Windows 11 is - IMHO - getting worse and worse.

Below my timeline as a reference. Track 1 is 4K, Track 2 is also 4K on this occasion. Track 3 is FHD.

What about Video Collage instead of PiP? It can do borders too.

I tried video collage, some time ago, I can more or less adjust it to look like a frame but I cannot easily re-frame the video when needed.

I constantly have to change position/size and zoom of those PIP for many reasons - one being that my head is never in the same place on different sessions - and the "Smart Reframe" doesn't seem to work properly for me.

To be fair, if I remove the "round corner" it's much faster but I like that!

I did some tests a few weeks ago when I realised DR now has its own native white edge and activating it meant slowing down the rendering by 50%. The template I use is a bit lighter.

Tony359 wrote:I've now spent a few hours working with Resolve on my new Mac mini base.

Thank you very much for updating ! May I send you a private message?

Of course

Tony359 wrote:I've now spent a few hours working with Resolve on my new Mac mini base.

Hello,

thank you again for updating.

My 11 years old computer is doing OK with DR (I am using the free version) but starts to slow down from time to time (especially working with fusion) and I believe that it could work a bit longer but I do not want to wait until it dies.

This is my current old system:

Intel Core i7 4790 ( which is more or less equivalent to an AMD Ryzen 5 5600G)
16GB Ram (2x8GB)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
OS Windows 10

I started to look for a new computer that could handle DR in a snappier way. Such a PC would cost between $1000 and $1300 and would consist of:

Intel Core i7 14700KF
16GB Ramm (2×8GB)
RTX 3060 12GB
Samsung 500GB SSD
Power Supply + case
(I have a 2TB HDD internal hard drive)

Then a month ago I started to read and watch reviews of the base Mac Mini M4 and I thought that the $600 M4 + a 1TB external SSD could a better choice than the $1000 /1300 which is a bit expensive for me right now.

The thing is that I have no idea how the base M4 will perform compared to a more expensive new $1000 /1300 Windows PC or even how compared to my current system. I would not want to purchase the M4 and realize that it performs more or less like my present PC.

Since you have some experience working with the base M4 and been able to compare it
to your Windows system, which I believe is a bit closer to the $1000 /1300 PC than my old current system, I thought that maybe you could tell me if I should opt for the M4 or invest more and stretch and get a new $1000 /1300 Windows PC.

The kind of edits that I do, are in general around 5 or 7 minutes max and are I believe are less complex than the one you published on your post.

Thank you very much

I answered that in private - you can summarise my reply here for me

Tony359 wrote:I answered that in private - you can summarise my reply here for me

Done!

Tony359 wrote:if you are happy with an 11yo computer, the M4 would probably be a massive upgrade.

A quick check suggests that the base M4 is 70% faster than the 4790 - but then the whole architecture is massively faster. The 1050Ti is a base card from many years ago with 4GB of VRAM which is very little for Resolve.

I don't think you need a gen 14 intel to replace your laptop - if you do, please make sure you get rid of mechanical HDDs and invest in 32GB of RAM.

But if the 4790 and a 1050Ti can handle your timeline, then an M4 base will fly.

Does your current laptop have an SSD? If not, replacing the HDD with an SSD is a simple process (for a skilled person) and will speed up your system A LOT!

In short: if your timeline works with your system, I wouldn't rush in buying a new one but if you want to upgrade, the M4 will work perfectly fine.
An Intel gen 14 is a more powerful system but - again - if your 4790 can handle your project now, you probably don't need such a powerful machine!

I hope this helps!

If your projects are under 10 minutes and not ridiculously complex the M4 mini plus 1 TB external SSD will be a brilliant choice.

I am using the old M2 with only 8 GB RAM and that one flies so the M4 with a much faster processor and twice the RAM should be perfect.

INBRO-VIDEO wrote:If your projects are under 10 minutes and not ridiculously complex the M4 mini plus 1 TB external SSD will be a brilliant choice.

Thanks!

This two minute video should give you an idea of how slick your M4 would be and remember that this was made on my M2 with a much lower spec and I was screen recording at the same time.

My two cents: I have a custom Windows 10 PC that I built from scratch that I use for heaving lifting (feature films and serious client work), but I also have a base model M2 MacBook Air that also runs DaVinci just fine. I can cut casual client work on it, and even low end short films. I think you'd be fine either way. If portability was a requirement, I'd get a MacBook over a Windows one. If you're just going to leave it on your desk, get a Windows PC that you could upgrade over time.

Exactly! Mac for mobility, PC for better power for the buck.
Downside can be configuration difficulties. And Windows

I still notice my Mac Mini to be snappier than my Windows PC when editing. It'a almost as having Proxies on Windows. I'm using the keyboard to edit and I am probably faster than the average user - surely slower than many others of course - so this is probably not many would notice.

If adding 8GB of RAM wouldn't cost an arm and a leg, Windows would be in the past.

(fair enough my PC is now a bit old...)

Tony359 wrote:I still notice my Mac Mini to be snappier than my Windows PC when editing
(fair enough my PC is now a bit old...)

Did you install RD on an external SSD drive and use it to edit?

I am actually reading/watching reviews and recommendations regarding an external SSD drives for the Mac Mini. Samsung T7? Samsung T9? A SSD drive in enclosure? I have no idea about the difference it will make for a usage.

Some say a Samsung T7 may be fast enough but others say it is two slow. Any recommendation?

By the way today I tested my Windows PC C Drive (a 250 SSD) where my programs are installed and got this result:

Tony359 wrote:Why you say it's not possible?

I mean that an external drive (Thunderbolt / USB4 / Whatever) won't give you better performances than the same drive as internal plugged on its native interface.

We use T5, T7 and a fast NVMe Thunderbolt drive.
For BRAW or H.265 in 10 bit the differences are negligible, but for ArriRAW I need the NVMe.

Uli Plank wrote:We use T5, T7 and a fast NVMe Thunderbolt drive.
For BRAW or H.265 in 10 bit the differences are negligible, but for ArriRAW I need the NVMe.

Thanks!

For multicam distribution to more than should be helpful.

Lucius Snow wrote:

Tony359 wrote:Why you say it's not possible?

I mean that an external drive (Thunderbolt / USB4 / Whatever) won't give you better performances than the same drive as internal plugged on its native interface.

The Mac Mini cannot take anything but the Apple internal drive so testing the same external SSD inside the Mac Mini is not an option. Your comment was not applicable.

Jacques Wegier wrote:

Tony359 wrote:I still notice my Mac Mini to be snappier than my Windows PC when editing
(fair enough my PC is now a bit old...)

Did you install RD on an external SSD drive and use it to edit?

Your drive is a SATA SSD, max speed of SATA is 500MB/s. SATA is the slowest available. Despite what people might say, a SATA drive is plenty for video - my 4K footage is 60Mbps which is 7.5MB/s. As you can see, a 500MB/s SATA drive has plenty of bandwidth. All my footage was on a SATA SSD until a few weeks ago.

Your projects seem to be pretty simple - no disrespect here - so I don't think you need to overspend on a system. When it comes to external SSD, I went for a WD Black on a USB4 enclosure - the Mac Mini can do 40Gbps, my PC 10Gbps - which is much better than any SATA can do.

A fast SSD can make your life easier when it comes to move files around - but when it comes to editing, unless you're using some super-high quality uncompressed formats in silly resolutions, it won't change much.

Maybe make sure you're getting an SSD which has a high TBW - Total Bytes Written. Some SSDs have a low value. For normal use, you wouldn't normally write a huge amount of data on it but when it comes to video editing, you're constantly writing and deleting assets.

In short:
- Fast USB port always helps. Mac Mini has Thunderbolt 4, a PC depends. Faster won't hurt. But for video editing anything works.

No, Resolve is on the internal SSD of the Mac Mini.

Samsung T7 is 10Gbps (aka 1000MB/s) - once again, the SSD I was using until not long ago is 5Gbit/s (aka SATA, 500MB/s). I know, confusing

Tony359 wrote: Your projects seem to be pretty simple - no disrespect here

No offense taken My 'projects' are indeed pretty simple

Jacques Wegier wrote:No offense taken My 'projects' are indeed pretty simple

If that's the case the basic M4 mini will be more than enough. Plus an external SSD of course.

There's always the option to put your system on an external SSD and boot from there.
Even a NVMe in a Thunderbolt 4 drive with 4 TB is far cheaper than Apple's offers and plenty fast. The only downside seems to be that you can't use Apple Pay or Apple 'Intelligence' – if you care.

I went for this (I am not paid for this!)

https://qwiizlab.net/products/es40ur

It's SILENT, it has no fan. I then installed a WD Black - the Crucial P3 I saw online as "favourite" has a very low TBW so it didn't feel appropriate but there are cheaper models available.

So far it's been working well and I don't have any obnoxious fan noise on my desk.

And as mentioned, it's faster than the internal 256GB SSD - but slower than the 512GB model apparently. Still, you won't notice the difference. Those speeds are "nice to have" but unless you transfer many TB of data every day, it won't change your life

That's what I have done. For the last year I ran my M2 mini off a cheap 1 TB SATA SSD connected by USB 3.0.

Subjectively it was just as fast as the internal in spite of the 360 MB/s write speed and objectively less than 4% slower with rendering or exporting.

A month ago I started using a Thunderbolt NVMe which was over twice the cost. It's six times faster but the difference during editing is not noticeable and the possible 4% saving in export times is not really worth the extra expense.

Second that, don't bee too concerned about storage speed (as long as it's not a HDD).
I'm using the Acasis enclosure, which is also silent. The nice thing: it's dual standard, USB and Thunderbolt, with automatic recognition.

SSDs are massively faster than mechanical HDDs because of access time. A mechanical HDD has to wait for the data to spin under the heads and wait for mechanical movements of the heads as well. That is milliseconds of wait for every block of data being read.

You don't have that with an SSD, the data is almost instantly accessible. When the OS needs to access small blocks of data all over the place, which is what often happens, an SSD is many order of magnitude faster than an SSD.

With video editing you're effectively reading sequentially - still, my videos have 60Mbps top of bitrate. I see my SSD reading 10/20MB/s maximum (all my streams together) so even the slowest SSD will do.

I ended up with a gen4 fast SSD and a fast-ish enclosure for "future proofing". But I could have purchased the cheapest external SSD and I wouldn't notice the difference!

Tony359 wrote:

Lucius Snow wrote:

Tony359 wrote:Why you say it's not possible?

I mean that an external drive (Thunderbolt / USB4 / Whatever) won't give you better performances than the same drive as internal plugged on its native interface.

The Mac Mini cannot take anything but the Apple internal drive

Really? What a shame... Another reason why I'd never buy Apple computers.

Nobody knows yet. There might be third-parties developing one. OWC, for example?
At least, they are not soldered in any more.
Anyway, who cares? You can claim that the SSD is your computer and the Mac mini is just a dongle