i5 or i7?

[StellarVixen]

From what I’ve seen on this forum, the i7 is too powerful and overheats a lot. It never gets under 90 degrees when under heavy loads, it’s just under 100 degrees Celsius.

That’s not healthy for a CPU in a long run.

 

[SoCalReviews]

From what I’ve seen on this forum, the i7 is too powerful and overheats a lot. It never gets under 90 degrees when under heavy loads, it’s just under 100 degrees Celsius.

That’s not healthy for a CPU in a long run.

As long as it's the same clock speed (same turbo clock speed boost etc.) and same number of cores the i7 shouldn't heat up under load any more than the i5. I am not sure about the Mac Mini 2018 system options but with the HP Z3 i7 6700T Mini desktop with Windows (basically it's like an HP Windows version of the Mac Mini) which I own there is an option in the system BIOS where you can turn turbo boost on (system default) or off (disable it).

As of the time of this post don't own an i7 2018 Mini so I can't tell you for certain but these types of specific system options might be available using specific MacOS terminal command lines or as options under the System Preferences.

If you are going to use the Mini for power intensive computing such as audio or video editing, gaming, etc.. I still would opt for the i7 since I would rather have all the extra Intel chipset features that it offers rather than wishing later that I had the extra performance that the additional features such as hyperthreading and the increased onboard CPU cache has compared to the i5. Note that I am not sure if the 8th generation i5 in the 2018 Mac Mini has hyperthreading... most older generations of Intel i5 CPUs used in Macs did in fact include this feature.

 

[StellarVixen]

As long as it's the same clock speed (same turbo clock speed boost etc.) and same number of cores the i7 shouldn't overheat under load any more than the i5. I am not sure about the Mac Mini 2018 system options but with the HP Z3 Mini i7 6700 desktop with Windows which I own there is an option in the system BIOS where you can turn turbo boost on (system default) or off (disable it).

I don’t know. I just see what people are reporting.

 

[Fishrrman]

F train wrote:
"If I like what I see, and the store has a mini with an i7 processor, 8GB of RAM and 512GB of flash storage, I'll purchase it on the spot."

Fearless prediction:
You're NOT going to find an i7-equipped Mini "on display on the table" in any Apple Stores, Manhattan or anywhere else.

 

[SoCalReviews]

I don’t know. I just see what people are reporting.

Yes, I've been reading those same posts about the overheating. I believe this would apply more to the i3 vs. i7 comparison since I read that the i3 doesn't have turbo boost (automatic clock speed increase under load). However the trade off of not having turbo boost and the enhanced performance it offers is that it limits the power of your system compared to having it... and what's the point of wasting your time and money upgrading to the latest and greatest "powerful" Mac Mini if you decide to purchase the power limited or neutered version of it.

If you are looking for slower and cooler you could just keep using your older less powerful Mini. If you don't own an older working Mac Mini then I suppose all options should be considered. For newer Mini owners who are non power users the l3 (or i5) might be just fine... but then again those aren't the users who will be pushing an i7 enough to worry about any potential overheating issues anyway.

 

[F-Train]

F train wrote:
"If I like what I see, and the store has a mini with an i7 processor, 8GB of RAM and 512GB of flash storage, I'll purchase it on the spot."

Fearless prediction:
You're NOT going to find an i7-equipped Mini "on display on the table" in any Apple Stores, Manhattan or anywhere else.

Gee, you think it might be possible that that's why I wrote right after:

"But from what I know right now, the store will in fact have a mini with an i5 processor, 8GB of RAM and 256GB of flash storage."
​

And:

" I'll walk out [of the store] either with an i5 or a receipt for an i7 that will show up whenever."​

"Fearless" isn't quite the right word to describe you. "Utterly humourless" comes to mind.

 

[marc_b]

Yes, I've been reading those same posts about the overheating. I believe this would apply more to the i3 vs. i7 comparison since I read that the i3 doesn't have turbo boost (automatic clock speed increase under load).

The additional heat is actually mostly down to hyperthreading, which the i5 doesn't have. And hyperthreading is a much more situational advantage of the i7 that many people don't get much out of.

Literally the only thing I'd really love to know at this point is if the i5's fan spins up audibly less often than the i7's.

 

[Fishrrman]

F train wrote:
""Fearless" isn't quite the right word to describe you. "Utterly humourless" comes to mind."

I wear that compliment with pride!

 

[Synchro3]

The only thing an i7 does is get hotter and throttle sooner.

Total waste of money.

Both the Core i5-8500B and the Core i7-8700B have the same TDP (65 Watt).

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

Yes, I've been reading those same posts about the overheating...

As long as Turbo Boost is enabled, Intel CPUs cannot overheat. Turbo Boost reduces the speed automatically, before the CPU can overheat. Overheating means the CPU shuts itself down and the OS restarts randomly, which is not the case.

 

[marc_b]

Both the Core i5-8500B and the Core i7-8700B have the same TDP (65 Watt).

That doesn't change the fact that an i7 uses much more power under load than an i5 does.

 

[archer75]

That doesn't change the fact that an i7 uses much more power under load than an i5 does.

I don't know if that's correct. Under load they should both use the same amount of power.
And from what i'm seeing they produce the same heat.

 

[marc_b]

I don't know if that's correct. Under load they should both use the same amount of power.
And from what i'm seeing they produce the same heat.

Read some CPU reviews then. The i7 uses a lot more power.

ETA: Ugh, I just read my post again and thought it sounded quite condescending. Wasn't intended, honest!

 

[rmdeluca]

I don't know if that's correct. Under load they should both use the same amount of power.
And from what i'm seeing they produce the same heat.

Usually, the i7 will finish the task quicker but use more power while running the task. Especially because it clocks higher and is able to sustain a higher throughput with hyperthreading. Basically, it can get to 65W TDP with greater ease and more workloads than the i5 can. Once at 65W TDP, the i7 will usually pull well ahead because of hyperthreading gains in very parallel workloads.

 

[SoCalReviews]

As long as Turbo Boost is enabled, Intel CPUs cannot overheat. Turbo Boost reduces the speed automatically, before the CPU can overheat. Overheating means the CPU shuts itself down and the OS restarts randomly, which is not the case.

To clarify when I used the term "overheat" I didn't mean that the CPU was running harmfully hot. That actually isn't the case when it's running within specs. I actually was referencing pushing CPU thermals closer toward maximum spec temperatures. I believe that is what the over posts using the term "overheating" meant and I simply used the same term in my reply.

Turbo Boost allows the CPU to throttle up when under heavy load and throttle down to regular speed when under lighter load. Turning it off means it never throttles up. I'll note also that I tested this on the HP Z3 Mini desktop with an Intel i7. The fan speed could be heard increasing when the CPU throttled up with Turbo Boost on but with it off the fan speed would run slower and remain more constant. I didn't need the extra performance offered with Turbo Boost on the HP Mini desktop and I preferred the cooler CPU and quieter fan on that particular system.
[doublepost=1541789524][/doublepost]

The additional heat is actually mostly down to hyperthreading, which the i5 doesn't have. And hyperthreading is a much more situational advantage of the i7 that many people don't get much out of.

Literally the only thing I'd really love to know at this point is if the i5's fan spins up audibly less often than the i7's.

While I don't claim to be an expert on Intel CPUs I would disagree that hyperthreading (HT) causes much additional heat since it is only accessed when the code from the OS or the application supports it. Most additional heat would be due to increased utilization of the CPU cores and not due to implementation of HT.

Hyperthreading is actually an older Intel feature that was offered a long time ago to simulate multi-core performance on individual cores. I agree that most people don't get much out of it but HT is still supported and heavily utilized by many applications including Virtual Machines running Windows VMs. I know this because I use Parallels with VM settings using those virtual cores that hyperthreading supports. It actually makes a big difference in performance when running many VMs at the same time which is something I do all the time.

 

[StellarVixen]

Intel doesn't even offer HyperThreading anymore. 9th generation i7 doesn't even have it.

I think only i9 and Xeon now have it.

 

[bigfatipod]

So basically:

i7
8GB RAM to be expanded as needed
128GB flash drive
512GB external storage

Assuming that the operating system and your apps take up about 15GB, that leaves you a bit over 100GB as a workspace. Personally, I'd be more comfortable with 256GB, but 128GB is doable. The one point that I'd make is that I had an 11" MacBook Air several years ago, and while I loved it as a portable computer (it wasn't much bigger than an iPad), I felt that I was constantly fighting its 128GB flash storage limit. I just felt constrained, and I made sure that the next portable computer that I purchased had more.

I had the same issue with my 128gb air and it wasn't fun. constantly purging things to get by. I ended up disconnecting a bunch of services from iCloud, but that wasn't ideal, either.

 

[fathergll]

Same story year after year for almost every product. New Mac comes out, people jump on the fastest processor then are disappointed when they find out it runs hot enough to cook an egg.

If you want to save some disappointment just assume that the high end hyper-threading chips will most likely run very hot.

 

[iZeljko]

gonna have to disagree there, always spend more on stuff you cant upgrade urself later, ram is upgradable and its cheaper if you do it urself later.

i would opt for the 1k i7 256gb ssd option. i believe thats the best bang for the buck.

Back in early 2013 I have purchased my 13" MBPR with 3.0GHZ i7 512GB SSD and only 8 GB of RAM. Today I am still doing work on the same computer but I do feel that more RAM would be welcome.
I have added eGPU and I can add external storage, both reasonably fast and the SSD so I am totally with you on this.

A new MM should be maxed out (specially if you wanna keep it for a while) the remaining budget should go towards the storage and keep your MM at 8GB of RAM until you can justify the total price of your MM + adding the RAM upgrade.

If you ask me, I would go for i7 / 256GB / 8GB / APP+ and add more ram myself if it does not void warranty.

If adding RAM does void warranty I would go with i7 / 128 / 16GB APP+ and then run the external storage SSD on TB3.
[doublepost=1541796346][/doublepost]

F train wrote:
"If I like what I see, and the store has a mini with an i7 processor, 8GB of RAM and 512GB of flash storage, I'll purchase it on the spot."

Fearless prediction:
You're NOT going to find an i7-equipped Mini "on display on the table" in any Apple Stores, Manhattan or anywhere else.

I've bought an i7 MBPR BTO machine in Apple store in Houston. It was there, just as I wanted it. Couldn't leave the store without it!

 

[Broken Hope]

The only programs that Hyper-threading will help in is stuff like video encoding or other highly threaded apps and the difference is a few seconds, up to a few minutes less encoding time for the most part. Not that many apps can use more than 6 threads fully and even less can use 12 threads fully, I didn't think a slight speed bump, a slight cache bump and Hyper-threading was worth it to me personally, but then I'm not using my mini to do any encoding work.

 

[dandeco]

Someone

Same story year after year for almost every product. New Mac comes out, people jump on the fastest processor then are disappointed when they find out it runs hot enough to cook an egg.

If you want to save some disappointment just assume that the high end hyper-threading chips will most likely run very hot.

I use the Macs Fan Control freeware app for when I do something processor-heavy to keep my 2012 Mac Mini from overheating.
But besides that, someone replied to a comment I made on YouTube that instead of going with the 6-core i5 processor, I should configure it online with the 6-core i7 processor if I want something noticeably faster than the quad-core i7 in my current Mini, so I may end up doing that, and also configure it with a 512 GB SSD. With education pricing (as I'm currently a college student) that will bring it up to $1409, but hey, it'd still be a better buy for me than the similarly-priced top-of-the-line 21" iMac, as I prefer working with headless desktop computers, and the RAM upgrade would be easier to perform. With that said, I'd still buy it with the stock 8 GB of RAM and then upgrade it myself; from the guides I saw it looks very similar to when I replaced the failing stock hard drive in my 2012 Mini, and does not appear too hard for me. But since the SSD is soldered to the logic board, I'll have to configure it online.
Now I'm not planning to buy a 2018 Mac Mini right away; I just want to know what I'll have in mind once I have a better source of income (i.e. a computer tech job) and I HAVE to replace my 2012 Mini (i.e. if something fails in it or once it won't support the newest Mac OS versions anymore.)

 

[fathergll]

Someone


someone replied to a comment I made on YouTube that instead of going with the 6-core i5 processor, I should configure it online with the 6-core i7 processor if I want something noticeably faster than the quad-core i7 in my current Mini,

6 core i5 is going to be noticeably faster than the 2012 4 core i7.

 

[Synchro3]

With iStat Menu's one can control the fan speed manually and keep the temperate of the CPU low (and turbo boost high), also in long heavy tasks.

Here with my Mac Mini 2012: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/how-to-keep-a-mac-mini-from-overheating.1884378/#post-21610445

 

[SoCalReviews]

Intel doesn't even offer HyperThreading anymore. 9th generation i7 doesn't even have it.

I think only i9 and Xeon now have it.

HT has become more of a legacy feature for current Intel CPUs but Intel still does market it in a way to differentiate between different versions of their CPUs. Older software and some newer software will utilize HT but with current generations of four, six or more multi core processors available it's not as important as it used to be for most users.
[doublepost=1541801655][/doublepost]

The only programs that Hyper-threading will help in is stuff like video encoding or other highly threaded apps and the difference is a few seconds, up to a few minutes less encoding time for the most part. Not that many apps can use more than 6 threads fully and even less can use 12 threads fully, I didn't think a slight speed bump, a slight cache bump and Hyper-threading was worth it to me personally, but then I'm not using my mini to do any encoding work.

HT is actually extremely useful when running VMs in MacOS in instances where you leave the VMs open in the background. For example you can allocate more available HT (virtual core) CPU resources for VMs (each real CPU core provides two HT cores) and still have full cores left over to dedicate to the regular MacOS and it's applications.

Without HT for virtual core support you would very limited to the number of live VMs you have running on a machine without a significant hit in MacOS system performance. HT doubles the number of virtual cores available to allocate. The difference in system performance between running Windows 7 or 10 in Parallels on my i7 2.3Ghz quad core Mac Mini with (eight virtual cores) and the exact same Windows 7 VM on my i5 2.5Ghz dual core (only four virtual cores) is night and day. I actually can't effectively run more than one VM on my dual core i5 due to lack of cores (virtual cores included) while I can easily run two or three VMs at the same time on my i7.

 

[F-Train]

Update on a couple of posts from yesterday...

I picked up an i5/8GB/256GB at one of the NY Apple stores today. If I conclude that I need an i7, I'll do an exchange.

The Apple store employee asked whether I plan to upgrade the RAM. When I said "Yes", he told me that the instructions are to tell customers that doing so will not void the warranty.


[I've added a bit more detail in post #77]