I am doing exactly that. I ordered the CPU bumped mid model with 4GB RAM and 1 TB drive. I ordered a 240 GB Extreme Pro SSD , data double kit (so I'll have both SSD and HDD installed), and 16 GB RAM from OWC. I have those already (doubler kit arrives today). The Mini will come next week.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Introduces New Mac Mini With Faster Processors and Quad-Core Option
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I am doing exactly that. I ordered the CPU bumped mid model with 4GB RAM and 1 TB drive. I ordered a 240 GB Extreme Pro SSD , data double kit (so I'll have both SSD and HDD installed), and 16 GB RAM from OWC. I have those already (doubler kit arrives today). The Mini will come next week.
Even with apps that aren't multithreaded (i.e. optimized for multiple cores) the dual-core i5 CPU is virtually never better than the quad-core i7. If your applications use less than four cores, the quad-core i7 "overclocks" to run at a higher clock speed. In effect, the quad-core i7 should be at least as fast as a comparable dual-core i5. On the other hand, quad-core
Intel calls this "Turbo Boost".
Broadly speaking, the quad-core is going to be at least as fast in applications that only use one or two cores, while being significantly faster in applications that are multithreaded. On the other hand, quad-core i7 aren't necessarily faster than comparable (same generation, similarly clocked) dual-core i5 in non-multithreaded applications, as evidenced by benchmarks comparing MacBook Pro 13" and 15".
So should i get an i5 or i7? Note that I'll probaly use lots of Photoshop and programming.
I am by no means familiar with Photoshop but from what I read and know, it has increasingly multithreaded and will surely be going further in this direction. "Programming" is really a broad term. Compiling should benefit from a quad-core machine.
Personally, I'd definitely go with the quad-core i7.
If doing "lots of Photoshop" isn't a good reason to opt for the higher Mac mini, I don't know what is..?
Keep in mind, though, that the memory upgrade is probably a better upgrade than the CPU (as might even be getting an SSD). You can also do the memory upgrade yourself.
Adobe has the HD P4000 as being mercury engine capable, but what's confusing is that the P4000 is the xenon workstation version whereas the plain 4000 is its mobile counterpart.... question is, is the HD 4000 mercury engine capable as well?
I've been looking to upgrade from my 2007 macbook C2D 2ghz with its intel 950 that not open gl capable so I can't take advantage of some of PS CS5's viewing options like rotation.
I was hoping to grab a new mini but now I don't know. I also use Logic 9 and Ableton Live, so unless I'm going to see some sort of huge performance boost, I guess I'll wait it out.
However, I don't do games so that is of no concern... I do need it to handle graphics for PS, DAW's and Mainstage though
I've been looking to upgrade from my 2007 macbook C2D 2ghz with its intel 950 that not open gl capable so I can't take advantage of some of PS CS5's viewing options like rotation.
I was hoping to grab a new mini but now I don't know. I also use Logic 9 and Ableton Live, so unless I'm going to see some sort of huge performance boost, I guess I'll wait it out.
However, I don't do games so that is of no concern... I do need it to handle graphics for PS, DAW's and Mainstage though
Last edited:
Thunderbolt
Could it be that they're just relying on TB technology for users needing a better graphics option? I guess I don't see the negative side here. I'm am pleased with the faster processing, the (slightly) less expensive SSD option than previous minis (I might be remembering incorrectly), and USB3.
I plan to only use the mini for recording audio with Pro Tools, though. So, these improvements are A+ in my book! I get to keep the FW for the recording interface and use USB3 for recording to external HD (or routing through FW as previously handled... or utilize TB if/when those drives come down in price).
If I really wanted to use the mini for gaming/graphics intense whatnot...etc., I'd just wait for an affordable TB option to come about.
I don't see what all the fuss is about, honestly.
Cheers,
Wren
Could it be that they're just relying on TB technology for users needing a better graphics option? I guess I don't see the negative side here. I'm am pleased with the faster processing, the (slightly) less expensive SSD option than previous minis (I might be remembering incorrectly), and USB3.
I plan to only use the mini for recording audio with Pro Tools, though. So, these improvements are A+ in my book! I get to keep the FW for the recording interface and use USB3 for recording to external HD (or routing through FW as previously handled... or utilize TB if/when those drives come down in price).
If I really wanted to use the mini for gaming/graphics intense whatnot...etc., I'd just wait for an affordable TB option to come about.
I don't see what all the fuss is about, honestly.
Cheers,
Wren
No idea, but I'd be willing to bet they'll be around soon enough if not already. I'd still wait for an appropriate price either way. I have a PC for games... The mini, in my opinion, is perfect for a small recording studio as is. Upgradeable in the not too distant future, graphically speaking.
Last edited:
There is hope yet for Mini fans...
Intel will reportedly introduce its next-generation "Haswell" (4th generation Core) architecture in April. "Haswell" is expected to improve performance per MHz by about 10%, enable higher MHz designs that consume less power, and double the performance of Intel's current integrated HD4000 GPU. The Haswell's GPU also adds support for OpenCL 1.2 and OpenGL 4.0 like the latest nVidia and ATI solutions. Extremetech and Anandtech have good articles below.
More information:
http://m.extremetech.com/extremetec...reat-to-nvidia-amd,50534c2e94f4be7169236e79/1
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6355/intels-haswell-architecture
[doublepost=1477916134][/doublepost]Um, updated in July 2011, so it has been 460 days since last update? Seems a tad math-challenged? More like 1,900 + days (rough calc in my head)...![]()
Apple updated its Mac mini line of desktop computers at its media event today.
The updated Mac mini models have new processors, including quad-core chips on the high end, as well as new build-to-order RAM options of up to 16 GB. Pricing remains the same as the prior generation Mac Mini models, starting at $599. There are two standard configuration and a server configuration:![NewImage27.png]()
High-end Mac mini models can now also be configured with Apple's new Fusion Drive technology, which seamlessly integrates a traditional 1 TB hard drive with 128 GB of fast flash storage for both speed and capacity. System files and frequently used apps and data are automatically placed in flash storage to optimize speed, while other data is housed on the slower traditional hard drive.
The Mac mini was last updated in July of 2011, marking some 460 days since the last update and the new models are available starting today.
Article Link: Apple Introduces New Mac Mini With Faster Processors and Quad-Core Option
