First Mac Mini Benchmark Surfaces Ahead of November 7 Launch

[MacRumors]

The first Geekbench benchmark for one of the 2018 Mac mini models has surfaced (via VentureBeat), giving us an initial look at the performance we can expect from Apple's revamped desktop machine.

The benchmarked model is a higher-end custom configuration that features a 3.2GHz 6-core 8th-generation Intel Core i7 processor, UHD Graphics 630, and 32GB RAM. At a minimum, this configuration would cost $1,699.

Two scores for the machine were uploaded today from the same user taken eight minutes apart. The first features a single-core score of 5070 and a multi-core score of 16818, while the second, which suggests much better performance, features a single-core of 5512 and a multi-core score of 23516.

The higher-end score set puts this particular Mac mini configuration right on par with the high-end 2.9GHz 2018 MacBook Pro, which earned a single-core Geekbench score of 5433 and a multi-core score of 22556. Given the price point of this Mac mini's configuration, its MacBook Pro-matching performance comes as no surprise.

The Mac mini also closely matches the 2013 Mac Pro models when it comes to multi-core performance and exceeds them when it comes to single-core performance. With the exception of the iMac Pro, it outperforms 2017 iMac models, which were not refreshed this year.

It's not clear why there's such a disparity between the two Geekbench readings, but it's possible with the first that background tasks produced a lower result, hence the retest.

We should see additional Mac mini benchmarks surfacing in the near future as the device is set to launch on November 7. Benchmarks of the base models will give us a better idea of what to expect from the lower priced versions of the device.

MacBook Air and iPad Pro benchmarks have also surfaced over the course of the week, with the iPad Pro also demonstrating MacBook Pro-class performance.

Article Link: First Mac Mini Benchmark Surfaces Ahead of November 7 Launch

 

[OneMike]

Will be interesting to see results for the base models.

 

[seatton]

I still have about 1,000 days to decide whether I should get it or not before the newer model comes out.

 

[Jack Burton]

I want to see cinebench numbers and performance on sustained load, like rendering for 4 or 5 hours. I wonder if the enclosure is just too small to handle that.

I'd love to throw a couple of minis in the other room as quiet render nodes.

 

[StellarVixen]

Good, good. I like this. Mine will be with i7. ^_^

 

[now i see it]

"The Mac Mini isn't so mini any more" indeed!

 

[zyr123]

I still have about 1,000 days to decide whether I should get it or not before the newer model comes out.

this next MacBook Pro update be huge or laptops won't be a thing.

 

[Razeus]

Will be interesting to see results for the base models.

The base models are a joke and shouldn't exist at those price points.

 

[SamRyouji]

I want to see cinebench numbers and performance on sustained load, like rendering for 4 or 5 hours. I wonder if the enclosure is just too small to handle that.

I'd love to throw a couple of minis in the other room as quiet render nodes.

Sustained load is what it counts comes rendering or deploying tasks. If this minis still comes cool, I think this is the ultimate one monster to own. Plus side, the iconic design still complements most desks better than the current Mac Pro.

 

[mi7chy]

Short synthetic benchmarks are freaking useless. Use real world work load and test sustained performance to see if it hits thermal throttling.

 

[jrlcopy]

The base models are a joke and shouldn't exist at those price points.

The i3 base model was only $200 more than if you built your own computer. That's not that bad of an apple tax.

 

[Artric76]

I'm excited to see these. I've been working on a Mac Pro 2010 with 2x2.66 Xeon. It looks like the high-end one (and maybe the lower-end ones) have surpassed my processing power.

Do you think these will all-around kick my current machine's butt? Would those integrated graphics be better than my 5780 for apps that use graphics acceleration?

I feel like picking up one of these would be better than trying to upgrade this old machine. I've done a little bit and it can be tedious, not to mention running into all the things I can't do...

By the way, I'd be working with some basic things in Motion, as well as exporting DCP (uses all cores at 100%) and using Final Cut, etc.

For reference, according to Mactracker, my machine gets 16341 multi and 2430 single core performance.

My company isn't going to be buying me an iMac Pro anytime soon...

 

[picaman]

Hey! I ordered that config this AM, with 16gb of RAM though.

Somewhat faster than my current late 2009 iMac

 

[StellarVixen]

By the way, I'd be working with some basic things in Motion, as well as exporting DCP (uses all cores at 100%) and using Final Cut, etc.

I do not know for graphics, but for this, 6 cores and 12 threads are definitely gonna be up for task.

 

[Spectrum]

The base models are a joke and shouldn't exist at those price points.

No way. All these models are fantastic updates, coming in cheaper than the 2011 and 2012 quads with loads more expected performance.

 

[Artric76]

Hey! I ordered that config this AM, with 16gb of RAM though.

Somewhat faster than my current late 2009 iMac

May I please have your address and tracking number? I just want to make sure it gets to you safely.

 

[Trusteft]

Good numbers. I would love to see tests that are not benchmarks though. Final Cut exports, etc.

 

[SoN1NjA]

Apple's new strategy: don't update your products for 1000 days so when you update them the performance gains seem big

 

[picaman]

Somewhat OT, but the same user also uploaded a new MacBook Air result. Someone has connections!

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/10603743

 

[StellarVixen]

Somewhat OT, but the same user also uploaded a new MacBook Air result. Someone has connections!

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/10603743

Single core: meh, multi core: pathetic.

 

[Spectrum]

Second test looks spot on for the average Geekbench i7 8700 benchmarks:
5300 and 23,000

https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/2063

This is going to be such a MONSTER upgrade from an aging 2011 i7 quad!
3x faster GPU
2x faster RAM
4x max RAM capacity
2x faster single core
3x faster multicore
4x faster internal SSD

 

[Artric76]

Intel ARK says that there are not imbedded options available for this 8700B Processor.... does that mean this might be upgradeable?!

https://ark.intel.com/compare/126686,134905

 

[picaman]

May I please have your address and tracking number? I just want to make sure it gets to you safely.

Delivering to the nearest Apple Store. I live in the hood

 

[Appleaker]

Will be interesting to see results for the base models.

You don't need to wait, while there are no benchmarks for the B variation of the i3, the are essentially the same mainstream desktop processors that have been on the market for almost a year, you can expect somewhere around 4500 single-core, and 14500 multi-core.

 

[cppguy]

A single benchmark is not a good indication, it doesn't tell us about the heat performance. The MacBook Pro may be almost as fast, but it it cannot sustain that speed very long, versus a proper desktop should have much better cooling. I'll just wait for the iMac CPU refresh, and proper stress testing with large FinalCut projects. A short benchmark can be very misleading, as it doesn't tell us about potential throttling.