Is the 40Gb/s bandwidth shared between ports or does each port sustain 40Gb/s loads independently?
Last edited:
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.
First Mac Mini Benchmark Surfaces Ahead of November 7 Launch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Is the 40Gb/s bandwidth shared between ports or does each port sustain 40Gb/s loads independently?
Thanks for the reply. I run everything like we are "supposed" to run it. That is, with sample libraries on external SSD and Logic project files on a separate external drive. Only the application is on my iMac HD. So, I could easily skate by with a 256gb HD on a Mac mini and save that extra dough for the beefiest processor and adding RAM myself.
With both you and LanceUK thinking this is a great direction for musicians, I'm certainly leaning in this direction. I was holding out for the new Mac Pro, but in the end, I simply don't make enough money doing this to justify what I'm sure will be a minimum of $3999 starting price (if it is ever released).
I'm eager to see some youtube reviews when these Mini's hit the streets.
While I don't like external enclosures, USB-C is future-proof enough that it's worth pulling the trigger on this for me to replace my 5,1.
What's interesting is where this leaves the Mac Pro. I mean, the only things the Mini is lacking at this point is internal storage bays, which Apple is phasing out, and slots, which Apple phased out in the 6,1.
The Mac Pro will basically be an iMac Pro with slots and no monitor. And if it has slots it'll have space for internal drive bays. So the Mac lineup will be:
Macs with screens
Good - iMac 21
Better - iMac 27
Best - iMac Pro
Macs with no screens
Good - Mini -> no slots, no internal bays, restricted CPU and RAM
Best - Mac Pro -> slots, internal bays, maximum CPU and RAM
What's interesting is where this leaves the Mac Pro. I mean, the only things the Mini is lacking at this point is internal storage bays, which Apple is phasing out, and slots, which Apple phased out in the 6,1.
The Mac Pro will basically be an iMac Pro with slots and no monitor. And if it has slots it'll have space for internal drive bays. So the Mac lineup will be:
Macs with screens
Good - iMac 21
Better - iMac 27
Best - iMac Pro
Macs with no screens
Good - Mini -> no slots, no internal bays, restricted CPU and RAM
Best - Mac Pro -> slots, internal bays, maximum CPU and RAM
Am I the only one who is getting very tired of people comparing this mac mini with PC hardware alternatives and complaining about the price? - There is a premium to pay for the ecosystem, reliability and security - and I for one are willing to pay that because it is my livelihood. We use FCP / Logic / ProTools / Adobe CC in the studio. We've got 6 macs currently in the studio – and have been using macs since 1987. Number of days since 1987 when we couldn't work because of a hardware / OS issue = precisely 0. Don't want to be rude but will you PC trolls please go away and buy some NUKs 
.
.Am I the only one who is getting very tired of people comparing this mac mini with PC hardware alternatives and complaining about the price? - There is a premium to pay for the ecosystem, reliability and security - and I for one are willing to pay that because it is my livelihood. We use FCP / Logic / ProTools / Adobe CC in the studio. We've got 6 macs currently in the studio – and have been using macs since 1987. Number of days since 1987 when we couldn't work because of a hardware / OS issue = precisely 0. Don't want to be rude but will you PC trolls please go away and buy some NUKs
Totally agree. The so-called Apple "premium" or "tax" for me is well worth it for the reasons you mentioned above, and, Apple providing warranty service and support. And of course there's all the systems engineering and design that went into it. The Mini is a great package that's incredibly flexible for many use scenarios while providing excellent value.
[doublepost=1541383750][/doublepost]
My understanding is that each port has that capability. OTOH, the Mini being able to source and/or receive that much data simultaneously at that rate doing something meaningful with it is a very different matter.
Am I the only one who is getting very tired of people comparing this mac mini with PC hardware alternatives and complaining about the price? - There is a premium to pay for the ecosystem, reliability and security - and I for one are willing to pay that because it is my livelihood. We use FCP / Logic / ProTools / Adobe CC in the studio. We've got 6 macs currently in the studio – and have been using macs since 1987. Number of days since 1987 when we couldn't work because of a hardware / OS issue = precisely 0. Don't want to be rude but will you PC trolls please go away and buy some NUKs
Well, considering how about 90%+ of the components are also used in PCs it's not surprising that they are being price compared. It does seem like Apple has increased their "premium" more recently though - it's probably Tim Cook trying to find the right balance (ie. most profit) between how much we're willing to pay for that premium before abandoning the platform, and everyone's threshold will be different. I think characterizing folks upset at the pricing (vs PC equivalents) as "PC trolls" is a little unfair. Apple definitely seems to be raising the prices on even their lower end products, and its unfortunate for folks who are Apple/Mac enthusiasts but also have to be budget minded.
It seems it can go high as this and was taken today.
Same person. https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/10625929
I like this usage very much.
For the last few years, I learnt that MBP is very expensive, unreliable, overheat and prone to high maintenance cost i.e., $600 display repair.
Going forwards, we must re-think the mix of laptop and desktop. And don't be under the illusion that an i9 MBP is the ultimate desktop replacement.
My only reservation is again now I have to maintain two Macs ....
Yeah, I'm eager to see more Mac Mini 2018 benchmarks and iFixit disassembly etc. before I finally pull the trigger and decide on what config to get. As much as I'm excited about the forthcoming MacPro - I'm pretty sure it will be more powerful than I actually need, and cost way out of my budget.
[doublepost=1541416458][/doublepost]
I like this usage very much.
For the last few years, I learnt that MBP is very expensive, unreliable, overheat and prone to high maintenance cost i.e., $600 display repair.
Going forwards, we must re-think the mix of laptop and desktop. And don't be under the illusion that an i9 MBP is the ultimate desktop replacement.
My only reservation is again now I have to maintain two Macs ....
Yeah, I'm coming to the same conclusion. I'd rather go for a Mac Mini/MacBook Air combo than a Macbook Pro. (And that's saying something, considering I have 2 MacBook Pro's sat on my desk right now!)
Last edited:
I wonder if the 6-core i7/8GB/256GB could be a desktop for ten years of software development. The possibility of using an external GPU can be the next step for extending computer lifetime. My 2010 Mini is still good for browsing/office work after almost 10 years thanks to 16GB of ram and a SSD.
MacMinis are brilliant for a small render farm, at least the previous model was.
I wonder if the new mini needs an HDMI dead head to run at peak speed. Also, to keep the heat down I always run these babies upside down so the cooling vents have more exposure to circulated air. Hacking the fan speeds is a plus too.
But I can't wait to see how these models perform.
Neat - you run them truly upside down, or with the rear vents facing upward?
I was hoping to have a couple of minis plugged in directly to my router, and I would just remote into them using my iMac when I need to use TeamRender.
I run them upside down (not very space efficient) with the vents up. TeamRender (Cinema 4D I presume?) is awesome - I had a dozen machines going at one point, very powerful! Now with cheaper multi-core machines farming is more affordably done.
cheers.
That score, if it is real and not some bogus posting somehow, puts it as the fastest single core Mac (at running Geekbench). And beaten at multicore only by the 2018 iMac Pro configs.
This will be a truly ridiculous upgrade from my Mac mini 2011 quad! (Which itself has lasted and worked great for 7 years). As another poster suggested, with ePGU and external TB3 storage, this could easily be a computer for 5+ years, maybe even 10. Until the macOS ARM revolution happens of course...
Can anyone explain what the advantages of getting the 10 GB ethernet option on the Mini are? I'll be using it as my main home Mac hooked up to a 27" Asus Designo screen and doing mainly music, prosumer video and photo editing.
If I plan on keeping this for 5 years will I regret not getting the 10 GB option?
If I plan on keeping this for 5 years will I regret not getting the 10 GB option?
My understanding is that 10Gb Ethernet is basically the same bandwidth as TB1. So very fast Ethernet.
I would have thought that if you don't add the option now, but find you need it in the future, it would be possible to have a TB3-10GbEthernet adapter/box of some kind that would give the same performance. Hopefully someone can chime in on that...
Here is an external adapter from Sonnet: https://cvp.com/product/sonnet_solo...MI1Pzfj_a93gIVzZ3tCh1a0wfFEAQYAiABEgJ_I_D_BwE
It's interesting if you need to interface to a remoted NAS (Synology, Qnap, etc), or other device or switch, via a 10 Gbit/sec Ethernet interface, which would be 10X faster than a 1 Gbit/sec interface. There are some caveats as to whether the Mini and other device can actually source/absorb data at those rates, though, and do something worthwhile.
Apple's optional interface is actually NBASE-T, which can negotiate rates of 1, 2.5, 5, and 10Gbits/sec. That can be useful if your ethernet cabling is not quite good enough for 10 GBit/sec, but still might be able to handle 2.5 or 5 Gbit/sec - which is still faster than 1 Gbit/sec..
Apple's option is well-priced at $100. I suspect most of Apple's computers will be 10G capable next year. The current iMac Pro is 10G right out of the box.
The Mac mini is very tempting, but only if all major software works with eGPUs: FinalCut, Adobe, etc. By the time you max out a Mac mini, buy the BlackMagic eGPU, and a 5K monitor, the cost is way above even an iMac Pro. I think the 5K iMac is a sweet deal when it finally gets updated, hopefully in 3-4 months time. The only disadvantage of the iMac is that it cannot be used as an external display for other machines. It's not upgradeable, but it's the least amount of hassle overall, and you can sell it when you're done with it, because it's so standard. Try selling a Hackintosh. Enthusiasts always build their own, and businesses need something standard, something they can buy 10 identical copies of, with support and all that stuff.
There's one way a Mac mini works out: If you're going to use the external monitor with multiple machines. Let's say you can connect a Windows or Linux machine to it, a laptop, a MacBook, even an iPad Pro. You can upgrade all of your computers, and keep using the same display.
Also a 4K display may be enough for a lot of people, which is much more affordable than a 5K one. But if you want an amazing 5K display with a pretty reasonable computer, the iMac seems to be a good deal.
There's one way a Mac mini works out: If you're going to use the external monitor with multiple machines. Let's say you can connect a Windows or Linux machine to it, a laptop, a MacBook, even an iPad Pro. You can upgrade all of your computers, and keep using the same display.
Also a 4K display may be enough for a lot of people, which is much more affordable than a 5K one. But if you want an amazing 5K display with a pretty reasonable computer, the iMac seems to be a good deal.
Last edited:
BGA (non replaceable) i7-8700.. too bad they didn't go for socketed.. but would have made the Max mini thicker i'm sure.
Very nice.
That's what I would be going for on a MUCH smaller scale.
I'm thinking about getting one or two. I won't have a server rack to bolt them to unless there is some very small, simple solution out there I can find.I was hitting team render pretty hard this weekend with my old Frankenstein PC, and was quite disappointed with the performance of my aging 2600k workhorse. Cinebench was down from 700+ to ~550. Age? Processor exploit patches hobbling performance? I'm sure there could be many factors, but I think I need to get on the eGPU bandwagon or get a few minis to bring CPU render speeds up to bearable levels.
These screenshots really put things in perspective! How the mini has (finally) grown maxi.
Yea its such a tough call. I don't want a 21.5in monitor especially coming from a 24in. So the cost factor of buying a 27in imac may be more than the mini/monitor combo. Probably best for me to just suck it up for a little while longer and see what they do with the imacs come spring time. I mean ive gone this long whats a few more months
That is why I've never bought a mini. Or a mac pro. You can never justify it against the iMac which pretty much comes darn close to Apple throwing in the monitor for free compared to setting up something similar with a mini. And the mac pro once I added a nice Apple monitor was always just way too expensive.
But I'm getting the mini this time. I've got a monitor, keyboard and mouse that I'm connecting to a windows laptop right now. The mini is going to take its place. And if I need/want a GPU later, I will add an external GPU. Probably would be able to also go dual 5k monitor with the eGPU down the road as well. Upgrade the RAM to 32gb in a few years as well. But if something goes wrong that can't be repaired, hopefully there will be a new mini that can take its place at that time.