A new Mac Mini to replace 2.66ghz 2009 iMac

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by Iwan, Jul 23, 2012.

  1. Iwan macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    #1
    I currently own a 2009 iMac 24" 2.66ghz and for a number of reason i think its time to upgrade to a newer model.

    Due to financial restrictions i think and the fact i can no longer get an education discount from apple, i think a mac mini may be the most sensible way forward.

    I understand that a 2012 Mac mini is just around the corner, so it would be quite stupid of me to go for the 2011 models at the moment. I mainly use my iMac for music production with large amounts of audio tracks an plug ins, my main concern is that if a new mac mini wouldnt be a significant upgrade in terms of performance compared to my 2009 iMac, I know the hardware will be much more up to date, but im concerned that the mac mini may not run as cool, and would I be better off just upgrading to a newer iMac?

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #2
    Core i Series is considerably faster than the Core2duo series. Further, the ability to run 16GB vs 8GB should help you immensely. Lastly, you can always get the server model with a quad core processor which would give you twice the cores you currently have. Yes a 2012 Mac Mini (even base) should be faster than your 2009 iMac.
     
  3. pismobrat macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    #3
    Just talking from experience.

    I recently upgraded from a Late 09 2.26 C2D mac mini to the mid 2011 I5 2.3 and it is noticeably faster for me in every area.

    The old Late 09 C2d Mac mini had a SSD and 4GB of ram. My new I5 has the same SSD and 8GB. Everything loads quicker and alot smoother.

    I had no problems on the older model playing any form of video, but where I really noticed the improvement was the video performance - specifically web browsing.

    I ran the old mac mini at 1920 res and safari and other apps that dominated the screen did have notisable lag. The new I5, even though it isn't a dedicated card, just slaughters the old mini for video performance.

    Just my two bits - but if you can afford SSD, do it - if not add a hybrid drive.
     
  4. jbellanca macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    #4
    I had an iMac, which recently died. I decided to go the Mac Mini route with a 32" 1080p TV monitor, because I like up upgrade more frequently, if I can afford it. Using a Mini gives me the ability to upgrade at least twice as frequently for the same cost, if I want to. I know the graphics card on the Mini's not as fast as the iMac, and (right now) it's not quad-core, but, for me, that sacrifice if better than waiting an extra couple years between upgrade cycles.
     
  5. Iwan thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    #5
    Disapointed to see the lack of dedicated GPU's in the new mini's. But Im not much of a gamer and the intel HD 4000 doesnt seem too bad, probably better than my current Geforce9400 in my iMac. Quad core now aswell, but no 7200rpm option, which is essential for my needs.
     
  6. tears2040 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    #6

    Hard Drive rpm speed is not everything. More than likely the 5400 rpm hard drive is a lot faster than your 7200 rpm 4+ year old hd. Also the cpu is leaps and bounds better. Finally the hd4000 is also better than your current gpu.

    Go and do a geekbench score test and post it, the Mac Mini will blow it away in everything.....
     

Share This Page