I made the same move and enjoying the new Mac mini a lot. I installed 16gb and a ssd in my 2012 model and it was pretty darn fast. This new mini(i5) feels so much faster with the new cpu. I will eventually install 32gb of ram.
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.
Hands-On With Apple's New 2018 Mac Mini
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I made the same move and enjoying the new Mac mini a lot. I installed 16gb and a ssd in my 2012 model and it was pretty darn fast. This new mini(i5) feels so much faster with the new cpu. I will eventually install 32gb of ram.
If it came with an i5 instead of an i3 as standard, I wouldn't mind the soldered CPU as much. If it came with 256 GB instead of 128 GB as standard, I wouldn't mind the soldered storage as much.
The problem is going to be the i3 + 128 GB model aging a lot faster, and with no real upgrade path for the CPU.
MR reviews are awesome. Love the video, Dan. Can you tell us the power draw at idle, under load, etc. Thanks!
People complain about hard drive cost. Yes Apple does not gives customer free upgrades at cost, of course there will be some cost on top of the cost of the hard drive. And the hard drive is a super fast new form hard drive not the old spinny hard drives you find at Best Buy. A 1TB hard drive is around $450 for Samsung model MZ-V6P1T0
For the money, these are pretty underpowered. Hate to say it. The best thing about them is that they have 10GbE.
I’ve had a “Sawtooth” G4 followed by an original Mini. When the iMac went Aluminum I jumped to the 24” All-In-One.
My only reason for giving that up (after subsequently upgrading to a 27”) was to consolidate my monitor options to work from home. So in 2016 I got a aging Mac Mini with adequate RAM and storage and a Dell 34” Curved 21:9 screen. This allowed me to dual purpose the screen for the Mini and my work Windows machine.
The Mini is my main computer and is always on so to allow streaming of a full iTunes movie and music library and houses all photos (photos and media on external drives). I did get a MacBook Air but it was only ever a laptop when I needed one, not a primary device.
Even with the new Mini and new Air just released, I suspect I will get a MacBook Pro as my main machine and relegate my Mini to the home media server and repository.
Spending money on an upgraded model doesn’t make any sense unless you really have a specific purpose for it.
My only reason for giving that up (after subsequently upgrading to a 27”) was to consolidate my monitor options to work from home. So in 2016 I got a aging Mac Mini with adequate RAM and storage and a Dell 34” Curved 21:9 screen. This allowed me to dual purpose the screen for the Mini and my work Windows machine.
The Mini is my main computer and is always on so to allow streaming of a full iTunes movie and music library and houses all photos (photos and media on external drives). I did get a MacBook Air but it was only ever a laptop when I needed one, not a primary device.
Even with the new Mini and new Air just released, I suspect I will get a MacBook Pro as my main machine and relegate my Mini to the home media server and repository.
Spending money on an upgraded model doesn’t make any sense unless you really have a specific purpose for it.
I'm still curious as to how the integrated graphics copes with 1 or 2 x 4k@60Hx displays in scaled ('looks like 2560x1440') display mode*. Not on serious graphics/3D workloads (we know you'll need an eGPU for that) but in terms of how smooth the UI is doing 2D work - especially in non-Metal apps.
I'm thinking about things like 'home' photo editing, vector graphics, or rendering some of the more graphically elaborate instrument plug-ins in Logic/Garageband - the sort of things you wouldn't really expect to need an eGPU for. However, 4k is shifting a lot of pixels, and scaled mode (crudely speaking, 5k downsampled to 4k) puts extra load on the GPU (and isn't something that would happen on Windows, which the GPU was designed for) so I'm a bit skeptical about depending on the lowest-spec Intel integrated graphics.
There's been a report in another thread of it being sluggish in Photoshop in "scaled" mode.
* which is the "goldilocks" setting for a 27-28" 4k display - without scaling its a choice between 'too big' and 'too small'.
I'm thinking about things like 'home' photo editing, vector graphics, or rendering some of the more graphically elaborate instrument plug-ins in Logic/Garageband - the sort of things you wouldn't really expect to need an eGPU for. However, 4k is shifting a lot of pixels, and scaled mode (crudely speaking, 5k downsampled to 4k) puts extra load on the GPU (and isn't something that would happen on Windows, which the GPU was designed for) so I'm a bit skeptical about depending on the lowest-spec Intel integrated graphics.
There's been a report in another thread of it being sluggish in Photoshop in "scaled" mode.
* which is the "goldilocks" setting for a 27-28" 4k display - without scaling its a choice between 'too big' and 'too small'.
Not a bad Mac, especially with the i7 option. But the pricing is ridiculous. Let's see what apple bring for a modular pro but I'm betting it too will be priced at an eye watering level. Is it me or has apple product jumped significantly in cost over the last few years?
Yeah, that 5K monitor is severely overpriced. Few would buy that as a companion to the Mini. I for instance am seriously considering getting a beefed up version of the Mini, add a 4K monitor for 400 bucks and I am still 700 bucks away from the 15" entry MacBook Pro that's basically less than half the performance of my planned Mini configuration. It all comes down to needs and circumstances. My old MacBook Pro will do just fine for occasional travel, and when that craps itself (after 7+ years), I'll just get a new Air and it'll do just fine.
People complaining about ability to upgrade... the RAM can be upgraded, and you can connect external storage and GPU. Unless I'm missing something, isn't it just the CPU which you can't upgrade (which, do people normally do?)
Sounds a lot like what I am going for. Any thoughts on how the integrated graphics perform in day to day use?
The purpose of the original mini, as I understood it, was to create an affordable MacOS machine that would spread the adoption of Macs. With the 60% price hike, it no longer serves that function. Speaking as someone who was in that original demographic and was interested in buying a new Mac in that same price range, no, it was definitely not worth the four-year wait.
Is the integrated graphics performance ashamingly poor as expected?
Apple could have included a mobile GPU at least. Or at least Iris Plus Graphics.
If to have a MINIMUM graphics performance you need an eGPU, then the Mini is no more ‘Mini’
Apple could have included a mobile GPU at least. Or at least Iris Plus Graphics.
If to have a MINIMUM graphics performance you need an eGPU, then the Mini is no more ‘Mini’
There are several ways to go about using the Surface as the "monitor" for a MacMini. The simplest and most tested is to use some form Remote Desktop. You use remote access to connect to, view, and control the MacMini from your Surface. I used to do this (and still do in various forms) with an iPad instead of a Surface. This method has highish latency (especially over WiFi) in the display and can be rather frustrating if you want to do anything quickly.
The low latency solution would be find a way to get USB DisplayLink working, and have the MacMini output Video directly to the Surface. Something like Splashtop Xdisplay. I have never investigated doing USB video into a Surface or other Windows10 based system. I'm sure there is a method, but it likely won't be a main-stream plug-and-play product. And will require some level of technical wrangling.
Possibly the better solution is to just plug the MacMini into your existing TV (if you have one) and use a Wireless Mouse and Keyboard. Any LogicTechs one will do. The K750 for Mac for example, or even just the just the K750 for Windows will work, and work for both your Surface and the Mini.
Apple would've had to go with a mobile CPU to get Iris Plus. No Coffee Lake desktop CPU has it.
You can blame Intel, as they typically assume the desktop CPUs will be used with a dedicated GPU, except in low-end or budget PCs.
But in Apple's case it was the decision to keep the same form factor, which wouldn't be able to handle the extra heat added by a dGPU. Just wish they'd have made the i5 standard at the very least, to pass on the cost savings from not having a dGPU.
Has anyone attempted to dual boot a Linux distro or is it the same situation as the T2 equipped notebooks? It's a shame that we won't be able to use Linux natively on modern Macs. VM is always usable but it's not the same thing.
Having a 2012 MM i5 with 16 gigs of RAM and hanging an external SSD off of it has given me very good service. I also have a late 13 i5 iMac with the same great service. Have been in the MAC camp since System 7 and am really a fan of Mac OS. That being said.......This HP Z2 appears to be a really good deal. Thoughts? Same cost as the i5.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...2aUVI68HMKGUWH5qKY2ivbQKuRoCJNAQAvD_BwE&smp=Y
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...2aUVI68HMKGUWH5qKY2ivbQKuRoCJNAQAvD_BwE&smp=Y
Unless you're doing something that requires intense GPU use, most all built in GPU's work for people. There is a demographic that requires more (video editors, modeling, rendering, etc). For most, you don't need it. If you do, you will have an eGPU.
The Mac mini is great machine, however the i3/128 should be nixed and never ever released. Old, low grade tech. Would that work for some? Sure. Most? No. i5/256/8GB should be standard. End of story.
And that 5K Retina iMac also has a dedicated GPU instead of just the onboard UHD630. It's also that that particular display is expensive and its price is much more than what Apple spends on the iMac's display. Due to Apple's contracts they probably pay $100 for those displays. We can't buy something of that quality (5K P3) for anywhere near that price.
I like the new Mini but I think the praise it is receiving is unwarranted. Apple basically waited four years before upgrading it and everyone is impressed with how much faster it is over the one released in 2014? Especially when many considered the 2014 model gimped compared to the 2012 model. If Apple had been upgrading it as new technology became available this upgrade would be welcome but not really noteworthy.
Edit: Grammar
Edit: Grammar
Last edited:
What is it with reviewing authors not talking about video transcoding using the T2 chip? sounds like its either not important or the authors are not adequately reviewing these.
this is from Apple: "T2 also features HEVC video transcoding that’s up to an incredible 30 times faster, enabling pro users to work more quickly with higher resolution video throughout their workflow." https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/10/new-mac-mini-packs-huge-punch/
this is from Marco: "
here is one comparing a MacBook Pro with T2 to an iMac 5k (pre-T2):
Remarkably here the author basically says "I dunno" as to why the MacBook Pro with T2 is so much faster. Could be differences in Intel chips, it was not clear whether he was running the transcoding on the T2 from the article.
Surely, a worthwhile review point. Please let us know!
this is from Apple: "T2 also features HEVC video transcoding that’s up to an incredible 30 times faster, enabling pro users to work more quickly with higher resolution video throughout their workflow." https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/10/new-mac-mini-packs-huge-punch/
this is from Marco: "
But if an app supports the T2’s hardware HEVC encoder,
ffmpeg can do it by specifying -c:v hevc_videotoolbox instead of -c:v x265. I also needed -vtag hvc1 for the output MP4s with either codec to be playable on macOS.
Compressor uses the T2’s HEVC acceleration when encoding 8-bit HEVC, but not 10-bit.
"it can go much faster. And since every T2 so far performs identically, all T2 machines — from the 2018 MacBook Air to the iMac Pro — encode HEVC this way at the same speed, and all in complete silence because they’re barely touching the CPU." https://marco.org/2018/11/06/mac-mini-2018-review
ffmpeg can do it by specifying -c:v hevc_videotoolbox instead of -c:v x265. I also needed -vtag hvc1 for the output MP4s with either codec to be playable on macOS.
Compressor uses the T2’s HEVC acceleration when encoding 8-bit HEVC, but not 10-bit.
"it can go much faster. And since every T2 so far performs identically, all T2 machines — from the 2018 MacBook Air to the iMac Pro — encode HEVC this way at the same speed, and all in complete silence because they’re barely touching the CPU." https://marco.org/2018/11/06/mac-mini-2018-review
here is one comparing a MacBook Pro with T2 to an iMac 5k (pre-T2):
"Now onto our final test, exporting HEVC footage to HEVC. For the first time in our testing, the MacBook Pro is now exporting almost 3 times as fast as the iMac 5K, and it also got way slower with the eGPU connected." https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/08/15/compared-2018-i9-macbook-pro-versus-imac-5k-performance.
Remarkably here the author basically says "I dunno" as to why the MacBook Pro with T2 is so much faster. Could be differences in Intel chips, it was not clear whether he was running the transcoding on the T2 from the article.
Surely, a worthwhile review point. Please let us know!