If the rumors are true, Mac mini will soon be upgraded with Sandy Bridge CPUs. The question is, is it going to get one of the i7 chips? If it will, aside from LCD, how is it going to be different from the current iMac 21.5" with an i7 CPU?
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.
iMac vs. Mac mini
- Thread starter yustas
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It will probably only get an i3 because the mac mini has to sell at a lower price point then the other mac computers also the mac mini was designed on the idea of being light and use minimal power. If you start putting top of the line components your are just building a headless mac. that would cost as much as a macbook pro.
I can only see the mac mini as a server or a HTPC.
I can only see the mac mini as a server or a HTPC.
Unless you're going to be taking it everywhere, the iMac is probably a better choice.
The iMac has the IPS screen, as you mentioned.
Quad core i5 2.5Ghz CPU
512MB 6750 Discrete GPU
4GB RAM to start.
Mini
Dual core, (likely) 2.3Ghz i5 - 2.7 i5 CPU
Integrated Intel HD3000 256-348MB shared system RAM (which are being slated on this forum at the moment, although if you don't game, maybe irrelevant)
2GB RAM to start.
Fair bit cheaper.
However, factor in the monitor cost, the mouse and the keyboard and you might not end up far off the cost of the base iMac, which, if nothing else, will look a hell of a lot nicer than a Dell monitor with wires hanging out all over the place. Maybe that's just my inner neat-freak talking.
Both are crap from an upgrading perspective.
For me, it'd be the iMac every time.
The iMac has the IPS screen, as you mentioned.
Quad core i5 2.5Ghz CPU
512MB 6750 Discrete GPU
4GB RAM to start.
Mini
Dual core, (likely) 2.3Ghz i5 - 2.7 i5 CPU
Integrated Intel HD3000 256-348MB shared system RAM (which are being slated on this forum at the moment, although if you don't game, maybe irrelevant)
2GB RAM to start.
Fair bit cheaper.
However, factor in the monitor cost, the mouse and the keyboard and you might not end up far off the cost of the base iMac, which, if nothing else, will look a hell of a lot nicer than a Dell monitor with wires hanging out all over the place. Maybe that's just my inner neat-freak talking.
Both are crap from an upgrading perspective.
For me, it'd be the iMac every time.
the i3 might just be possible at around 2ghz , but i5 and the i7 at clock speeds of a iMac would be impossible due to heat issues , that little alu box would get hot enough to boil eggs on with a i5 clocked at 2.7ghz with a i7 clocked at 3.4 ghz you could possibly grill some steaks on it , or they would need a serious fan which would transform that little box into a windtunnel
ok there would be the possibility of a serious downclocking which them would not make real sense
the mini is a lot smaller then a MacBook pro and the heat needs to go somewhere
ok there would be the possibility of a serious downclocking which them would not make real sense
the mini is a lot smaller then a MacBook pro and the heat needs to go somewhere
Last edited:
Won't every Lion install allow macs to be servers?
What would a server in "every" home mean anyway? I'm imagining an internet that resembles the late 1990s again, only with more liability for hosting the free speech (or criminal content) you upload.
I don't believe the Mac mini will get an i7 processor but rather an i3. I do hope they include more than 2 GB of RAM stock on the new Mac mini's.
The Mac mini is designed mostly to lure people away from Windows, since they already have a a monitor, keyboard, mouse etc. I just ordered an iMac at work and I did consider the mini. The problem with the mini is that it is underpowered for what I do and by the time I added in the monitor, keyboard etc. the price difference between that system and an iMac wasn't large enough for me to sacrifice the integrated design and the better performance of an iMac. However, I might consider one for a home system.