Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Mac and PC Games

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 30, 2012, 09:12 AM   #1
madeirabhoy
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Has anyone compared gaming on base mini versus mid range 2012?

like a lot of people trying to decide if spending more money on my mini is worth it.

2.5ghz i5 base mini is 660 euros and will be a good bit faster than my 2009 2ghz core2dueo.

the next model is 200 euro more. i can write off 100 euro of that in terms of having a 1tb drive in it. so really the cost is 100 euro, which i can afford i guess.

but its 2.3 ghz. it is quad core i7, in terms of gaming, and separately in terms of normal use, how much faster will it be? is it possible it might actually be slower in some things?

now i know i could pay another 100 euro, and get 2.6 ghz iz, but by this stage we are nearly 50% more than the cost of the base unit.


has anyone compared the two from a gaming perspective?
madeirabhoy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 10:45 AM   #2
edddeduck
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by madeirabhoy View Post
like a lot of people trying to decide if spending more money on my mini is worth it.

2.5ghz i5 base mini is 660 euros and will be a good bit faster than my 2009 2ghz core2dueo.

the next model is 200 euro more. i can write off 100 euro of that in terms of having a 1tb drive in it. so really the cost is 100 euro, which i can afford i guess.

but its 2.3 ghz. it is quad core i7, in terms of gaming, and separately in terms of normal use, how much faster will it be? is it possible it might actually be slower in some things?

now i know i could pay another 100 euro, and get 2.6 ghz iz, but by this stage we are nearly 50% more than the cost of the base unit.


has anyone compared the two from a gaming perspective?
The jump is from an i5 dual core to a i7 quad core. The performance difference between the two models is huge. In games both mini's will be fairly low spec settings as they both have a HD4000 graphics card which is low power as far as modern games go. The quad core will be faster but the limitation is the low power gfx card. HD4000 is not a gaming card.

However having double the cores to run the game will improve the game's performance. Adding some third party RAM so you have at least 8GB will also help as it will mean you have more RAM for the system and graphics card to use.

Edwin
edddeduck is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 02:03 PM   #3
madeirabhoy
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
much appreciate your answer Edwin, i know the graphics card is a bit crap, but that made me a bit confused as to whether it was a case that

a) the GPU was so crap that there was no point in having a quad processor

or b) the quad processor would help mitigate how crap the GPU is.


i'd love an imac but its just too much cash.

what are the most demanding Feral games and would they work? i see deus ex human revolution doesnt support HD4000. would it run at all on either machine?

how would mafia II run?
madeirabhoy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 07:19 PM   #4
Wardenski
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Why anyone would buy a Mac Mini for gaming is beyond me.
Wardenski is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 08:07 PM   #5
cluthz
macrumors 68040
 
cluthz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Norway
Send a message via MSN to cluthz
Quote:
Originally Posted by madeirabhoy View Post
much appreciate your answer Edwin, i know the graphics card is a bit crap, but that made me a bit confused as to whether it was a case that

a) the GPU was so crap that there was no point in having a quad processor

or b) the quad processor would help mitigate how crap the GPU is.


i'd love an imac but its just too much cash.

what are the most demanding Feral games and would they work? i see deus ex human revolution doesnt support HD4000. would it run at all on either machine?

how would mafia II run?
A) A quad core won't help the hd4000 much.
__________________
-tb
MacBook Air 13" i5 osx10.7.5
HackPro i7-4790k, 16GB RAM, GTX780GHz Edition, 3x SSD , win7+osx10.9.4
cluthz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 09:28 PM   #6
blesscheese
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Central CA
What games do you want to run?

It will all depend on the games you want to play. If you want to play the "latest and greatest," I think you won't be happy.

If you want to play some 2-3 year old games, or old GOG games, you should be fine.

For example, I can play Skyrim on my 2009 MBA (NVidia 9400m), albeit at about 13-17 frames per second. My 2010 Mac Mini, with a NVidia 320m will play Skyrim at about 30 fps.

I think we are at the point where the current Intel graphics (HD 4000?) are at least as good or better than the the old 320m, so with a faster processor, I'm sure you could get better graphics performance, but not necessarily high or ultra-high settings.

Have you posted specifically about the games you want to play, and asked if anyone is running a Mac Mini to play them?
blesscheese is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2012, 04:31 AM   #7
madeirabhoy
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardenski View Post
Why anyone would buy a Mac Mini for gaming is beyond me.
i know what you mean but, basically i always have a mac, an imac is too expensive and im not a hardcore gamer. i tend to play football manager and civ , although my 2009 mini cant handle civ5. and i have no problem with toning down graphics.

im thinking about things like skyrim, deus ex hr, borderlands, la noire, endless space, ANNO 2070 mostly in bootcamp therefore.

id like to play deus ex hr in os x if i can, but if not, bootcamp is fine. same with mafia 2.


im guessing borderlands 2, max payne 3, far cry 3 are probably out of reach. what about the assassins creed games?

Last edited by madeirabhoy; Dec 1, 2012 at 04:39 AM.
madeirabhoy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2012, 04:45 AM   #8
edddeduck
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by madeirabhoy View Post
much appreciate your answer Edwin, i know the graphics card is a bit crap, but that made me a bit confused as to whether it was a case that

a) the GPU was so crap that there was no point in having a quad processor

or b) the quad processor would help mitigate how crap the GPU is.
Sorry about that, the quad core will make the Mac quicker and a better experience overall, however both mini's are not great for games as their weakest link is the HD4000. The Quad does speed things up slightly as it has more cores so the game will not wait on CPU as often. However the boost is not huge in games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madeirabhoy View Post
i'd love an imac but its just too much cash.

what are the most demanding Feral games and would they work? i see deus ex human revolution doesnt support HD4000. would it run at all on either machine?

how would mafia II run?
The HD4000 will run almost all games released right now but on lower settings. Deus Ex is not supported due to a bug in the HD4000 drivers once that's fixed by Apple/Intel it will run Deus Ex as well.

Edwin
edddeduck is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2012, 07:37 AM   #9
madeirabhoy
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by edddeduck View Post
Sorry about that, the quad core will make the Mac quicker and a better experience overall, however both mini's are not great for games as their weakest link is the HD4000. The Quad does speed things up slightly as it has more cores so the game will not wait on CPU as often. However the boost is not huge in games.



The HD4000 will run almost all games released right now but on lower settings. Deus Ex is not supported due to a bug in the HD4000 drivers once that's fixed by Apple/Intel it will run Deus Ex as well.

Edwin
so really, for the 200 euro price difference im as well to take the cheaper machine which will work (almost) as well, and the cash saving is a third of the way towards its replacement in 2 or 3 years
madeirabhoy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2012, 09:21 AM   #10
76ShovelHead
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Connecticut
Excuse me if it it's against any forum rules to post about hackintoshes, and mod please delete if so.

OP:

Perhaps you'd be better off building a Hackintosh. There are many boards that seem to be plug and play, and a vast community out there. Plus many graphics cards are plug and play as well under OS X Snow Leopard and later (for instance my HD4670 and brothers HD5770 ran under SL, Lion, and ML). This way you can get the best performance for little cash and still be able to run OS X.
__________________
Haswell i5 3 GHz 8 GB Ram 128 GB SSD Mavericks

Last edited by 76ShovelHead; Dec 6, 2012 at 09:26 AM.
76ShovelHead is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2012, 09:35 AM   #11
edddeduck
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 76ShovelHead View Post
Excuse me if it it's against any forum rules to post about hackintoshes, and mod please delete if so.

OP:

Perhaps you'd be better off building a Hackintosh. There are many boards that seem to be plug and play, and a vast community out there. Plus many graphics cards are plug and play as well under OS X Snow Leopard and later (for instance my HD4670 and brothers HD5770 ran under SL, Lion, and ML). This way you can get the best performance for little cash and still be able to run OS X.
It's worth mentioning as an option but there are cons as well as pros to that route.

I have been down the hackintosh route and unless you are a PC builder / modder kind of person I would not recommend it. If you are tech savvy and enjoy messing about it can be a great bit of fun but if you want something to always just work without checking forums when an OS update comes out for hacked drivers etc then I would not recommend a hackintosh.

It is an option (and can save you a few bucks) but it depends what you want from your computer.

Edwin

Last edited by edddeduck; Dec 6, 2012 at 12:31 PM.
edddeduck is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2012, 12:18 PM   #12
Plutonius
macrumors 601
 
Plutonius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Hampshire
Quote:
Originally Posted by edddeduck View Post
It's worth mentioning as an option but their are cons as well as pros to that route.

I have been down the hackintosh route and unless you are a PC builder / modder kind of person I would not recommend it. If you are tech savvy and enjoy messing about it can be a great bit of fun but if you want something to always just work without checking forums when an OS updated comes out for hacked drivers etc then I would not recommend a hackintosh.

It is an option (and can save you a few bucks) but it depends what you want from your computer.

Edwin
The old saying "Time is Money" is true but for some reason people don't calculate the time they have to spend on a project like this into the final cost of a hackintosh.
Plutonius is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Mac and PC Games

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which Mac Mini is better? 2011 Mid-level or 2012 Base? dmk1974 Mac mini 74 Dec 7, 2013 05:00 AM
Mini 2012 Base vs Mid - Thermal / noise performance Beezer900 Mac mini 35 Nov 14, 2012 05:19 AM
Help decide: 2012 Mini (base or mid) vs. 2011 iMac base refurb k.alexander iMac 6 Oct 25, 2012 10:26 AM
Help decide: 2012 Mini (base or mid) vs. 2011 iMac base refurb k.alexander Mac mini 7 Oct 25, 2012 10:25 AM
Help decide: 2012 Mini (base or mid) vs. 2011 iMac base refurb k.alexander Buying Tips and Advice 6 Oct 25, 2012 10:25 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:46 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC