Mac Mini fastest in it's size!?

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by Poki, May 10, 2012.

  1. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #1
    Just out of curiosity I looked for PCs with similar size (about 1,5 liter volume) to get an idea of how pricey and how powerful they are. The result? None of them was as expensive as the Mini, but also non of them had either a Quad-Core CPU or a GPU at all.

    The so called "Intense PC" claims to be the fastest fan less system in it's size. Well, that may be true, but with only a dual-core i7 with Intel HD3000 graphics, it's nothing to write home about.

    Do you know any comparable system with at least nearly as much performance as the Mini?

    Oh, and I think it's great we see the most powerful HTPC-sized computer in the Mac line-up! :)
     
  2. macrumors 65816

    Dustman

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2007
    #2
    Most PCs the Mini's size have an Atom CPU which is garbage.

    On a side note, while yes, the higher end Mini does have a discrete GPU, its only marginally better than the new intel integrated graphics in benchmarks, so I wouldn't necessarily write home about it.
     
  3. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #3
    While that's true, the Mini is a year old. The next Mini could well have a GeForce GT 640M (30W TDP) or, if there's not enough power for it, a GT 640M LE (17W TDP), which is even lower than the 19W TDP of the 6630M. And both 640M versions are really GREAT performers, so no comparison to any integrated graphic solution today.
     
  4. macrumors 65816

    Dustman

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2007
    #4
    It'd be nice if they did bump the specs. Its my understanding that the current GPU in the mini is a small step up even from the integrated graphics in the current low end mini. I do love the mini, however.
     
  5. philipma1957, May 10, 2012
    Last edited: May 10, 2012

    macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    #5
  6. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #6
    Asrock: 2,8 liters volume
    Mini: 1,4 liters volume

    So double the size for just a newer GPU and USB 3.0? Not really worth it. If you throw in the 640M and the new 35W Quad-Core i7-CPU the Mini beats it in all respects - for a lower price.

    The Mini seems to be really well placed on the market.
     
  7. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2012
    #7
    It's a little larger, I know, but the new Commodore Amiga is a lovely bit of kit. And quite nostalgic for an old duffer like me who remembers who huge fondness playing hours and hours of "Turrican" on his first computer - a Commodore Amiga.

    http://www.commodoreusa.net/CUSA_AMIGAmini.aspx
     
  8. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #8
    While not exactly the smallest, fastest or cheapest, it's a Commodore after all. :D
     
  9. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #9
    The answer to your question is no. A couple of years ago I thought about dabbling in the Hackintosh realm and wanted to go with something like a mini due to desktop space. I couldn't find anything on the market that wasn't A. running the pile of poo that is the Atom processor or B. Running a Core2duo but cost almost as much as the base Mini with the same or worse specs. In the end I just bought a mini since it was roughly the same price and guaranteed me to have a compatible system at all times. Apparently Apple is the only company capable of making a fairly fast, tiny, good looking PC for a "low price".
     
  10. CausticPuppy, May 11, 2012
    Last edited: May 11, 2012

    macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    #10
    I like the concept.... but aside from the logo, it's basically a generic PC built using off the shelf parts.

    I do like that it has its own Commodore OS- for some reason it looks oddly familiar!

    [​IMG]
     
  11. Poki, May 11, 2012
    Last edited: May 11, 2012

    thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #11
    A Mac OS oriented Linux version? Not necessarily a bad thing I'd say. :cool:
     
  12. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    #12
    And I love the 80's throwback fonts!
     
  13. macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    #13
    Strange thread.

    The mini is quite unique in his petitess but if you were to buy an HTPC case (a bit taller than a mini) you could fit a micro-ATX board with a i7 2600k and a low profile GTX card with no problem. Add some silent fans from Scythe and you would have a very powerful machine with a very small trace.
     
  14. macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    #14
    yeah.

    I have a i5 2500k

    a crucial 256gb ssd

    an asus maximus iv gene mobo

    a efx hd6870 gpu

    windows 7


    4 sticks of kingston ram

    a samsung bluray

    in a 14 inch by 14 inch by 7 inch rosewill case.

    cost 980

    this machine uses a 46 inch sony led tv and shames all but the mac pro in all aspects.


    I do not want this machine but apple forces you to own it or a mac pro, if you want a quality big screen tv experience for ht. I have a mac mini attached to the same tv and can switch from my pc to the mini with a button.

    the sound and the picture on netflix is far better on the pc.

    I have owned mac pro and would rather have it but I would need about a 3k machine once you count the ssd the blu ray and the windows for bootcamp. so 3k vs 1k plus 600 for the mini. 3k vs 1.6k not much to decide but I have room for the 2 computers.
     
  15. tshrimp, May 11, 2012
    Last edited: May 11, 2012

    macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2012
    #15
    I thought this looked interesting.

    http://it-chuiko.com/computers/1160...-x-10-cm-equipped-with-a-chip-ivy-bridge.html

    That Commodore from an earlier post looks cool. Even gives us something our minis don't. Optical drive. And something that Apple is behind on....USB3, And another thing that Apple looks to never support Bluray. I would take a little larger size for the above. It isn't like that thing is huge.

    But to the OP....Not that I have seen. The mini is a great little system. Slow without upgrade to a real hard drive, but great once that SSD gets installed.
     
  16. tshrimp, May 11, 2012
    Last edited: May 11, 2012

    macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2012
    #16
    Why did you post this? I now want one of these. This would be a great Windows 7 Media Center box. Small, powerful, esata, optical output, Bluray, real video.
     
  17. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    Location:
    Cape Cod, MA
    #17
    Can You install this on a Mac?

    The OS is downloadable on the website. When I get my new iMac(or MP)(haven't decided yet) I think I am going to try to put this distro on my MBP 2,2... after all it seems to be just another x86 linux distro... never had a C64 but I want that one from the website... did have a Vic-20, a C128(ok that had a C64 inside it) and an A500, before I got my Preforma 575... Wonder if my wanye gretzky hockey disks will still boot... Has any one tried to install this with bootcamp...
     
  18. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #18
    There's Parallels (or Dropbox, if you want free) for such things. As it's Linux it shouldn't even need much hardware to feel fast enough. I'm definitely gonna try it on my future Mini with Parallels.
     
  19. macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    #19
    Well, if you are using Win7, there's not need for a mac pro. Better go with a i7 3930k 6 cores that will yield the same results.
     
  20. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    #20
    As an old time Amiga fan, I agree. I had the original Amiga 1000 and later upgraded to the 3000. The 1000 was very nicely designed (Mac-esque physically), but what made it truly special was its custom OS and custom graphics and sound chips. It was its own thing, and it was wonderful. Had there been competent management at the time, it could very well be the leading platform today. These semi-recent Amiga revivals are nothing more than slapping an Amiga logo on a PC box. In this case, the box is fairly attractive, though I'd argue that it's still clunkier looking than the last Mac Mini that had an optical drive. And did you notice the price? It's not competitively priced to a Mac Mini. No thanks.

    As I said, I was an old time Amiga fan. On the mobile side, I was an old Palm OS fan (and later focused on the Treo smartphones). After Handspring/Palm followed in the same footsteps as Commodore and pissed away their advantage while not continuing to evolve, I reluctantly tested the waters with the iPod Touch, and then the iPhone 3GS. Since then, I've become more and more entrenched in the Apple ecosystem (I'm typing this on a MacBook Air, and also own several Apple TV 2's - plus an ATV3).

    Getting back to the original point...there simply isn't any other manufacturer making affordable, beautiful computers. There are some case manufacturers who seem to understand beauty, but they're limited by the fact that they don't control all of the other aspects of what needs to go into the box, so they have to make their boxes clunkier than they otherwise could, because they've got to allow for an end-user to plug in a standardized motherboard, etc. Apple can control everything and puts a focus on aesthetics. They may not go after the lowest-end market price-wise, but for the money, there is nothing else out there like the entry-level Mac Mini.
     

Share This Page