Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2011 Mac Mini - Geekbench Scores

N

Nanker/Phelge

macrumors regular
Original poster
Dec 6, 2010
168
1

Attachments

  • Capture.PNG
    Capture.PNG
    14.9 KB · Views: 590
Last edited:
Good grief, even the base model looks like it could be faster than my Late-2008 MBP 2.53 GHz 15". I think that it should be sufficient to hold my files, run my backups, and serve iTunes to my Apple TV2 for me for a long time.
 
jljue said:
Good grief, even the base model looks like it could be faster than my Late-2008 MBP 2.53 GHz 15". I think that it should be sufficient to hold my files, run my backups, and serve iTunes to my Apple TV2 for me for a long time.
Click to expand...

I'd pick up a refurb of last year's model for those purposes...dirt cheap these days!
 
That's mad fast. My 2009 iMac 2.8Ghz i7 quad core with 16GB DDR3 gets 8586 in geekbench. I have a few things open, but that's beside the point. The new mini server is FAST.

Re-ran the benchmark in 64bit mode, and I get 10012 on the above iMac.

Integer: 8879
Floating Point: 15767
Memory: 4963
Stream: 3943

Geekbench score: 10012

The new Mac mini server = FAST
 
Last edited:
ZRD said:
I'd pick up a refurb of last year's model for those purposes...dirt cheap these days!
Click to expand...

How do you pickup a refurb of last years model? I don't see it listed online, at least not one with a DVD drive.
 
dmelgar said:
How do you pickup a refurb of last years model? I don't see it listed online, at least not one with a DVD drive.
Click to expand...

Luck of the draw...some times they are there when you check, others they are not...check back frequently!
 
Being somewhat new to macs, I'm just curious how geekbench ends up functioning in real life. The work I do is web related - Photoshop, iTunes, Browsers, and light gaming. The server model out performs the other two models by a huge margin, but how does that translate in real life?

I'm thinking the 2.5 dual core w/ the AMD discrete chip will offer the best balance in video and performance. Or do I have that all wrong and should go with the highest geekbench number?? These Mac Minis seem to be in spitting distance to the 2011 21.5" stock imacs (which is what I had my eye on awaiting the mini refresh).

My wife's mini (the 2010 2.4 model w/ 4gb of ram) is ALMOST powerful enough to serve my needs. Seeing as these new minis are double the performance on geekbench, it ought to handle it quite nicely, right?

I'm heavily considering the $799 model stock (I can't imagine feeling a huge difference between the 2.5 and 2.7), then upgrading the memory to 8gb, then later down the road fitting in a SSD or a TB drive.
 
xheathen said:
Being somewhat new to macs, I'm just curious how geekbench ends up functioning in real life. The work I do is web related - Photoshop, iTunes, Browsers, and light gaming. The server model out performs the other two models by a huge margin, but how does that translate in real life?

I'm thinking the 2.5 dual core w/ the AMD discrete chip will offer the best balance in video and performance. Or do I have that all wrong and should go with the highest geekbench number?? These Mac Minis seem to be in spitting distance to the 2011 21.5" stock imacs (which is what I had my eye on awaiting the mini refresh).

My wife's mini (the 2010 2.4 model w/ 4gb of ram) is ALMOST powerful enough to serve my needs. Seeing as these new minis are double the performance on geekbench, it ought to handle it quite nicely, right?

I'm heavily considering the $799 model stock (I can't imagine feeling a huge difference between the 2.5 and 2.7), then upgrading the memory to 8gb, then later down the road fitting in a SSD or a TB drive.
Click to expand...

Geekbench basically just tests the processor. That's not real life. There are several other benchmark programs that will be more useful to you. Xbench, Cinebench and Speedmark are just some of them. Macworld magazine uses Speedmark and, for me, it's probably the best real world benchmark.

http://www.macworld.com/info/speedmark.html
 
xheathen said:
Being somewhat new to macs, I'm just curious how geekbench ends up functioning in real life. The work I do is web related - Photoshop, iTunes, Browsers, and light gaming. The server model out performs the other two models by a huge margin, but how does that translate in real life?

I'm thinking the 2.5 dual core w/ the AMD discrete chip will offer the best balance in video and performance. Or do I have that all wrong and should go with the highest geekbench number?? These Mac Minis seem to be in spitting distance to the 2011 21.5" stock imacs (which is what I had my eye on awaiting the mini refresh).

My wife's mini (the 2010 2.4 model w/ 4gb of ram) is ALMOST powerful enough to serve my needs. Seeing as these new minis are double the performance on geekbench, it ought to handle it quite nicely, right?

I'm heavily considering the $799 model stock (I can't imagine feeling a huge difference between the 2.5 and 2.7), then upgrading the memory to 8gb, then later down the road fitting in a SSD or a TB drive.
Click to expand...

hand brake really will benefit from the server's cpu.
gaming will do well with the stock 799 model. geekbench really measure how good the cpu is more then any other part of the computer. handbrake with a torrent program is the most common use that many users will love to use with these mini's.
 
philipma1957 said:
hand brake really will benefit from the server's cpu.
gaming will do well with the stock 799 model. geekbench really measure how good the cpu is more then any other part of the computer. handbrake with a torrent program is the most common use that many users will love to use with these mini's.
Click to expand...

Indeed
 
Good to know thanks! I've been debating heavily on whether or not to spend the extra $100 on the 2.7 upgrade. I've already got 8gb SODIMM DDR3 1333 ram at home, so I think I should be golden until I get brave enough to put my own SSD in it or just wuss out and buy an external :p
 
xheathen said:
Good to know thanks! I've been debating heavily on whether or not to spend the extra $100 on the 2.7 upgrade. I've already got 8gb SODIMM DDR3 1333 ram at home, so I think I should be golden until I get brave enough to put my own SSD in it or just wuss out and buy an external :p
Click to expand...

don't forget lacie t-bolt raid0 ssd's ! that would be one very fast osx drive even if it is external.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back