Mac Mini now or wait for Mac Pro

[thekev]

How does Synology measure up against Drobo?

That's a fancy grandma you got there -- streaming to iPad

I truly hate Drobo.

Is that really true?

If so, I hear the following in my ear:
"The Mac Mini killed the Giant Mac Pro..."

Mac Mini it is then. ~4 year "life" span ==> $333 per year for Mac Mini i7 - sales price.

Re: SSD Mac Mini, is it really worth it and can I install it myself (without voiding the warranty?)????

I wouldn't believe everything you hear on what is faster than what. It's not something that can be completely defined with a linear equation. Assuming that you can't make efficient use of more than four cores, the mini wins. It can match the four cores of an older architecture with four from a newer one. The 2008 wasn't a bad machine. The 2009 8 core which was significantly more expensive only outperformed it on some well threaded functions by a very slim margin. In many things the 2009 was slower. Blame Apple for cheaping out on components. They switched to a newer architecture with a lower cpu grade at a higher price point . In the end it all depends on what you run. If you want power, you need to consider your usage patterns because there are so many potential bottlenecks within a single machine.

There is one thing I'd really like to see. I'd like to see Apple make more machines that run like the Mac Pro (relatively cool, stable, silent, with easily expandable storage). The way it's set up, it's just such a dip going down one notch. I wouldn't touch the imac. You can't even swap a hard drive on your own, and don't expect it to be cheap from Apple.

 

[jeremyshaw]

I truly hate Drobo.



I wouldn't believe everything you hear on what is faster than what. It's not something that can be completely defined with a linear equation. Assuming that you can't make efficient use of more than four cores, the mini wins. It can match the four cores of an older architecture with four from a newer one. The 2008 wasn't a bad machine. The 2009 8 core which was significantly more expensive only outperformed it on some well threaded functions by a very slim margin. In many things the 2009 was slower. Blame Apple for cheaping out on components. They switched to a newer architecture with a lower cpu grade at a higher price point . In the end it all depends on what you run. If you want power, you need to consider your usage patterns because there are so many potential bottlenecks within a single machine.

There is one thing I'd really like to see. I'd like to see Apple make more machines that run like the Mac Pro (relatively cool, stable, silent, with easily expandable storage). The way it's set up, it's just such a dip going down one notch. I wouldn't touch the imac. You can't even swap a hard drive on your own, and don't expect it to be cheap from Apple.

Actually, the E5462 chips used in that 2008 Mac Pro were dual MCM Penryn chips, on FSB and DDR2. A mobile Sandy Bridge Quad really does outperform it in every way, multithread, singlethread, heavy memory ops, SATA controllers, etc.

Of course, this is under Windows &/ Linux (not counting OSX). OSX has had some strange performance scaling before (i.e, GT320m being slower/matched by HD3000 in OSX, GT320m significantly & consistantly faster in Windows 7).

 

[jamesryanbell]

I just bought a refurb i7 quad core server with 8GB RAM two days ago (made it TO MY DOOR in 20 hours when the estimated time for it even leaving Apple was 5-7 days...pretty cool) as my new Logic Pro machine. It'll do just fine. Gives me way more money to spend on other things.

 

[NeverhadaPC]

I just bought a refurb i7 quad core server with 8GB RAM two days ago (made it TO MY DOOR in 20 hours when the estimated time for it even leaving Apple was 5-7 days...pretty cool) as my new Logic Pro machine. It'll do just fine. Gives me way more money to spend on other things.

How big a difference is the MacMini i7 Dual-core 2.7GHz vs. i7 Quad-core 2.0GHz Server (for say, HD video editing)???

After adding CPU + HDD upgrade (750 GB @7200 RPM) to Mac Mini 5,2 => $1000 = Mac Mini Server. [I will upgrade 8GB RAM myself].

Pro / Cons for Server vs. non-server graphics (embedded vs. designated)???
1) Does it impact video/photo editing?
2) Diablo III?

 

[iamthedudeman]

How big a difference is the MacMini i7 Dual-core 2.7GHz vs. i7 Quad-core 2.0GHz Server (for say, HD video editing)???

After adding CPU + HDD upgrade (750 GB @7200 RPM) to Mac Mini 5,2 => $1000 = Mac Mini Server. [I will upgrade 8GB RAM myself].

Pro / Cons for Server vs. non-server graphics (embedded vs. designated)???
1) Does it impact video/photo editing?
2) Diablo III?

I own both. For heavily threaded workloads the dual 2.0 is faster. For single and dual threaded workloads the 2.7 is faster. The 2.0 acts like a 8 core machine while the 2.7 acts like a quad core due to hyperthreading. So they are both very good.

don't bother upgrading the HD. Waste of money. Get a SSD. A base mini with SSD will outperform a quad server mini with a HD. A SSD is more important than even the CPU.

 

[elliotn]

Pro / Cons for Server vs. non-server graphics (embedded vs. designated)???
1) Does it impact video/photo editing?
2) Diablo III?

I found the Server buggy with Photoshop. I exchanged it for the 2.7 i7 mini. In terms of speed, they're about the same (with Photoshop).

 

[WRP]

When Apple was dragging its feet last update of the MPs I bought a mini. The day the new MPs were announced I got it an sent my mini over to be a media server in my living room. If money isn't an issue I would do that.

 

[iamthedudeman]

When Apple was dragging its feet last update of the MPs I bought a mini. The day the new MPs were announced I got it an sent my mini over to be a media server in my living room. If money isn't an issue I would do that.

That was quite a while ago. It's ironic now that a Mac Mini server is just as fast or faster in the CPU dept than your MP if you got the Quad core.

I want a MP but Apple is taking too long. So I got a mini 2.7 with SSD. Love the Mini but the expandability of the MP is king.

 

[thekev]

Actually, the E5462 chips used in that 2008 Mac Pro were dual MCM Penryn chips, on FSB and DDR2. A mobile Sandy Bridge Quad really does outperform it in every way, multithread, singlethread, heavy memory ops, SATA controllers, etc.

Of course, this is under Windows &/ Linux (not counting OSX). OSX has had some strange performance scaling before (i.e, GT320m being slower/matched by HD3000 in OSX, GT320m significantly & consistantly faster in Windows 7).

Macs are not known for the quality of their graphics drivers. It's something we all accept . It was a complete non issue for me until recently. It's still not an enormous issue, but it's more irritating.

I am surprised that mobile sandy would actually outperform it on well threaded operations. I would definitely like to see Sandy Bridge E even if it's not a massive step up. I just want to see a general update to an aging machine.

That was quite a while ago. It's ironic now that a Mac Mini server is just as fast or faster in the CPU dept than your MP if you got the Quad core.

I want a MP but Apple is taking too long. So I got a mini 2.7 with SSD. Love the Mini but the expandability of the MP is king.

Bleck well it would have been sort of a mid cycle refresh, but it would have been nice. They could have bumped a few things, but there aren't any truly newer cpus (something better than a W3530 in the base model would be nice, especially with the price drops on the other quad core and 6 core cpus). If you look at the PC end, they make a few adjustments for pricing at times, and they use workstation cards many of which are the same thing as the Mac Pro cards with different drivers (5870 has a firepro version). Sandy Bridge E while technically released, isn't available in huge volume. I would guess Apple and the other oems are in the testing phase for when production ramps up.

 

[kas23]

Bleck well it would have been sort of a mid cycle refresh, but it would have been nice. They could have bumped a few things, but there aren't any truly newer cpus (something better than a W3530 in the base model would be nice, especially with the price drops on the other quad core and 6 core cpus). If you look at the PC end, they make a few adjustments for pricing at times, and they use workstation cards many of which are the same thing as the Mac Pro cards with different drivers (5870 has a firepro version). Sandy Bridge E while technically released, isn't available in huge volume. I would guess Apple and the other oems are in the testing phase for when production ramps up.

Unfortunately, Apple has become almost obsessive in padding their huge nest egg of cash. They know that bumping the MP specs will not significantly increase their already low demand. Thus, by them sitting on their hands, the profit margins for the MP increase by the day. The costs associated with the MP continuously decrease while the prices remain constant. It's actually kinda sad. Gone are the days...

 

[jeremyshaw]

Macs are not known for the quality of their graphics drivers. It's something we all accept . It was a complete non issue for me until recently. It's still not an enormous issue, but it's more irritating.

I am surprised that mobile sandy would actually outperform it on well threaded operations. I would definitely like to see Sandy Bridge E even if it's not a massive step up. I just want to see a general update to an aging machine.

I'm actually hoping the real reason for the delay was Apple aimed at the original December Ivy Bridge (presumeably IB-E, too) launch, but since Intel delayed the launch, Apple was hit off guard and the old Mac Pro is even more dated then it would be normally.

 

[iamthedudeman]

Is that really true?

If so, I hear the following in my ear:
"The Mac Mini killed the Giant Mac Pro..."

Mac Mini it is then. ~4 year "life" span ==> $333 per year for Mac Mini i7 - sales price.

Re: SSD Mac Mini, is it really worth it and can I install it myself (without voiding the warranty?)????

Yes it's true. The Quad server Mini is a beast in the CPU dept. Is also as fast as the fastest i5 imac in raw power and faster in threaded work loads. But the GPU is weak. If the GPU isn't important to you get the quad. The dual 2.7 i7 isn't bad either. Fast also. You have to remember what CPU is faster than what is subjective. Depends on what you use it for. A 2.7 i7 mini dual with hyperthreading is faster than the Quad mini in dual and single threaded tasks. Which is most of general computing for 90 percent of the population.

Yes you can install it yourself and it is fairly easy. As long as you don't damage anything it does not void the warranty. I installed a 256 Toshiba OEM Apple SSD myself. I wanted consistent Trim support without doing a hack.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkaRS6w5l1o

 

[Jayrcee]

I installed a 256 Toshiba OEM Apple SSD myself

What is the model number of this drive? I've been looking for something like that myself.

 

[iamthedudeman]

What is the model number of this drive? I've been looking for something like that myself.

THNSNC256GBSJ

I get them through my business Apple contract at cost. But you can pick one up on ebay. One of my employees got one for $260.00, a 256 SSD.

I wouldn't pay much more than $300.

Here is one for a decent price.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-TOSHIBA...ultDomain_0&hash=item4160d54d3c#ht_500wt_1413

 

[NeverhadaPC]

Thanks for all your replies.

Based on these discussions, I think the quad core i7 (in the coming years) will be a better fit for video editing, so...

I ended up getting a Mac Mini Server and for $90 bumped up the HDDs to 2x750 GB (7200 RPM), which should be able to hold my pic + video collection for the near future until I get proper NAS [that's $45 for upgrading each hard drive, which ain't bad]. I hope to set up the 2nd drive with time-machine.

I avoided the SSD upgrade (for now) as prices are too high (even 3rd party), in my opinion, and does not offer proper storage sizes within a decent price range.

With student discount the price was ~$1000 + $100 for AC + tax. Despite tax, Apple still provided a better deal than Amazon due to upgrade and education pricing.

I am happy with my purchase and can't wait to try it out on January 24th -- seems like a long time for shipping, but I guess China is far away

Thanks again

PS: I will update once I put Mac Mini Server through the hoops of editing.

 

[David085]

Wait for the Mac Pro

 

[Flynnstone]

Is the Intel 3000 graphics good enough for editting?

 

[NeverhadaPC]

Is the Intel 3000 graphics good enough for editting?

I was told that video editing depends on processor power x number of processors and not on graphics cards (which is more for rendering and games).

----------

Wait for the Mac Pro

Too late

Which Mac Pro, btw...

 

[jeremyshaw]

I was told that video editing depends on processor power x number of processors and not on graphics cards (which is more for rendering and games).

Depends. The GPU is being used in more ways than gaming now. Even most web browsers are now GPU rendered, isntead of software rasterized on the CPU.

However, I think in video editing, only parts of Premier are GPU accellerated, and in particular, only on nVidia GPUs.

 

[David085]

I was told that video editing depends on processor power x number of processors and not on graphics cards (which is more for rendering and games).

----------



Too late

Which Mac Pro, btw...

Uh... The next Mac Pro that there are rumors about that Mac Pro