This is because I am running Windows 10.
My hardware doesn't support windows 10 It is an Intel i7-3770K, purchased around 2014 or so.
I have at least 4 options --
It is worth taking a moment to grind an axe here. Why won't Adobe allow their software to run on Windows 10. Clearly this is a policy decision, not a technical limitation. And in the same vein, why won't Microsoft let me run Windows 11 on my existing hardware. I am running Linux on the same processor, and it runs very well (much better than Windows on the same hardware).
The second option is not recommended (by Microsoft naturally). My objection is that a supported version of Windows does not run well at all, and some hacked version will drag me up to my neck is weird Windows issues I would rather have nothing to do with.
If I was a Windows geek, I would be both capable and willing to tackle a workaround. Or I might understand that it is a bad road to go down and know better than to travel it.
I can move my "abandoned" DDR4 memory to my linux machine, which is some kind of benefit. Next the AMD versus Intel question arises. Here are some prices:
AMD Ryzen 7800X3D $330 (recommended to gaming) AMD Ryzen 9 9950X $550 (recommended for power user) ASUS ROG Strix B650 A motherboard $160 Asroc or Gigabyte X870E motherboard $270 32G of DDR5 ram $400 cpu cooler $100The price of RAM has gone up since 2024 apparently.
All told we are looking at $1000 -- if I don't need a new power supply
One benefit of this route is the standardization of M.2 SSD connectors. Most boards will accept 4, and this offers a flexibility the Mac route does not.
A question arises, how long will Apple support a Mac Mini? They guarantee 5 years of major OS upgrades, and you usually get 5-7 years. You then get 2-3 years of security patches. This gives weight to the idea of getting a current model.
So, you will get 7-8 years from the release date. And it will continue to run after that. Note that I am complaining about Microsoft not supporting my 10+ year old hardware in my discussion above.
I also would like to use my existing HDMI monitor. I read that the latest (M6) mac mini will support virtually any modern HDMI monitor. There is an HDMI port, but you can also use a thunderbolt port along with a USB-C to HDMI adapter for a second monitor or to get faster refresh rates. There are also thunderbolt to display port cables.
The monitor I want to use is a Dell U2413 (1920x1200), which my searches tell me will be easily supported. There are problems reported using this monitor with M1 based mac minis.
Google AI tells me that I won't have a problem and that the HDMI cable will also carry the audio to the monitor's speakers.M4 is a 10 core chip. It has 4 "super" cores, 6 performance cores. It has a 10 core GPU
It is not clear to me whether the new M6 chip with more cores, but fewer super cores performs better or if it is just a budget option. The claim is that it performs up to 40 percent faster There are also variants like the M4 Pro to consider.
M6 is a 12 core chip. It has 2 "super" cores, 4 "performance" cores and 6 "efficiency" cores It has a 12 core GPU Comparing the M6 to the M5 Pro underscores the fact that mere core count is only part of the story. The M6 will actually have a slight edge when running only a single core. But the M5 Pro has much higher memory bandwidth (300 vs 170 Gb/s) and will be far better when an application uses multiple cores. Oddly enough, Apple does not disclose clock rates for the M6 chips. I read that the base clock for a M5 Pro is 3.05, but it can "boost" up to 4.61 Ghz. The M6 uses the new TSMC 2 nm process and the core has a new design.
M5-Pro is 15 or 18 cores. The 15 core M5-Pro has 5 "super" and 10 "performance". The 18 core M5-Pro has 6 "super" and 12 "performance". It has a 16 or 20 core GPU.
Note that Apple changed names as of the M5 and M6 series, as follows:
new Super = old Performance new Performance = old Efficiency new Efficiency = entirely new super low powerSo, it is almost more honest to call the M6 a 6 core chip and the M5 a 15 or 18 core chip. Talking in that way makes the M5 look a lot more interesting.
How does that 20 GPU count for the M5 Pro compare to an Nvidia GPU. A direct comparison is difficult and perhaps misleading. Each apple GPU core has 128 ALU and is more akin to an Nvidia SM than it is to a CUDA. A reasonable thing to do is multiply by 128, so a 20 core apple GPU is like a 2560 CUDA Nvidia unit.
Also Apple uses unified memory, which means the CPU clusters and the GPU use the same memory. The Nvidia uses dedicated video RAM which gives higher performance.
Two USB-C (usb 3.2 gen 2 -- up to 10 Gb/s) One 3.5mm headphone jackBack:
Three Thunderbolt 5 ports (up to 12Gb/s) One HDMI port One Ethernet port (2.5 G -- 10G optional)Inside:
Bluetooth WiFi 7 (802.11be)
Thunderbolt 5 is the hot new thing. A rating of 128Gb/s is given, but you will only see this on certain video displays. You will generally expect 80 Gb/s. This is better than the 40 Gb/s for USB 4 over USB-C
I see a 2T external SSD that claims Thunderbolt 5 selling for $400. A 4T device is $800 to $1000. Memory prices are currently wildly out of control.
I see at 5T Western Digital external drive (USB 3.1) selling for $300. This transfers data at 2.5 Mbytes/second
M6, 16G ram, 256G ssd $899 (base unit) M6, 32g ram, 1T ssd $1499 M5 pro, 24G ram, 512G ssd $1699 (base unit) M5 pro, 48G ram, 1T ssd $2589 (with edu discount)For the M6, an extra 16G adds $200, and bumping 256G to 1T for the SSD adds $400
For the M5, memory is 24, 48, or 64G and the jump from 24 to 48 costs $540. You get either a 512 or 1T ssd and the jump costs $270
I may drop the price by $200 via an educational discount --
Apple uses a thing called UNiDAYS to confirm eligibility. I just need to be staff at a institute of "higher education".