[trynewideas]

That's kind of a problem, too.

A top-spec M2 Pro Mini on CPU and RAM (12-core CPU, 19-core GPU, 32GB unified RAM) is $1,999.

A bottom-spec M1 Max Mac Studio (10-core CPU, 24-core GPU, 32GB unified RAM) is $1,999.

Since the low-end Studio has 10Gb Ethernet and four Thunderbolt ports at the same price, and neither has upgradable RAM, there's no reason to buy the high-end Mini.

[aclatuts]

The mac mini is less than half the size which may be important in some cases.

[coder543]

> and four Thunderbolt ports

The Mac mini with M2 Pro includes four Thunderbolt ports too, just FYI.

[trynewideas]

I know — the only thing a new M2 mini might've theoretically brought is going all-in on Thunderbolt ports vs. the Studio, even at the cost of the HDMI or built-in LAN ports, but it doesn't do that either.

Same RAM, same performance, slower built-in LAN, less storage expansion, same price. Is the smaller form factor really worth it? If not, why would anyone who'd consider that spec not get a Studio (or wait for an M2 Studio bump to get a M2 Max)?

[coder543]

For $100, you can opt to have 10Gb ethernet as well, so it's not really slower LAN. Personally, I think choosing the higher end M2 Pro doesn't make the comparison more fair than the lower end M2 Pro, so you can get 10GbE and "save" $200 (compared to the Mac Studio) by choosing the base M2 Pro Mac mini for the comparison and including 10GbE.

But, I agree. I don't understand the purpose of the M2 Pro Mac mini very well.

Apple is charging way too much for the M2 Pro upgrade, which makes it a confusing option. Is the fully enabled M2 Pro chip really worth $600 more than the base M2 chip by itself? That's the cost of an entire base Mac mini! I don't understand why Apple is charging this much. I think $200 for the base M2 Pro chip and $400 for the fully enabled variant would have been a more sensible price structure. Still a bit expensive, but less confusing.