Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iMac 27" Vs Mac Mini 2020 (Intel)

M

MR_Boogy

macrumors regular
Original poster
Apr 6, 2012
140
19
I'm in the market for a new Intel-based Mac and I had assumed the Mac Mini 2020 would be the obvious choice in terms of features & price for someone who needs a Mac but doesn't care about it being pretty. However doing some spec and configuration comparisons I'm not so sure. I'd welcome any advice.

  1. So base price is £1099 Vs £1799 with seemingly near-identical specs, except the Mini has 512Gb SSD Vs 256. 2 Grand for what most would consider a bare minimum 8Gb/256Gb spec... a no-brainer surely?! But then the MM is hella pricey compared to what it once was.
  2. This is probably the last Intel Mac I ever buy, I want it to last until there are no issues with M1/Arm at all when I run Windows VMs and so on. And it is my main work PC I use for software development, as well as music in my spare time. So the base CPU probably could be bumped up on the MM to the i7.... +£200. And when I look at https://browser.geekbench.com/mac-benchmarks, I see the base 10th Gen i5 outscores the 8th gen i7 I just paid 200 quid for. Not by a lot so we can call it even but the MM got 200 more expensive to catch up
  3. Similarly, 8Gb really isn't going to cut it for RAM. 16 is a bare minimum, 32 or even more is wonderful for music and running VMs. I know the MM2020 is user-upgradeable but I don't fancy it. This is a huge price hit, even 16Gb is an extra 200, 32 is £600 more! Whereas the iMac27 is very easy to upgrade. Those nice folk at Crucial will sell me a 32Gb kit for £150. I guess I can pay someone to upgrade the MM but even so let's say the MM gains +£300 compared to the iMac. And the iMac will take up to 128Gb down the road.
  4. Storage 256/512, who cares I need a bigger drive anyway. Maybe my NAS, maybe just a 1Tb drive for £100
  5. And of course the iMac has a very nice monitor. A decent 27" monitor goes for £300 at least I guess, certainly my existing Dell U2715H (2K) monitor was about that. And I have been considering a 2nd monitor.
  6. Plus of course you get a pretty Apple keyboard and mouse. Maybe I can sell those :)
  7. And the iMac seems to be generally a notch higher in overall spec - external monitor support, graphics generally.
But now I'm looking at spending £2k on a PC. Which is probably 4X as much as I ever did before! Prices do seem to be up generally but I can spec a Windows box for half that... heck I can get an Alienware machine for £1650.

Am I just talking myself into trying to make the iMac seem a good deal when it's not?
 
I love the form factor but the Intel Mac mini is very overpriced. It has an older underpowered CPU and no real GPU. Upgrading the RAM yourself is theoretically possible but not easy. The closest standalone monitor to the screen in the 27" iMac is the LG 27' Ultrafine. That costs $1300 in the US.

When you price in the monitor, the iMac is cheaper even if you don't want the keyboard or mouse (I got the trackpad).
The 9th gen CPUs are much better, particularly the 8 and 10 core options.

By Apple standards, the 27" iMac is an excellent deal. A better deal than any other Intel Mac Apple sells.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR_Boogy
ADGrant said:
I love the form factor but the Intel Mac mini is very overpriced. It has an older underpowered CPU and no real GPU. Upgrading the RAM yourself is theoretically possible but not easy. The closest standalone monitor to the screen in the 27" iMac is the LG 27' Ultrafine. That costs $1300 in the US.
Click to expand...
that reminds me what's this nano glass option? I'm guessing it's simply a more matt finish to avoid glare?
 
Seems a shame they stopped the ability to use the iMac as a standalone display if it's genuinely that good. Is a 4/5k display at 27" really such a game changer compared to QHD (2k)?
 
d000hg said:
Seems a shame they stopped the ability to use the iMac as a standalone display if it's genuinely that good. Is a 4/5k display at 27" really such a game changer compared to QHD (2k)?
Click to expand...
IMHO Yes it really is. 5K displays are very hard to find and very expensive but I could not go back to a 2k or even a 27" 4k display.

It is a shame that these Macs no longer have display mode but when the 5k iMacs first became available, there wasn't even a standard connector that could handle 5k.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR_Boogy
I went through a similar analysis when I bought my 2020 27” iMac, and concluded that the 2020 iMac was really good value for the price (by Apple standards), provided you avoided most of the optional upgrades, most of which have marginal benefit for most users.
If you need an Intel Mac, $2,500 can get you a very nice machine, assuming U.S.
The 5k display is stunningly good. You don’t need (or want) nano unless you have an extreme glare situation
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR_Boogy
The iMacs simply dominant the All-in-one PC market.
Their cheap rivals can't compete in specs.
Those that are on par in specs are way over priced.
So unless you can't afford the price, go for the Windows only AIO machine from HP, Del, Lenovo, etc.
Otherwise, the iMacs is the ultimate choice.
 
Has anyone any experience with Apple refurb products? I can see some good deals on 2020 27" iMacs, and better on the 2019 versions (1 generation older CPU, Fusion rather than SSD).
 
d000hg said:
Has anyone any experience with Apple refurb products? I can see some good deals on 2020 27" iMacs, and better on the 2019 versions (1 generation older CPU, Fusion rather than SSD).
Click to expand...
1. Apple refurbs are as good as new.
2. Never ever buy a Mac with a fusion drive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR_Boogy
AAPLGeek said:
1. Apple refurbs are as good as new.
2. Never ever buy a Mac with a fusion drive.
Click to expand...
Because Apple fusion drives have known issues, or simply because there's no good reason not to have SSD these days?
 
d000hg said:
Because Apple fusion drives have known issues, or simply because there's no good reason not to have SSD these days?
Click to expand...
Because they are a major performance bottleneck that don't belong in any modern Mac.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back