• expired

Apple Mac Mini M1 - 8GB/256GB - $999 (RRP $1099) @ Umart (-5% OW Price Beat = $949.05)

1630

For anyone that's been thinking about getting the base Mac Mini M1 that's just been released.

JB Hifi had a cheaper ($10) discounted price over the weekend, but you couldn't price beat it as OW dropped their price to match. They haven't yet price dropped for this retailer and they will price beat it. Stock currently available in NSW.

Umart: $999 - 5% Officeworks price beat = $949.05 delivered/collect.

I think this price beat price may be the lowest I've seen for this model (roughly 15% off Apple store) and Mac Mini's aren't eligible for Unidays offer.

Related Stores

Umart
Umart

closed Comments

  •  

    how much is shipping? - wont let me calculate unless i login

    •  

      13$ to ACT/2600, 14$ to Perth/6000

    • +3 votes

      $10.00 NSW

      Also important to note that the new M1 chips equipped SKU's don't have SODIMM slots, choose carefully because there's no memory upgrades down the line.

      • +7 votes

        i know - apple have horrible marketing techniques - they know we really want 16g ram - but they make it a BTO that never goes on sale!

        • +1 vote

          and charging through the nose

          • +29 votes

            @Caped Baldy: I thought they were going wireless charging? Through the nose seems like a step in the wrong direction to me.

          • +9 votes

            @ialam99: You obviously didn't buy an M1 model, which has everything (RAM included) integrated into a SOC.

            The M1 uses 4266 MT/s LPDDR4X SDRAM[9] in a unified memory configuration shared by all the components of the processor. The SoC and RAM chips are mounted together in a system-in-a-package design. 8 GB and 16 GB configurations are available.

  •  

    This may be the first Apple product I've ever been remotely interested in. How does the M1 stack up against say, a Ryzen 4700u?

    • +3 votes

      arm64 vs x86, both cpu are have different instruction sets. Comparison wise, you'll need to look at real word usage in terms of what you'll need it for (video editing, Photoshop, browsing, email etc).

      Personally i feel arm computing will be the future, however the software side of arm computing hasn't caught up.

      edit: current benchmarks are in favour of m1

      • +2 votes

        IMHO x86 is already dying. Apple always does things and every other company then follows. Examples: USB-C macbook, no headphone ports, etc. Microsoft has been trying to make a competitive arm chip, but they aren't doing great. I only found out about the surface pro x (2) after watching a ltt video and seeing it get beaten in performance by a windows vm on a m1

        • +7 votes

          I think you need to do some reading up on x86 before thinking it's a dying architecture. The same thing was said 20 years ago when PowerPC RISC based CPUs came out. x86 just adapted due AMD and Intel pushing each other to innovate. x86 also covers more than just laptops/desktops, and includes server, console and embedded architectures, where they have dominant market share.

          I also think you need to do some reading up on USB Type-C. It wasn't invented by Apple. It was developed by multiple companies as part of the USB 3.0 promoter group. Apple is a member of this group, but so is Intel, AMD, Google, Microsoft, Samsung and many more.

          • +1 vote

            @shellshocked:

            The same thing was said 20 years ago when PowerPC RISC based CPUs came out.

            Yeah agreed, though I'd argue that where we're at now in terms of consumer computing is vastly different from 20 years ago. We've all got multiple computing platforms in our households (one in our pocket on our phone; one in our laptop; one on our desktop…games console…TV…the list goes on). Broadly-speaking, consumers don't care what the architecture platform is, so long as it's got the apps they need. This is what Apple is banking on.

        • +2 votes

          USB-C is a mess to be honest. The digital AV dongle, you have cheap ones which does 4K/30; most 4K/60Hz ones not HDR ready. Then, you have dodgy USB-C cables with incorrect PD coding. The mess with 29W chargers (which isn't proper standard). The downgrade of 1m USB-C to lightning cable (used to support USB 3.0, now, cost cutting to USB 2.0).

          The progressive nature of USB-C and the PD is really annoying, especially to Apple users adopting to USB-C early. The 29W charger, the 18W charger, the first gen of 61W and 87W chargers. The first version of USB-C digital AV dongle. You pretty much want all the revised versions or the replacement models.

          M1, fundamentally, is cost cutting from Apple and a huge Intel screw up which is still ongoing. Further port reduction from 4 USB-C ports to 2 for Macbooks.

          If Apple really want to be forward thinking, then it should include WiFi 6E, Bluetooth 5.2 with M1.

        • +1 vote

          Sorry, but all of what you've written here is just uninformed and misleading.

          IMHO x86 is already dying.

          This is a complete crock of BS.

          The main advantage of the M1 vs. the Intel chips they're replacing isn't even really x86 (or, more correctly, AMD64) vs ARM64, but rather, the change in philosophy away from having larger instruction sets (i.e. doing things "in software" as it's commonly referred to) vs. offloading common and demanding tasks to dedicated hardware (i.e. ASICs or doing things "in hardware").

          An example of this is the commonly cited benchmarks showing the M1 capable of complex 4K editing in Final Cut. This is probably mostly due to the integrated integrated signal processor (ISP) which is able to offload a lot of the video rendering from the CPU and perform those common tasks much more efficiently.

          This design philosophy will no doubt translate across to Intel and AMD chips and we'll see huge performance gains. Most people who use the M1 as some demonstration of the superiority of ARM is seriously misled. Also anyone who thinks that Apple moving their Mac silicon to ARM has any impact on ARM64 vs. x86-64 market share is seriously misinformed. Macs account for a miniscule (probably almost negligible) proportion of CPUs being produced. ARM has already outstripped x86-64 in market share for quite some time already anyway due to smartphones, tablets, integrated CPUs in consumer electronics…etc.

      • -1 vote

        Current benchmarks are not in favour of M1. If you need to do real work Ryzen is a lot more powerful.

    • +1 vote

      well, the M1 runs Mac-OS, the ryzen doesn't.

      You wouldn't but this to run windows, if you wanted a small footprint platform to run windows buy a NUC, and add ram and storage as you like.

      • +2 votes

        I bet it won't be long until an easy way to run windows on an emulated VM comes along very soon. It's like running Doom on a calculator, it's only a matter of time before someone does it because we all want to see it.

        •  

          ARM Windows demos running as a VM are already showing on Youtube from early builds you can download and test. Microsoft has lost its “us vs them” stupidity after Steve Balmer left so as suggested only a matter of time before a supported version is available from MS

        •  

          It's like running Doom on a calculator

          Lolwut? Your entire post shows you have no understanding of virtualisation vs. emulation vs. porting.

          Doom on a calculator is a native port, not virtualisation or emulation.

          •  

            @p1 ama: The x86 environment needs to be emulated for the virtualisation to even take place. There is no viable version of Windows for ARM yet.