Early Impressions and Benchmarks on Apple's 2012 Mac Mini

[SirHaakon]

So, at least in theory, one could add a graphics card with Sonnet's Expansion Chassis? Didn't find anything about the support in their web site though.

You can't do it yet... the bandwidth is still too limited on those Thunderbolt chassis for high end graphics. You can put a 10GB Ethernet card, an Esata card, or other peripherals in it however.

There's one chassis that runs at twice the speed of the sonnet currently available, but unfortunately it costs a grand.

http://www.magma.com/thunderbolt

People are working on graphics solutions though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AYypyF1SRg

 

[elec999]

Id love to see one of these minis with 4 network cards so I could run vmware esx server on it.

 

[xraydoc]

So very much want one to replace my Mac Pro server (see sig) - which can pretty much be used as a space heater in cold weather. Even the base model would work well enough for me as a server. Plus, my office would be so much quieter! Only downside is the lack of eSATA which is the interface for my RAID box. It has a FireWire 800 port on it but does not have Thunderbolt. FW800 will probably reduce the performance I'm used to but might not be a deal-breaker.

 

[Cory Bauer]

Am I correct that the $799 Mac Mini features the exact same processor as what is found in the $2,199 MacBook Pro with Retina Display? And the $100 BTO option gives you the same 2.6Ghz chip found in the $2,799 MacBook Pro with Retina Display?

I'm thinking a 2.6Ghz Quad-Core i7 Mac Mini with Fusion Drive and 16GB of RAM ($82 from Crucial) could be a pretty great system, apart of course from the complete lack of dedicated graphics. But it seems that all of Apple's offerings under $2k require some significant compromise.

 

[haravikk]

But there are uses whree you can never have too much power and speed so Apple need to always have a top class workstation. Is doesn't matter if it doesn't sell millions - it needs to be there for the sake of platform completeness.

True, I'm a programmer and occasionally do work with movie files and 3d rendering, so a workstation is necessary, and I've been looking to upgrade for a while now, but for the expense I don't really see that the current Mac Pro is worth it.

Anyway, it's a bit off topic but it's kind of reaching the point that a bunch of Mac Minis slaved together with XGrid could end up better for processor intensive tasks, providing you can work that way. I'd still rather have access to proper graphics cards though. The stagnation of the Mac Pro is even hurting what little support for Mac cards there is, as firms considering switch from Mac Pros means less and less reason to bring out cards that work well with OS X.

 

[SpinThis!]

Anyway, it's a bit off topic but it's kind of reaching the point that a bunch of Mac Minis slaved together with XGrid could end up better for processor intensive tasks, providing you can work that way.

Too bad XGRid was axed in Mountain Lion.

 

[subsonix]

Too bad XGRid was axed in Mountain Lion.

There are many other alternatives though not as closely integrated. However, the gap that is left with the new machines, and the official statement that something new is coming for the Mac Pro means that it may be better to wait if this was mean as a replacement imo.

 

[polaris20]

Yeah, it is somewhat sad when USB 3.0 is a make or break feature on Apple's computers. That and discrete GPUs.

Well, for me this cements my purchase, due to the IO. The 2.6Ghz Mini is faster than the Mac Pros we still have running FCP here in the office. It'll run Logic Pro with a breeze, and with one of the stack drives from OWC, I'll be able to have a ton of local storage at high speeds.

I know I can get a Windows PC that's faster, yadda yadda yadda, but honestly OS X agrees with me the most in terms of audio and video work, and with so much stuff in my office/home studio already, the small size of the Mini is very, very appealing.

----------

Id love to see one of these minis with 4 network cards so I could run vmware esx server on it.

You could get the Thunderbolt to ethernet, but that's just one extra, obviously. There was a company that was making a Mini-sized box awhile back, that had 8 NICs. I really wanted one, but the company went out of business.

A good compromise would be to get a Shuttle kit, and get an Intel quad port NIC for it. You could probably easily build one for less than a grand.

 

[linkgx1]

Something like this?

http://www.dell.com/us/p/alienware-x51/pd.aspx

Super powerful for its size, upgradeable, real video card, which is also upgradeable, its all easily upgradeable, and STILL maintains a tiny footprint.

I'd be more attracted to the mini if it was something along those lines.

I dunno though. I think the mini is more or less understated yet effective. While the Alienware is nice, it pushes to much into the territory of a tradition desktop. Meh.

 

[The Wedge]

How many copies of Final Cut Pro are there out in the wild? Many Millions at very least. Logic Pro also. I'd say about 90% of them would buy a new killer Mac Pro if it was available. I know because I'm one of those.
Can't give an exact figure on sales but it would be in the Billions of dollars.

I would buy one also. Logic and FCPX are my main apps, I need power, not a laptop.

 

[Garsun]

Only downside is the lack of eSATA which is the interface for my RAID box.

I use "LaCie esata hub thunderbolt series" to connect my esata disk arrays to my macmini. Works great.

 

[banemicic]

What is the best 2.5", 1TB, 7200rpm hard disk suitable for new Mac Mini as a second drive with OWC Data Doubler Kit? Hard disk will be used mainly for audio/video work with Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro X projects.

----------

Anyone knows why Mac Mini Server has better Geekbench results than $799 model? They have the same processors and components...

 

[PeterQVenkman]

There are many other alternatives though not as closely integrated. However, the gap that is left with the new machines, and the official statement that something new is coming for the Mac Pro means that it may be better to wait if this was mean as a replacement imo.

Tim Cook said this:

"Although we didn't have a chance to talk about a new Mac Pro at today's event, don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year,

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-...-refresh-later-next-year-2012-6#ixzz2AKGAdtH4

Note that he said "something really great" not "a new mac pro". His wording is just vague enough so that if they do not release a new mac pro, they can say they never promised it. They are purposefully stringing along mac pro owners.

Apple is calling the iMac the premiere desktop computer.

 

[linkgx1]

Tim Cook said this:



Note that he said "something really great" not "a new mac pro". His wording is just vague enough so that if they do not release a new mac pro, they can say they never promised it. They are purposefully stringing along mac pro owners.

Apple is calling the iMac the premiere desktop computer.

I think Mr Cook is gonna run Apple into the ground, especially regarding with its loyal user base.

 

[subsonix]

Tim Cook said this:



Note that he said "something really great" not "a new mac pro". His wording is just vague enough so that if they do not release a new mac pro, they can say they never promised it. They are purposefully stringing along mac pro owners.

Apple is calling the iMac the premiere desktop computer.

I agree, but it was a response to the reactions of latest update to Mac Pro. When the rumors started to circulate that this also related to iMac, that was denied by Apple PR. This relates to 2013 and the iMac has already been updated now. The fact that the iMac has become thinner and Mac mini remains where it was, means that there is still an upper segment that they did not attempt to bridge with the current models.

Edit: See the update at the end.

https://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/1...c-pro-and-imac-designs-likely-coming-in-2013/

 

[JHankwitz]

No dedicated GPU = no buy

You obvilusly want this product to be used for something it's not intended to be used. The iMac 27 will be availble for you before Christmas.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

I agree, but it was a response to the reactions of latest update to Mac Pro. When the rumors started to circulate that this also related to iMac, that was denied by Apple PR. This relates to 2013 and the iMac has already been updated now. The fact that the iMac has become thinner and Mac mini remains where it was, means that there is still an upper segment that they did not attempt to bridge with the current models.

Edit: See the update at the end.

https://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/1...c-pro-and-imac-designs-likely-coming-in-2013/

Let's hope it's true. I've already gotten a taste of blazing fast windows machines that I build myself for a fraction of the cost. It's awesome.

 

[zorinlynx]

Anybody know if it is possible to run ML client on the server model? An SSD as the main drive with a 1TB drive for time machine backup, would make a nice little machine.

You don't want your backup disk to be in the same physical machine as the disk it's backing up. If the machine dies, whoops, your backup is toast too.

Back up to a separate external hard drive at the very least... Time capsule is even better.

 

[SockRolid]

Mac Pro replacement?

[...] Don't look now, but the new Mac minis are getting comparable to the last gen Xserve and 2010 Mac Pros as far as benchmarks. Tech progress marches on. [...]

Yes it does. Maybe some day Apple could eliminate the need for a the current monolithic Mac Pro. Instead, we would use clusters of Mac minis. Optical Thunderbolt would give higher performance than Gigabit Ethernet between the clustered minis.

Taking it a step further, maybe Apple could design the "Mac mini server" enclosures to snap together magnetically. And Apple could also provide various lockable racks for clustered Mac minis, hard drives, SSDs, etc. to prevent accidental disconnection, for better security, etc.

Couldn't happen for years, but it might be practical.

 

[hamakiman]

I think the comment about the 2010 Mac Pros is the most difficult to bear; it's great to see the Mac Minis continuing to improve as I've got two and they're great little machine, but they should not be threatening the workstation model!

Hence the GPU call.

 

[elec999]

Well, for me this cements my purchase, due to the IO. The 2.6Ghz Mini is faster than the Mac Pros we still have running FCP here in the office. It'll run Logic Pro with a breeze, and with one of the stack drives from OWC, I'll be able to have a ton of local storage at high speeds.

I know I can get a Windows PC that's faster, yadda yadda yadda, but honestly OS X agrees with me the most in terms of audio and video work, and with so much stuff in my office/home studio already, the small size of the Mini is very, very appealing.

----------



You could get the Thunderbolt to ethernet, but that's just one extra, obviously. There was a company that was making a Mini-sized box awhile back, that had 8 NICs. I really wanted one, but the company went out of business.

A good compromise would be to get a Shuttle kit, and get an Intel quad port NIC for it. You could probably easily build one for less than a grand.

I agree with you, only problem is that I really like the form factor of the mini.

 

[JohnDory]

I've been using a base model mini for 6 years - the first three were very enjoyable and it is still remarkably useful. I was so much hoping for a new iMac. But with the limitations of the base models, the expense of necessary add ons, and the obvious value in the $799 model - goodbye pot-bellied iMac, good-buy sexy little Mac mini.

 

[Obioban]

There is a benefit to the portable based hardware-- reduced power consumption!

My Mac Pro server is a video converter, home theater server, and web server. Months that it is on I spend ~$20 more on power (some of which is AC to counter the heat it generates).

I don't need anything near the expandablility or gpu performance of the Pro, so the mini would be only better for my needs.

I'm not going to switch over, as everything is currently working flawlessly... But next time I buy something to use as a server/home theater computer, it likely will be a mini. Cheaper to run, fits on the home theater shelf, cheaper to buy, way more than enough power for my needs, and quieter.

 

[fig]

How many copies of Final Cut Pro are there out in the wild? Many Millions at very least. Logic Pro also. I'd say about 90% of them would buy a new killer Mac Pro if it was available. I know because I'm one of those.
Can't give an exact figure on sales but it would be in the Billions of dollars.

While true, a lot of pro users have shifted away from FCPX and onto more traditional editoing packages.

And while horsepower is nice, for your average and even prosumer user an iMac or mini is going to be more than enough for most work they'll do. Even for your average designer/developer it's more than adequate.

I certainly hope Apple continues to create Pro machines, I'm just not sure if the market is nearly what it used to be.

 

[Macist]

Why does Apple need to have a complete platform? Does it show up somehow on the bottom line?

It can do. Say you're a design or video or production house. You NEED one or two high end work stations for crunch but the rest of the seats can all be iMacs or MacBook. Then the workstation goes. So you need another platform. Then you don't want a mixed environment. So you get rid of the iMacs too. Perhaps the iPads as well.

And random 'prosumer' types that cream themselves over having something similar to the 'pros' stop buying Apple stuff because it's not used much for key content creation anymore and that bit of cachet goes too.

Bottom line hurt.