My M1 MB Air has been serving me very well since 2020.

But now i am using Waves IDX and Equator plugins a lot, the M1 Air for the first time is not coping.

There are work arounds like freezing tracks, bouncing etc, but i am under time pressure with getting projects done fast and i need to work quickly.

M4 PRO single core geekbench score is 3800 on average and the M4 is around 3700 on average at geekbench. So maybe for my application there won't be that much difference?

If money wasn't a concern i would get a M4 pro computer no doubt,
how is the base M4 computers coping with hungry plugins vs M1 base generation?
Thanks for any help.

I've just been in the same position as you.

Spent hours and hours researching and couldn't really get a definitive answer as to whether I could get by with the M4 chip instead of the M4pro.
Lots of talk about the number of ecores and pcores etc etc.


In the end I just completely maxed my budget and went for the base 12core Pro with maximum ram (48gb in my case).

My main concern would be in 3 years time would I regret having saved a few hundred pounds with the base M4 and figured that might be the case

Cool, looks like you have a computer for many years to come.

Though the latest gen of plugins like Waves IDX and Equator are very hungry, probably in 2 to 3 years there will be even more hungry plugins.
The plugin manufactures definitely have a hand in computer sales as they constantly create powerful tools for us to use.
I could still produce great work without IDX and Equator, but i am working to deadlines non stop at the moment, and these 2 plugins are amazing at making mixes so clear with little effort.

I’d pay the extra and have as many performance cores as you can afford.

forget "geekbench" or any other general-purpose benchmark. forget goofball youtube "daw tests" that run 200 of the same track (which tell you nothing of pratical value). you need to know how your exact workloads will perform. period. end of story.

please list a complete list of tracks and plugins (including groups and master bus) of a typical project. then we can gauge what machine resources you will need.

It is important to know how your DAW utilizes the P/E cores. That's crucial purchase info. For an Ableton user like myself, the P core count is important so as much as I'd love a new M4 Air, the MB Pro with 10 P cores will be my next purchase.

Geekbench sucks. The Pro has twice as many performance cores. It is substantially faster for multi-core workloads.

And if you get the same amount of RAM the Pro CPU only costs $200 more.

Well, geekbench has a multi-core test as well as a GPU test. Comparing single core speeds, the two CPUs will be similar, of course.

Thanks for your replies.
When i upgrade it will be either a M4 Pro or Max.

No point upgrading by 40%-50%.

The M4 Pro will be 2-3 times more powerful than the M1 air i have.

https://www.provideocoalition.com/th...on-march-2025/

this is a great article for video and it pretty much applies to DAWs as well

Really? How so? Real time video?

I think the Mac selections are pretty spot on for both audio or video, I actually edit video for my day job and muk around with music at night :

. I “I want a laptop as my sole system.”
MacBook Pro 16-inch @ $4,199
• M4 Max with 16 cores
• 64GB RAM
• 1TB SSD
• Excellent screen (XDR)
• Three Thunderbolt ports
• (Cheaper by $300 as a 14″)

The biggest change from the prior article is the M4 Max vs. the M3 Max.

“I want the cheapest laptop – but I need it as functional as possible.”
MacBook Air 13-inch @ $1,599
• M4 Stock 10 cores
• 24GB RAM
• 1TB SSD

“I want a solid desktop system.”
MacStudio M4 Max @ $2,899
• M4 Max 14 Cores
• 64GB RAM
• 1TB SSD
• Four Thunderbolt 5 ports

This would be a great everyday system for most people.

“I want the cheapest desktop – but it needs to be functional.”
MacMini M4 (not Pro) @ $1,399
• M4 Stock 10-Core
• 32GB RAM
• 1TB SSD
• Three Thunderbolt Ports

Seriously, don’t buy the bottom stock M4 MacMini with its RAM or SSD. See about the CPU levels as the M4 Pro is more than “just one step up” below.

“I want a killer desktop, but skip Apple’s crazy tier.”
MacStudio @ $5,599
• M3 Ultra, 28-core
• 256GB RAM
• 1TB SSD
• SIX Thunderbolt ports

Brilliant overview. Thanks.

I got the M1 Max MBP 3.5(ish) years ago, mainly because I thought I was going to jump into more editing projects. Well, I pivoted to other endeavors and so the M1 Max has been a bit overkill for a music machine, but total overkill for an all other functions travel laptop.
So I ordered the M4 MacBook Air with 24GB RAM and was hoping that will at least handle the musical tasks my M1 Max handled and be a better all around and lighter laptop.
Anyone have any insight on how well the new M4 Airs are handling audio versus the older M1s?

Since you already ordered it, you’ll soon tell us

But per core it’s a lot faster than M1.

This benchmark page will give you an indication (no M4 air but the base M4 mini should be pretty similar) - https://music-prod.com/music-product...ro-benchmarks/

This guy proper nerds out on the comparisons (again with Mac Mini M4) and it looks like you should get slightly better performance than an M1 Pro in a lot of cases! https://youtu.be/sUcIO18W3oE?si=QIwgEXKKChQ27m-F

I'm sure it'll be great (my M1 Air has handled some massive projects)
but it's worth noting that the base 12c M4 Pro chip brings a massive performance jump as it basically doubles the number of performance cores. If you're a heavy user that's a big leap for about an extra £4-500 at current street prices (£1299 for Air M4 24gb, £1799 for 12c M4 Pro 24gb). I've just moved from an Air M1 to a 14" M4 Pro and the performance increase is pretty crazy and the relative size difference isn't really that noticeable in use. You also get the nicer screen, more ports etc etc.

Ha! I know, right? I figured if it isn't working at some point I'll grab an M4 Pro mini.

Thanks for the breakdown. Yeah, portability is really the thing for me as I am primarily a writer of words and while I love my little 13" MBP for the ease of carrying around, the little screen isn't really working for me for long term use. 16" is kinda the sweet spot, so the 15.whatever" is fine. But the weight is noticeable between the 16" pro and 13" pro when you're constantly on the move with it. I did consider the 14" pro, but the 15" air is going to be even more portable. I'm also incredibly tall and small laptops work well for my normal sized wife, but it gets noticeably cramped for me. Being able to have 2 programs open and easily clickable is the bare minimum for me and I'm afraid of going too small.
Music is, honestly, a hobby for me these days; I make so little money from it. I just need a system that works for what I do for myself. If it's a little limited and frustrating to use an air over a pro, I'll deal with it. But it seems like it will be okay.
I was eyeing a tricked out mini M4 pro, but then I'll end up keeping the M1 Max for traveling around and I'm back to my first issue all over again.
Thanks!

I'm sure you'll be absolutely fine with the Air! My M1 Air with just 8gb has been a beast tbh... I've done loads of 200+ channel projects with loads of plugs, big master chains etc. Might have to freeze some tracks towards the end but they're amazingly capable machines.

Impressive! Thanks, I feel a bit better about the purchase now.... It'll be here next week and I have a bunch of mixes to push out by the end of April, so I'll f around and find out!

I can't help with direct comparisons (sorry) but the M1 Air was an absolute godsend for me for the exact reasons you said you'd like one. And I'm sure the M4 smokes the M1.

I could already do some pretty hefty sessions with it (have just bought a M4 Mini Pro for the studio) but the portability is just ridiculous. I often have to double-check my bag just to make sure it's there as it's so light.

Best laptop I've ever had, hands down!

R.

IMHO, audio people often overestimate their computing needs, of course YMMV for your own workflow. It’s fine to want a more beefier system but audio only doesn’t really need the top level system for most scenarios….even the lower end current Apple systems are going to be pretty good for a lot of audio people….and if you know you need more, there’s that too. I scored a couple films with a base model 2010 Mac Pro, and done a lot of mixing on, which is far less capable than anything Apple sells today. Had a base M2 air for a few weeks (inherited it) and it was actually pretty nice…but wanted new shiny / something a little bit more, so i took it in to Best Buy and traded it in on a m4 air 16gb / 512gb configuration. I could sit there and feature creep until i talk myself into a $3000 system if I want, but this system is pretty incredible for my own use.

Feature creep is a great phrase.

It definitely informed my latest purchase.

Like you my professional audio work is being done on a machine that's 15 years old.
If it wasn't for some small warning signs that things might beginning to fail, I wouldn't have given any thought to a new machine.

That deadly cycle of "but...what if...but...I want it to be useful for as long as possible..." Definitely contributes to some over spec-ing and I'd say that Apple offer the model variants they do to play into precisely this.

Exactly, but some novice producers might not know what "need more" means.

I find it more common that "audio people" lack the deeper knowledge about what processes they need to achieve what they want under the circumstances they'd prefer and most importantly what those needs actually mean for the particular tools they choose to use.

What I also don't get is why anyone would purport to know what quality and responsiveness other people need, just because the purporter started out with cassette portas or whatever.

There are number of reasonable needs that those that think they are in the know think are unreasonable. Why would running the most demanding software instruments in high quality mode on dozens of tracks, with the shortest audio buffer, only AA plug-ins and not expect a single audio dropout be unreasonable? What does it matter if other people make do with less than what you want? You're the producer. You decide what you need. Not anyone else.

Everything needs to start with actually analysing what one wants to do, then find out what that means for what gear that can do it. If one doesn't want go deep into this, getting more than you need works.

Grabbed the MB Air M4 15" with the 24GB RAM and so far, so great!
I am in the middle of mixing, which means I have bounced out all of the synth and orchestral tracks, so I'm not taxing the machine with a lot of VSTi and samples, but it isn't having any issues with the heavier plugin count and it renders out way faster than the MBP M1 Max does.
When I'm back to composing and recording, I'll really get to see what this little machine can do.
So far extremely happy with how light it is and once it's in my bag I barely notice it.

Single core vs multicore, Single thread vs multithread processing...
Audio processing is mostly done on a single core? not sure. If so then a more powerful processor does not mean lots more audio processing power.

I too wonder if I should upgrade from my intel mac to a M2 M3 or M4, and which one then..the Max, the Pro? The regular mac or the studio version?

Why a pro? Why not a max mini Studio? I find it all puzzling.

For video yes, but for audio those more cores get unused.. thats what I hear on YT. I wonder if thats actually true?
10 vs 28 cores...

But jeez, 6K for any computer is too rich for my blood

While there is a price overlap between the highest mini and the lowest Studio, there isn't an upgrade path with the lowest studio and I don't need to drop more than $2K on a music machine, so I'll take the slightly cheaper mini in a smaller footprint at that point.
I don't run a studio or do heavy video work so I don't really feel the need to go higher. So far the M4 MB Air seems to be fine for what I need.

No. it's not. Each DAW track can only be handled in one thread at a time, a thread runs on one core at a time, and multiple threads can run in parallel on multiple cores.

Track counts until audio dropouts prove this is so and is beneficial. More cores = more tracks. This is not to say multiple threads aren't allocated to the same core, because they are, but it would be ridiculous to not use available CPU power when needed.

It is not and you're watching the wrong channels. Barring some odd DAW the principles are what I wrote above.

Some DAWs work a little differently with core distribution, and the OS largely decides the details, but the alternative to multicores would be running all the tracks sequentially on a single core then? Good luck with that on a 32-128 samples audio buffer.