I'm just wondering of performance... You may have 4 or 6 Cores and faster speed but its still an i3...
To me, even an i5 would feel faster.
"First, i7 does not mean a seven-core processor!" lol
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.
Apple Announces New Space Gray Mac mini With 4-Core or 6-Core Intel Processor and Up to 64GB RAM, Starting at $799
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm just wondering of performance... You may have 4 or 6 Cores and faster speed but its still an i3...
To me, even an i5 would feel faster.
"First, i7 does not mean a seven-core processor!" lol
Yes, I do, since my point was that you said
and that is utterly wrong. That is pretty much the definition of proof.
Only true on the base price, once you pay Apple's consumer ripoff for SSDs and RAM, it ends up being 100's of % more.
A brief compare and contrast:
NUC
8th gen quad i7
8GB RAM
128GB NVMe SSD
MINI
8th gen quad i3
8GB RAM
128GB NVMe SSD
The NUC has
The NUCs also look easier to get into and repair/upgrade.
Here's the kicker: For the specs given above, the NUC is only 60% of the Mini price. (739 v. 1249). And that comparison gets worse for the Mini as you increase factory RAM and SSD capacity.
So, besides being cheaper up front for the same specs, getting a NUC also means I can afford to add more RAM and storage, and/or upgrade models every couple of years or so.
I am not rich, and that is not likely to change. Price, upgradability, and repairability, are becoming more important to me.
The new Minis are very nice. But that Apple tax is getting hard to wear.
In fairness to Apple, I haven't factored in any difference in build and component quality, and overall durability/lifespan. I don't know how well the NUCs hold up. My experience with Apple on that score is excellent. All my Apple computers have lived way past their warranty, with no problems. Both my 2012 Mini and 13" Air, and even a retired 2007 iMac, are all still running fine.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Oh noes! I have just spotted the real deal breaker: the power/status light on the front panel has been moved from top of the panel to the bottom.
That's it. I'm out.
NUC
8th gen quad i7
8GB RAM
128GB NVMe SSD
MINI
8th gen quad i3
8GB RAM
128GB NVMe SSD
The NUC has
Better graphics (Iris Plus 655 v. UHD 630), although the UHD 630 is still a big jump in performance from the HD4000 in my 2012 Mini, and should easily meet my needs.
Enough ports for my needs (big difference is the number of TB3 ports – Apple have delivered there, though we don't yet know how many controllers they are using to drive those four TB3 ports).
An external power brick, which I don't mind. It helps reduce heat around chipsets and drives, is a trivial effort to replace, and I rarely move my desktop computer.
A much bigger range of drive options, including two case forms (short & tall) to allow a 2.5" SATA bay (as well as the SSD blade socket).
Enough ports for my needs (big difference is the number of TB3 ports – Apple have delivered there, though we don't yet know how many controllers they are using to drive those four TB3 ports).
An external power brick, which I don't mind. It helps reduce heat around chipsets and drives, is a trivial effort to replace, and I rarely move my desktop computer.
A much bigger range of drive options, including two case forms (short & tall) to allow a 2.5" SATA bay (as well as the SSD blade socket).
The NUCs also look easier to get into and repair/upgrade.
Here's the kicker: For the specs given above, the NUC is only 60% of the Mini price. (739 v. 1249). And that comparison gets worse for the Mini as you increase factory RAM and SSD capacity.
So, besides being cheaper up front for the same specs, getting a NUC also means I can afford to add more RAM and storage, and/or upgrade models every couple of years or so.
I am not rich, and that is not likely to change. Price, upgradability, and repairability, are becoming more important to me.
The new Minis are very nice. But that Apple tax is getting hard to wear.
In fairness to Apple, I haven't factored in any difference in build and component quality, and overall durability/lifespan. I don't know how well the NUCs hold up. My experience with Apple on that score is excellent. All my Apple computers have lived way past their warranty, with no problems. Both my 2012 Mini and 13" Air, and even a retired 2007 iMac, are all still running fine.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Here in Australia it is $6659. My bank account went into hiding when it saw that number.
I agree. A 256GB entry level would have taken some of the sting out of the price.
The 630 is not the best iGPU on offer nowadays, but still a big jump up from the HD 3000 in your 2011, and even from the top iGPU in the 2014 Mini.
I agree that most users, including me, won't see much practical difference between SATA3 and NVMe SSDs. But if Apple are genuinely trying to expand the Mini into the Pro market – and that seems to be their intention – then going all NVMe does make some sense.
This Apple support document states that the T2 settings allow the option to boot from any external drive.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Oh noes! I have just spotted the real deal breaker: the power/status light on the front panel has been moved from top of the panel to the bottom.
That's it. I'm out.
No. I didn't miss a paragraph. The whole point of BTO is so you DON'T have to build the exact same spec machine as another. You can build specifically to your needs. And if I can build a Mac Mini workstation for $2,250 that performs just as well as the $5,000 base iMac Pro for the specific tasks I'm going to be performing...
Then Why would I spend the extra $2,750 for the iMac Pro. That's a total waste of money. There's absolutely zero reason I need a 2TB NVMe drive in the Mac Mini. The 256GB is all I want, as I prefer to have my OS drive as clean as possible.
Going out of your way to build a Mac Mini that specifically matches the iMac Pro is only proving the Mac Mini is fantastically scalable. And better yet, Having the ability to add a GTX 1080ti to Mac Mini as an eGPU is a pretty sweet deal - so yeah. PC Partpicker is a dam great resource. ...or, if I don't need a Vega 56, I can get a $200 8GB MSI Radeon RX 580. The options are what makes the 2018 Mac Mini a fantastic little beastie.
I'm ecstatic they announced this machine.
No. I didn't miss a paragraph. The whole point of BTO is so you DON'T have to build the exact same spec machine as another. You can build specifically to your needs. And if I can build a Mac Mini workstation for $2,250 that performs just as well as the $5,000 base iMac Pro for the specific tasks I'm going to be performing...
Then Why would I spend the extra $2,750 for the iMac Pro. That's a total waste of money. There's absolutely zero reason I need a 2TB NVMe drive in the Mac Mini. The 256GB is all I want, as I prefer to have my OS drive as clean as possible.
Going out of your way to build a Mac Mini that specifically matches the iMac Pro is only proving the Mac Mini is fantastically scalable. And better yet, Having the ability to add a GTX 1080ti to Mac Mini as an eGPU is a pretty sweet deal - so yeah. PC Partpicker is a dam great resource. ...or, if I don't need a Vega 56, I can get a $200 8GB MSI Radeon RX 580. The options are what makes the 2018 Mac Mini a fantastic little beastie.
I'm ecstatic they announced this machine.
Your comparisons make no sense: you're comparing baselines tasks to Apple's only real 'Pro' machine, you're pricing out a computer with no monitor, keyboard or mouse. You have to compare Apples to Apples. Also, while anyone who wants to build a Hackingtosh should, there are drawbacks to building and running one that are negatives compared to out-of-the-box Apple products.
And I've written it in this thread before: At the moment the ONLY eGPU that has no issues working with Macs is the (of course) Blackmagic eGPU. Every other eGPU, regardless if it's fully compatible with Mac has constant issues. This is well documented.
Says who? That's the trap so many people fall into - they feel there needs to be some sort of mythical equality in comparisons. It's BTO for a reason...
I don't need a display - I have a fantastic display. The 5K does nothing for me that I can't do with my calibrated NEC MultiSync. I have a Keyboard and Mouse. In fact, I have two of each - one set is going unused.
Who says I have to compare apples to apples, if both computers can do the tasks I need? And especially if both are equally adept, even though one is computer is significantly less expensive than the other. So what's the point of over specing/pricing the less expensive machine? To prove I can build a $5,000 Mac Mini?
This is the same silly argument Mac users make; "You can't compare and i7 PC workstation to a Xeon Mac workstation" - even though both workstations can do the exact same work.
Don't kid yourself - you make any computer comparison you wish. That's the entire point of customization/Build to order.
Which is funny, as no one seems to want to answer - if I can spec out and build a Mac Mini workstation (for $2,250) that can perform my tasks just as fast, if not more efficiently than a $5,000 iMac Pro - then why would I buy the iMac Pro?
As of today, there are no NVidia drivers that have been released for the GTX 1080ti for macOS Mojave.
Only for macOS High Sierra, which is not installable on the 2018 Mac mini, AFAIK.
Almost certainly.Fair enough. I'm sure they're coming.
I can afford the mac mini fairly easily, but I can't disregard the bang for the buck. I am still evaluating the same points as you for the NUC vs the Mac Mini. I'm thinking if I bought a Mac Mini, it'd basically last over a decade considering I still use my Synology from 2012 today with no real plans to retire any time soon. The NUC on the other hand could also last the same amount of time if not more with upgradeable slots. Any peripheral that dies can be replaced without taking it to the ridonkulous Genius Bar.
However I really prefer MacOS over Windows and Linux for the ideas I have in mind, and I don't want to build a Hackintosh.
Decisions ...
So will these 8th gen Intel Core CPU's have a built-in hardware fix to address the Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities?
Also, will the 6 core 3.2 ghz i7 be noticeably faster than the 6 core 3.0 ghz i5 when it come to video editing? Just wondering if it's worth the upgrade.
Also, will the 6 core 3.2 ghz i7 be noticeably faster than the 6 core 3.0 ghz i5 when it come to video editing? Just wondering if it's worth the upgrade.
No, do not think so. Even 9th generation partly needs software against the variante of spectre/meltdown.
https://www.itnews.com.au/news/intel-release-first-meltdown-and-spectre-proof-cpus-513687
But the Mac mini is still a nice machine now for apple users that do not want to buy iMacs or notebooks at all.
In considering the Mac Mini for pro use, but I think many of us are neglecting a HUGE issue which is noise. I hate noise with passion, that's one of the reasons I built a hackintosh which is near silent even under load vs my MBP and vs the iMac I used to have which were turbo jets.
We need to find out how how noisy this new Mac Mini will be.
We need to find out how how noisy this new Mac Mini will be.
Last edited:
It is currently borderline for me. Still waiting on things like iFixit breakdowns, Usebench and Geekbench scores, general user reports, etc.
I do like MacOS, and really would prefer not changing OS. But would also be fine with Linux, if required. It does everything I need, and seems to have a solid future.
Hackintosh is probably too much work for me. Apple might also use the T2 chip to make Hacks impossible or much harder (though could be talking out my arske here).
The two stumbling blocks for me with the new Mini are the pricing of the SSD, and the possibility that it is soldered in and hence cannot be replaced if it dies.
Fortunately my current set-up is running fine and doing what is needed, so I am in no rush. Good chance I can safely wait 6-12 months for refurbs, which will take some of the sting out of the price.
OTOH, I could buy myself a NUC for Xmas, start moving over to Linux, and have the whole show done and dusted well before the first 2018 Minis appear in the refurb store.
Decisions indeed...
thanks! Yes, here is a full comparison to the HD3000. It looks like 3x faster on averageA brief compare and contrast:
NUC
8th gen quad i7
8GB RAM
128GB NVMe SSD
MINI
8th gen quad i3
8GB RAM
128GB NVMe SSD
The NUC has
Better graphics (Iris Plus 655 v. UHD 630), although the UHD 630 is still a big jump in performance from the HD4000 in my 2012 Mini, and should easily meet my needs.
Enough ports for my needs (big difference is the number of TB3 ports – Apple have delivered there, though we don't yet know how many controllers they are using to drive those four TB3 ports).
An external power brick, which I don't mind. It helps reduce heat around chipsets and drives, is a trivial effort to replace, and I rarely move my desktop computer.
A much bigger range of drive options, including two case forms (short & tall) to allow a 2.5" SATA bay (as well as the SSD blade socket).
The NUCs also look easier to get into and repair/upgrade.
Here's the kicker: For the specs given above, the NUC is only 60% of the Mini price. (739 v. 1249). And that comparison gets worse for the Mini as you increase factory RAM and SSD capacity.
So, besides being cheaper up front for the same specs, getting a NUC also means I can afford to add more RAM and storage, and/or upgrade models every couple of years or so.
I am not rich, and that is not likely to change. Price, upgradability, and repairability, are becoming more important to me.
The new Minis are very nice. But that Apple tax is getting hard to wear.
In fairness to Apple, I haven't factored in any difference in build and component quality, and overall durability/lifespan. I don't know how well the NUCs hold up. My experience with Apple on that score is excellent. All my Apple computers have lived way past their warranty, with no problems. Both my 2012 Mini and 13" Air, and even a retired 2007 iMac, are all still running fine.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Here in Australia it is $6659. My bank account went into hiding when it saw that number.
I agree. A 256GB entry level would have taken some of the sting out of the price.
The 630 is not the best iGPU on offer nowadays, but still a big jump up from the HD 3000 in your 2011, and even from the top iGPU in the 2014 Mini.
I agree that most users, including me, won't see much practical difference between SATA3 and NVMe SSDs. But if Apple are genuinely trying to expand the Mini into the Pro market – and that seems to be their intention – then going all NVMe does make some sense.
This Apple support document states that the T2 settings allow the option to boot from any external drive.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Oh noes! I have just spotted the real deal breaker: the power/status light on the front panel has been moved from top of the panel to the bottom.
That's it. I'm out.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...-630-Desktop-Coffee-Lake-i5-i7/m7647vsm356797
Even the High Sierra does not have ones for 10.13.6.
It's a shame, because I want nVIDIA card for games in BootCamp, but having a GPU that works only in Windoze is a terrible idea. Someday, I will need all that graphic processing power on Mac, and then, what I can do is just look at nVIDIA eGPU and cry. I still have hope, though, I find it hard to believe that nVDIA will never release the drivers. But I do not know what is taking them so long.
The thing is that eGPU such as RX580 will blow out of water any mobile dGPU.
But yes, for those who just want nice dGPU and consider the eGPU unnecessary, this is a huge drawback, I do not know what the heck they were thinking at this price point.
Even 'average' iGPUs like the UHD 630 are pretty good these days. Probably comfortably cover most non-gamer and non-pro use.
The mini has never really included a dedicated GPU, so I don't see that anything has really changed. And in my opinion the prices are very similar to where they were back in 2011/2012 with the HD3000 and HD4000 in the quad core versions.
An Option with GPU like in MBPro might have been good...but that is more even heat in a small enclosure, especially now that these are 65W+ desktop chips.
It would be nice if a matching £200 eGPU module were released by a third party (maybe with m2 Slots) but I don't see that heppening just yet.
[doublepost=1541070341][/doublepost]
I'm actually quite interested in the idea of converting by 2011 mini case into a matching hub for external TB3 connected SSDs
The dimensions are identical to the new model. just need to remove the guts to make some room...
Last edited:
The mini has never really included a dedicated GPU, so I don't see that anything has really changed. And in my opinion the prices are very similar to where they were back in 2011/2012 with the HD3000 and HD4000 in the quad core versions.
An Option with GPU like in MBPro might have been good...but that is more even heat in a small enclosure, especially now that these are 65W+ desktop chips.
It would be nice if a matching £200 eGPU module were released by a third party (maybe with m2 Slots) but I don't see that heppening just yet.
[doublepost=1541070341][/doublepost]
I'm actually quite interested in the idea of converting by 2011 mini case into a matching hub for external TB3 connected SSDs
The dimensions are identical to the new model. just need to remove the guts to make some room...
Analogue to HD3000/HD4000 is Iris, not this. This is below Iris in performance.
But this is what I'm talking about the base model with the I3,128gb storage, isn't worth 800$+taxes, this is the 500$ machine that apple for no reason other than even bigger profit decided to up the price to 800$.
Dang, looks like no Mac Mini with that integrated GPU.
Everything else was so perfect for me. I don’t need an external gpu, but I am not going to put myself in a bind for another 3-4 years because the graphics card underperforms.
Everything else was so perfect for me. I don’t need an external gpu, but I am not going to put myself in a bind for another 3-4 years because the graphics card underperforms.