i5 or i7?

[Sarpanch]

5 cores:
View attachment 805204
6 cores:
View attachment 805206

Thanks for sharing these results. They are very helpful. If you don’t mind, can you also perform the following 2 tests?

1) Handbrake Transcoding with the following video and profile - https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/benchmark-your-computer-4k-with-handbrake-1-1-and-h265.2544492/

2) Run Cinebench R15 back to back without break to see at what frequency the i7 settles using 12 threads

I have posted i5 test results on page 7 of this thread for reference.

Thanks again!

 

[rmdeluca]

Thanks for sharing these results. They are very helpful. If you don’t mind, can you also perform the following 2 tests?

1) Handbrake Transcoding with the following video and profile - https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/benchmark-your-computer-4k-with-handbrake-1-1-and-h265.2544492/

2) Run Cinebench R15 back to back without break to see at what frequency the i7 settles using 12 threads

I have posted i5 test results on page 7 of this thread for reference.

Thanks again!

1) encoded 1806 frames in 470.84s (3.84 fps), 11821.39 kb/s, Avg QP:29.08

2) Those (from post #155 https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/i5-or-i7.2153452/page-7#post-26819331) were back to back

 

[Sarpanch]

1) encoded 1806 frames in 470.84s (3.84 fps), 11821.39 kb/s, Avg QP:29.08

2) Those were back to back

Awesome! And I just saw your post detailing i3 vs i5 vs i7 as well. I think you summarized it perfectly. Based on these results, I am getting inclined towards returning my i5 Mini and getting the i7. The i7 appears to be better not only in synthetic benchmarks, but real-world sustained load scenarios as well.

 

[Chiromac81]

Awesome! And I just saw your post detailing i3 vs i5 vs i7 as well. I think you summarized it perfectly. Based on these results, I am getting inclined towards returning my i5 Mini and getting the i7. The i7 appears to be better not only in synthetic benchmarks, but real-world sustained load scenarios as well.

Does an average “not pro” user really need a i7???

 

[Jorbanead]

Does an average “not pro” user really need a i7???

Depends. What are you going planning on using your mini for?

 

[Sarpanch]

Quoting again...

For the average Mac user that doesn’t need any professional work done or graphic stuff or photo editing or video editing but just needs a future proofed fast machine to run iTunes, flac, 4K videos to Apple TV, store 4K photos and videos from iPhone and web surf...is there any reason a i3 wouldn’t be good enough for me?

My needs will never change of what I use the Mac mini for but would the i5 be worth the upgrade cost if I won’t be doing intensive stuff even a few years from now? Does that matter or will the processor be worth upgrading to play the software Apple runs in 2021 better??

I think the i3 is more than a capable machine for your needs.

 

[x2max]

Hallo, has anybody tried to disable hyperthreading on i7 CPU. It is Interessting to know which clockspeed is reachable compared to i5 Version.

 

[Chiromac81]

Quoting again...

What makes the machine faster in the long run-more ram or a faster processor? If I don’t plan on upgrading down the road I plan on getting i3 processor and 16 GB RAM for sure-if I could only upgrade 1 of these further at purchase (won’t upgrade later) what would be best to bump up-to i5 or 32 GB RAM?

 

[Spectrum]

What makes the machine faster in the long run-more ram or a faster processor? If I don’t plan on upgrading down the road I plan on getting i3 processor and 16 GB RAM for sure-if I could only upgrade 1 of these further at purchase (won’t upgrade later) what would be best to bump up-to i5 or 32 GB RAM?

Depends on your workload...but I would say the boost to i5 will be more useful than the shift from 16>32 GB.
You also double the SSD size by going with the i5 model.

And, in the future, in case you find you really do need more than 16GB. You can always pay someone to upgrade it - 32GB RAM is likely to be much cheaper in the future too.

 

[pl1984]

Thanks for sharing these results. They are very helpful. If you don’t mind, can you also perform the following 2 tests?

1) Handbrake Transcoding with the following video and profile - https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/benchmark-your-computer-4k-with-handbrake-1-1-and-h265.2544492/

2) Run Cinebench R15 back to back without break to see at what frequency the i7 settles using 12 threads

I have posted i5 test results on page 7 of this thread for reference.

Thanks again!

I performed this test for you on my 2013 Mac Pro which saw a meager 2.4 fps. From post #72:

work: average encoding speed for job is 2.404646 fps

After reading this post I decided to run it on my 2010 Mac Pro and I was very surprised at the results of 6.5 fps. Enough so I ran it three consecutive times:

work: average encoding speed for job is 6.823718 fps
work: average encoding speed for job is 6.212079 fps
work: average encoding speed for job is 6.429915 fps​

2010 Mac Pro: 4c/8t @ 2.8GHz, 32GB RAM, 5770 GPU, 1TB HD, macOS High Sierra 10.13.6. Aside from the RAM upgrade this is essentially a stock 2010 Mac Pro 2.8 as delivered by Apple. I'm re-running the benchmark on the 2013 but the first test isn't looking any better than the first time I ran it.

UPDATE:

Here are the benchmarks for my 2013 Mac Pro:

work: average encoding speed for job is 2.492640 fps
work: average encoding speed for job is 2.504011 fps
work: average encoding speed for job is 2.505572 fps​

2013 Mac Pro: 6c/12t, 3.5GHz, 16GB RAM, dual D300 GPUs, 256GB SSD, macOS High Sierra 10.13.6. I'm at a loss to understand why this system is considerably slower than the 2010 Mac Pro. Observing the behavior of the processor with Intel Power Gadget 3.5.5 reveals nothing of concern. The cores operated at 3.6GHz the entire time with utilization hovering around 98% most of the time. I'll see if I can get some other metrics from the Mac Pro forum members.

 

[th0masp]

I ran just had this running on my machine while I was out on a break -

> encoded 1806 frames in 735.57s (2.46 fps), 11821.39 kb/s, Avg QP:29.08

MP6,1, 6-core, 64 GB, D500 on 10.13.6
I had a bunch of apps open in the background - generating maybe 5-6 % CPU load tops. Encode time seems in line with what other people in that linked thread have posted from non-overclocked Haswell-CPUs.

On the other hand: that 2010 of yours does seem quite a bit out of line.

 

[pl1984]

I ran just had this running on my machine while I was out on a break -

> encoded 1806 frames in 735.57s (2.46 fps), 11821.39 kb/s, Avg QP:29.08

MP6,1, 6-core, 64 GB, D500 on 10.13.6
I had a bunch of apps open in the background - generating maybe 5-6 % CPU load tops. Encode time seems in line with what other people in that linked thread have posted from non-overclocked Haswell-CPUs.

On the other hand: that 2010 of yours does seem quite a bit out of line.

It was very much out of line with every other system that was tested. I re-ran the benchmark this morning and this time I achieved results which were in alignment with others and what I expected when I performed my initial run:

work: average encoding speed for job is 1.154117 fps​

I am at a loss to explain why the previous days testing was so high. I ran the benchmark multiple times and the results were always in the 6 fps rate. The only difference between today and yesterday is my having rebooted the system. But that seems unlikely the reason for a decrease in speed.

At this point I can only conclude it was somehow operator error but what that may have been is unknown to me.

 

[fireedo]

go with i7, you will have longest usability, here is my result using cMP 2009 (flashed 5,1) 12 core 3,33Mhz, 48Gb RAM and VEGA 64

encoded 1806 frames in 503.62s (3.59 fps), 11821.39 kb/s, Avg QP:29.08

 

[cornerexit]

Does an average “not pro” user really need a i7???

I’d say if you are going to keep the machine a long time, yes. The base 6 core is the best deal out of any Apple computer. 256Gb hard drive, 6 core cpu, and just buy with 8Gb of RAM. With current prices I’d upgrade it myself to 32Gb of RAM. Machine would be powerful and set you up quite nicely until the machine is no longer supported by Apple.

I did this with my current mini. Quad core, replaced hard drive with SSD for OS/apps (kept the included tape drive for a backup drive), and upgraded the RAM myself to 16Gb. It’s still running strong and I’ll upgrade to the new mini when Apple no longer supports my mini (OS updates).

 

[CurtisBilly]

Anyone buy the i7 with 128gb SSD?
Same price as the i5 with 256gb.

I have a 2tb Lightroom library, so I have to use external storage anyway.

 

[Spectrum]

Anyone buy the i7 with 128gb SSD?
Same price as the i5 with 256gb.

I have a 2tb Lightroom library, so I have to use external storage anyway.

If you want to save some cash, then there is nothing wrong with a 128GB boot drive - unless you have loads of massive Apps. Then again, Apps could be installed on an external Samsung X5 and get the same or better performance anyway if you run out of space.

You main Lightroom files can be kept on a third drive (cheaper SATA SSD, or HDD).

 

[tedson]

Anyone buy the i7 with 128gb SSD?
Same price as the i5 with 256gb.

I have a 2tb Lightroom library, so I have to use external storage anyway.

I'm going to get one of the two versions you mentioned. I'm just waiting for someone to offer $100 off MSRP. I expect that to happen before the end of the year. In the mean time, my 2011 is working just fine.

I did take advantage of Amazon's sale of a Samsung 1TB T5 SSD for $197.99 so I'll be set either way.

 

[SkiHound2]

Anyone buy the i7 with 128gb SSD?
Same price as the i5 with 256gb.

I have a 2tb Lightroom library, so I have to use external storage anyway.

How big is your catalog and previews folder? Will you put that on the external drive as well?

 

[CurtisBilly]

How big is your catalog and previews folder? Will you put that on the external drive as well?

Good questions. The catalog file is really small - only about 1 gb. If I build smart previews for the entire library, it is about 60 GB. I'm not sure I need to keep previews for the whole library, but my thought is I can either keep the smart previews on an external SSD or just build them as-needed. Thoughts?

 

[SkiHound2]

Good questions. The catalog file is really small - only about 1 gb. If I build smart previews for the entire library, it is about 60 GB. I'm not sure I need to keep previews for the whole library, but my thought is I can either keep the smart previews on an external SSD or just build them as-needed. Thoughts?

I think you can set it up to delete the previews after X amount of time. I sometimes do 1:1 previews for current files and they can take up quite a bit of room. The 1:1 previews go away after a month. My LR catalog, previews, presets, etc. (no image files) is currently just under 70gb. If I want that on the main SSD, add the system, and there's not a heck of a lot of space left (like none) on a 128gb drive. To me it just seems that 128gb can be pretty cramped. That said, using an older computer I've run everything off an external SSD connected with USB 3. It works pretty well. I just think the internal SSDs on these things are so fast I'd prefer to have my catalog and working files on the primary SSD.

 

[Alwis]

I got the i7 with 32Gb RAM, as I am planning on using the Mini as a small home server with some Linux VMs on it (as Apple has reduced the server application to completely useless). It will replace my 2012 Mac Mini Server.

I am just wondering, if this was such a great idea. Sitting on my desk, configuring the Mini the CPU idles at around 40°C, but the air outlet is quite warm. I am not sure, if this will be good in the long term for all the cables on the back, that are directly in the air stream...

 

[bigfatipod]

I got the i7 with 32Gb RAM, as I am planning on using the Mini as a small home server with some Linux VMs on it (as Apple has reduced the server application to completely useless). It will replace my 2012 Mac Mini Server.

I am just wondering, if this was such a great idea. Sitting on my desk, configuring the Mini the CPU idles at around 40°C, but the air outlet is quite warm. I am not sure, if this will be good in the long term for all the cables on the back, that are directly in the air stream...

What’s been your experience so far with the new mini compared to the 2012 server? Was that the 2.6ghz quad core?

 

[Sarpanch]

I'm going to get one of the two versions you mentioned. I'm just waiting for someone to offer $100 off MSRP. I expect that to happen before the end of the year. In the mean time, my 2011 is working just fine.

I did take advantage of Amazon's sale of a Samsung 1TB T5 SSD for $197.99 so I'll be set either way.

The i5/8/256 model is at 100$ discount today. https://iphone.appleinsider.com/price_guides/group/2730/?src=155

Additionally, Adorama has a 10% bonus if you purchase their gift card. So effectively, 200$ off if you pay with their gift cards.

 

[thirdsun]

What makes the machine faster in the long run-more ram or a faster processor? If I don’t plan on upgrading down the road I plan on getting i3 processor and 16 GB RAM for sure-if I could only upgrade 1 of these further at purchase (won’t upgrade later) what would be best to bump up-to i5 or 32 GB RAM?

Like @Spectrum already mentioned, it’s much more worthwhile get the better CPU. While you can actually increase the RAM later, there’s no way to upgrade the CPU after your purchase. Furthermore the i3 is fine today for light to mid-level tasks, but the i5 or i7 will likely give you a few more years out of the machine in the long run. Get the i5.

 

[Alwis]

What’s been your experience so far with the new mini compared to the 2012 server? Was that the 2.6ghz quad core?

Yes, the 2012 Mac Mini server is the 2,6GHz Qauad core. It is still sufficient, but one of the two internal disks has an increasing "reallocated sector" count. I could change the drive, but that still leaves me with a 6 year old machine, which was up 24/7, beside that it would need some more RAM. I plan on booting it from an external SSD and using it for some not so important tasks.

I can't really compare them by now, as I am still in the process of setting everything up and have not much time to do so right now. In the process I will revise my whole setup, I am planning on switching from native applications to running some or all of the services which are not provided by macOS in VMWare Linux virtual machines or maybe docker. It will run openHAB, postgreSQL, influxdb and grafana, together with some python scripts, for my home automation. In addition it will provide my internal mail server (smtp and imap), an internal ftp server, a wiki, some file sharing and it will rut iTunes to play music via Airplay.

The new Mini is the i7 with 32GB RAM, 512GB SSD and an external 1TB Samsung T5, it could access more mass storage on a NAS.

What I can say so far: The new Mac Mini is really fast, even compared to the 2012 Mac Min, which is probably partly caused by the SSD in the new one vs. the spinning hard disk in the old one. While sitting on my desk during setup I could nearly never hear it and coile whining does not seem to be an issue. I still like the form factor very much, in particular with the internal power supply. I liked the old silver colour better, I can not comprehend while the LED doesn not indicate a sleeping Mac any more and the case is still slipping on my desk, but these points are not an issue for my use case, as it will finally be placed in my network cabinet in the cellar. Would I be planning on using it as a desktop machine I would miss the SD-Card Slot.

The case is noticable warm, but not in an extend, that it causes any concern. I can easyly touch it for longer times, it is probably only a few deegrees over air temperature. The air outlet is an other case. While connecting a USB drive I was surprised who warm the air is and I immediatly asked myself if this could be good for the cables connected to the rear. The outlett of the old mini was definitely cooler.

I can provide more details while setting up the mini, if you have any specific questions, please let me know!