A casual user would be fine with a Core 2 Duo still though these days it's all about Core i5/i7 in addition to an SSD. So I agree and disagree with what utahnguy says.
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.
OWC SSDs Turn the 2011 Mac Mini Into a Powerhouse
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well...
I'm just waiting for the days when SSD's become more reasonably price. If only money were no object...!
But, remember how much blu ray players and even dvd players cost when they first came out? Hell I remember when I uncle bought one of the first CD players ever, when they first came out... it cost him thousands of dollars! For a CD player!
So of course, someday, SSD's will simply be the standard drive type... and I can't wait for that to happen!
I'm just waiting for the days when SSD's become more reasonably price. If only money were no object...!
But, remember how much blu ray players and even dvd players cost when they first came out? Hell I remember when I uncle bought one of the first CD players ever, when they first came out... it cost him thousands of dollars! For a CD player!
So of course, someday, SSD's will simply be the standard drive type... and I can't wait for that to happen!
I met a guy who had one of those ultimate stereo systems, $2000 speaker cables for example. His CD player originally cost thousands and he claimed it was better sounding than recent consumer models. Of course he would...
Maybe SSDs will get cheaper faster than we expect. I presume they are made by machines and so all they have to do is line up those suckers in a big room and out come zillions of SSDs. Just a commodity like RAM is today. Just a guess.
For one million billion dollars.
Forget it. Cheaper to get an i7 iMac with an SSD in there for good measure.
Forget it. Cheaper to get an i7 iMac with an SSD in there for good measure.
Only 256 GB of RAM? I had a server with 1 TB of RAM two years ago!
And you only have the Palladium model? Psh. I went whole-hog for the Plutonium model. Self-powered! (But, uh, don't scratch the protective lacquer off...)That's where I'm torn. I want a new Mac, but I keep running into "for only $200 more...." syndrome.
I want a basic one, but the $599 Mini just doesn't cut it. Only 2 GB RAM? Well, for only $200 more, I get the more RAM *AND* the discrete video card.
But for only $200 more than THAT, I get quad-core and dual (faster) hard drives. I do a lot of video encoding, so those quad-cores will really help.
But for only $200 more than THAT, I get a full-blown quad-core iMac, with faster quad-core CPU, AND discrete graphics (plus a display that is at least equal to the display I'm using now - which I could then turn in to a second display.)
But for only........ until I'm all the way up to an upgraded 27" iMac, with i7 and upgraded GPU for $2,299.00...
Last edited:
Anaemik - try "thebookyardcom". They are in Liverpool. I have used them as has my daughter. They have the Pro 3G & Pro 6G in various sizes as "5 day lead time" & also have a fitting service for £58.
Many Folks are saying the same thing about the SB iMac. Youd also have decent graphics (though still mobile flavor) and a transcendent monitor
Too many Apple lust boxes, too little cash
The Mac mini has always been a great choice as beginner or back up computer. The only problem I've come across is the stress from trying not to damage anything while upgrading it. It's a delicate operation
The Mac Mini is now becoming quite a powerful computer when you attach all the bits. However, it is exorbitant at this time. The future is looking amazing, though; when this tech becomes pennies-a-pound, we'll have amazing home computers for a nice price.
As it stands, doubling 8GB RAM at 15x the price is RIDICULOUS. 16GB is nice, but you won't notice the difference more often than not. Especially on a Mini... unless you are doing some crazy stuff on there. Those super SSD drives are pretty amazing, though.
The 2014 Mini will be quite a sweet machine for a decent price. At this time, get an iMac and save some cash for the boost.
As it stands, doubling 8GB RAM at 15x the price is RIDICULOUS. 16GB is nice, but you won't notice the difference more often than not. Especially on a Mini... unless you are doing some crazy stuff on there. Those super SSD drives are pretty amazing, though.
The 2014 Mini will be quite a sweet machine for a decent price. At this time, get an iMac and save some cash for the boost.
Anandtech is reviewing the 120GB version of the OWC Mercury 6G here, pitting it against some higher capacity drives. This isn't the fastest version of the OWC Mercury 6G, so you can't decide who gets the fastest drive on the market trophy based on these results. You would need to include the 240GB version of the OWC Mercury 6G in the tests to make conclusions. Here's why:
The 120GB version is slower than the 240GB version because it has fewer die per memory channel. In the case of the Sandforce controller, the 240GB versions of the drives have 4 die per memory channel (instead of two) allowing more pipelining of requests and in turn higher parallelism and ultimately higher performance. Since both the OCZ and OWC drives use the Sandforce controller, you'd need to compare them at equal capacities.
Anand explains why capacity affects performance in this way in his review of the OCZ Vertex 3
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4316/ocz-vertex-3-240gb-review
Anandtech said:
Actually the specific benchmarks you linked show the OWC Mercury 6G 120GB model outperforming every drive of equal or lesser capacity indicating that the OWC Mercury 6G 120GB is best in its class.
I'm an avid Anandtech reader and I wouldn't say something if it disagreed with his results.
Last edited:
Anandtech's latest Sandforce SSD Review
... and yet, this implies all Sandforce-based SSDs are essentially a wash.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4604/...rsair-patriot-ocz-owc-memoright-ssds-compared
... and yet, this implies all Sandforce-based SSDs are essentially a wash.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4604/...rsair-patriot-ocz-owc-memoright-ssds-compared
Edit: oops, you're right, it's all a wash. In light of this information (which was just published about a minute ago, so you can't blame me for not knowing) I'll revise my statement to say that most the sandforce based drives are equally fast at equal capacities, including the OWC Mercury 6G. That doesn't make the OWC Mercury 6G any less fast, but it certainly is tied for first place with a lot of contenders.
There's still something to be said for the OWC drive, however, because it comes with a 5 year warranty. I haven't looked at all the drives warranties, but a typical SSD warranty is 3 years or less.
Last edited:
I'm not trying to suggest that OWC's drive's aren't fast, and that 5-year warranty is definitely added peace-of-mind. I have the 6G Extreme 120GB version and so far, so good (though my Mac Pro is 3G, not 6... for now). I'm just fact-checking the seemingly fanboyish notion that the reason MacRumors never mentions any other SSDs is because no one else's are equal-to-or-better, which is clearly wrong.
Now if they'd just get-on-the-stick and release a 6G replacement stick for the 2011 Airs I'd volunteer to early adopt that.
I'm not trying to suggest that OWC's drive's aren't fast, and that 5-year warranty is definitely added peace-of-mind. I have the 6G Extreme 120GB version and so far, so good (though my Mac Pro is 3G, not 6... for now). I'm just fact-checking the seemingly fanboyish notion that the reason MacRumors never mentions any other SSDs is because no one else's are equal-to-or-better, which is clearly wrong.
Now if they'd just get-on-the-stick and release a 6G replacement stick for the 2011 Airs I'd volunteer to early adopt that.
All true.
I'm sure that the real reason macrumors.com is featuring the drives is that OWC is Mac centric. If other companies were writing blog entries about how well their drives performed in the new Mac such and such I'm sure we'd hear a lot more about them as well.
