2006 Mac Mini vs 4th gen TC for TM Server?

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by adam9c1, Feb 13, 2016.

  1. adam9c1, Feb 13, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2016

    adam9c1 macrumors 65816

    adam9c1

    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #1
    Which will be faster?

    4th gen Time Capsule
    Or
    2006 Mac Mini 1.83 upgraded to 2.0

    I need to run a Time Machine Server for few clients.

    Edit: maybe the mini is 2007. I'll have to check specs..

    The 3.5" drive is a WD Green.
     
  2. Lucas Godfrey macrumors 6502

    Lucas Godfrey

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Somewhere between Here and There
    #2
    i don't think you can fit a 3.5 drive into the mac mini, but the time capsule does fit them
     
  3. adam9c1 thread starter macrumors 65816

    adam9c1

    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #3
    I would remove the optical drive and install hard drive caddy (data doubler), then cut out a hole in chassis to route sata power and data cables to outside. I have a dummy empty mini chassis that this 3.5 drive would hide in.
     
  4. Lucas Godfrey macrumors 6502

    Lucas Godfrey

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Somewhere between Here and There
    #4
    :eek:
    Why? just use the time capsule instead
     
  5. adam9c1 thread starter macrumors 65816

    adam9c1

    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #5
    Need to know which will be faster to backup and restore.
     
  6. Lucas Godfrey macrumors 6502

    Lucas Godfrey

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Somewhere between Here and There
    #6
    both will be limited by your network speeds, the time capsule sounds like the cleanest option and it doubles as a switch, and you can manage it remotely using airport utility.
    The mac mini sounds like a complete hack-job and you should forget about it.
     
  7. adam9c1 thread starter macrumors 65816

    adam9c1

    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #7
    What I ment to understand is what device has more "processing horsepower" for TM service.
    Each device would be wired to a unmanaged gigabit switch.

    Perhaps someone else can chime in. Thanks for the input Lucas.
     
  8. chrfr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    #8
    You won't see a difference with Time Machine performance on either. It's purely a matter of disk and network performance. Effectively all the CPU load happens at the client end.
    There's a lot less configuration and work involved to use the Time Capsule for backup, so I'd just use that.
     

Share This Page