Late 2014 Mac Mini Benchmarks Indicate Decreased Multi-Core Performance

[Atlantico]

For those of you saying you want to see a Mini with an i7 and Iris Pro, I am with you. But it has been done, not by Apple, but in the PC market.

Gigabyte did it with their BRIX series. It's $650 without an memory, harddrive or software. It has a 135W power supply. It does not have Thunderbolt (which adds licensing costs).

But more importantly, even with an obnoxiously loud fan it STILL has to throttle when being pushed because the small form factor just isn't enough mass to handle all that heat.

Gigabyte is a second rate company with third rate products and are really not comparable to Apple.

That being said, the CPU on that Brix thing is a desktop CPU. Mac mini has a U class CPU. Even so where Gigabyte fails, others probably succeed.

Cooling a 65W TDP CPU is well within the realm of reason without too annoying fan noise.


All I hear is excuses. Excuses.

 

[jouster]

Overkill. Working on 2D print and digital graphics and photography, all I want is a highish end desktop (not workstation) level computer without mobile graphics into which I can plug a professional colour-calibrated monitor of my choice.

On Windows relatively few professionals buy 'workstations'.

If the 2D print and digital graphics/photography work you do drives your income, you should certainly be considering a Mac Pro. Not only would it be deductible, but it would be a relatively small expense once amortized over a couple of years. And, since time is money in that sector, it would increase your billable hours/work ratio.

 

[5232152]

If you are a professional user, get a Mac Pro.

Mac Pro is overkill for 85% of everyone thinking of buying it. People just don't really know what hardware does/means/can do.

 

[deceiver9]

as a media machine?

So, what do you think of the second level (iris graphics) mini as a media machine. Assuming one was determined to go the mini route. (I know there's other alternatives) I understand that graphics option is an improvement??. The number of cores in this case aren't as important. Anyone care to give their take on this?

 

[DudeDad]

Like I said before, I think the reason why Apple is doing this is clear: They don't want the Mac Mini to compete with the iMac and the Macbook Pro in any market segment. Previously, they had three Macs which were overlapping partially in terms of performance. I assume the Apple marketing department considers that bad business, so they removed the Mac Mini from that segment.

That implies that if someone wants to buy a Mac in that segment, they are forced to buy an iMac or a Macbook Pro - whether they need a display or not - whether they need a notebook or not. The Mac Mini is now being positioned purely as the second entry point to the Mac (next to the Macbook Air) for people who currently have a PC with a monitor and who want to keep the monitor while exchanging the PC for a Mac.

And yes, there are people here who claim "It has always been that way." Bizarre, because that's simply not true. Otherwise, Apple never would have offered a quad core Mini to begin with. Now that Apple is pushing the Mac Mini back into entry level territory, people are seriously claiming that it was never intended for anything else - rewriting history. There was a quad core i7 Mac Mini in Mid 2011 already. The performance overlap between Mac Mini and iMac is not a new thing, but apparently something that Apple doesn't like anymore.

I don't know where that preference for the iMac at Apple marketing comes from. Is it because it looks cool? Is it because everyone who enters the room immediately sees that there's a Mac at work, while the Mac Mini can be hidden behind a monitor or under a desk? If they want Apple hardware front and center, perhaps they should not have given up on the Thunderbolt Display. It it actually my feeling that if Apple wants to offer a desktop entry level Mac, it should be an All-in-One, not the displayless version.

It's possible that Apple wants to kill the mini...they make it "not worth it" and sales plummet, giving them the "reason". Personally, I don't think sales will plummet. The number of mac purchasers out there is significantly larger than the fans on this forum. The average user will purchase a mini and not think twice about the cores. I have a 2012 mini, i7, quad core. I really don't need it. I mainly use it for editing raw images in Light Room (and Aperture), and as a server for my Sonos system. Two cores would serve me just fine.

 

[kemal]

Apple's engineering and design choices have been so bad since 2012 that I believe a manchurian candidate is running the company.

 

[szw-mapple fan]

The problem is that they don't offer a single quad core processor DESKTOP computer for under $3000. That is simply ridiculous. The pro customer (graphic designers, architects, photographers, gamers, etc.) needs quad core desktop computing at affordable prices. I'm an architect and yes we bought a new $4000 6 core Mac Pro. It works well even if our software doesn't take advantage of the extra GPU - hence we overpaid for how we use the machine. However, we don't need and can't afford ALL of our machines to cost $3000 or more. We also want to upgrade our server eventually....with what now?

A lot of us have invested in the Mac Mini product line, hoping we could upgrade it into the future. I don't care if some of you want to define a Mac Mini as a "low end" or "entry level" Mac. They had an affordable quad core computer and now they don't. It cost us $1300 for the old quad core Mac Mini (after aftermarket RAM upgrades). We have 5 of them in the office = $6500 The graphics cards are not great, but they run our 3D software well enough. To upgrade now we are being forced to buy an iMac or a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro starts at $3000. Times 5 machines = $15000. So now we need to spend an additional $8500 for Mac Pro's??? No thanks Apple. That is more than our original 5 Mini's cost.

And WE DO NOT WANT TO UPGRADE TO IMAC'S. Too glossy and reflective, not the right screen size for us, we already own 10 great looking, non-reflective, affordable screens since we were in the Mac Mini product line, there is no matching second screen (sorry we are not paying $1000 for the 27" outdated Apple display), you can't easily transport the iMac, etc... The iMac works for some business just great, but not for us. At a minimum we would like to CHOOSE an iMac or a desktop just as the low end and high end customer can do.

They didn't replace it with anything. It is simply gone. What about that don't those defending Apple get? To add insult to injury they soldered the RAM and didn't even throw in Iris Pro graphics on the high end dual core.

We need a quad core i7 machine with decent graphics (Iris Pro or discrete graphics at a minimum) for an affordable price. NOT the iMac. The iMac is not what we want as a replacement. For some reason you can buy a cheap desktop and a really really expensive one, but nothing in the middle. They need to stop up and fill the middle again.

They could easily solve this by adding back a Mac Mini quad core option, hopefully with Iris Pro graphics. Or make a less expensive Mac Pro option: quad i7 with a single Firepro graphics card.

We will ride out our 2012 quad core Mini's as long as we can. If they don't have a mid level machine in the $1200-$2000 range next year we will transition to PC's. Which for me also means when I upgrade my phone and tablet it is time for Samsung.

If Apple is not going to support small business design professionals, then we are not going to support them.

you could just buy a 15 inch MBP(quad core and iris pro graphics) and hook it up to a monitor of your choice.

 

[Alfuh]

Why do many Mac users always have this compulsion to have to say something derisory about other platforms? It's almost as if they think THEY invented, designed and built the Mac. It seems to be a Mac cult thing... as if they're insecure, and it's "the done thing" - so they say it so as to "fit in". Hey, guess what? If Macs didn't exist, you'd be all over Windows like a rash, baby

Ugh I hope not. Linux seems pretty good these days

I'm the " tech guy" in the family and had to try to setup my parents with a Windows machine... Man Windows 8 is a mess

 

[Sandstorm]

Best product pipeline in 25 years, my a**.

 

[Tech198]

That's a shame..

Reckon this is a trend ? up the anti with a 5K display or a better resolution for desktops/laptops, but slightly lower the performance at the same time ?

The only reason why Apple would do this, which comes to mind, would maybe be for heat issues. ??

Its probably how they do it...... get a chip out rated for x, but deliberately, reduce it to y. Since all chips are locked to that speed, uses cannot adjust (like over-clocking back in the old days)

 

[gizmo84]

Maybe this is why they cancelled the server option. But now what? We have been using several mac servers in our company. Should we buy iMacs as servers now? LOL. Or simply switch over to Windows or Linux in the future?

I think they cancelled the server option and gimped this because they want us to buy the new Mac Pro.

 

[downpour]

Best product pipeline in 25 years, my a**.

Notice they didn't include the mini in that slide.

My MacBook Pro Retina 'is' the best laptop I've ever owned. I'm sure the Retina iMac will be very good too.

The problem with Apple is you have to pay a lot to get something good. The Mini seems like an afterthought.

Even if Apple aren't making much of profit from it, they should still put some effort into making the Mini desirable, otherwise the negativity generated will damage their brand. Lower test scores on a new generation system (especially considering the long time between upgrades), is just not acceptable.

 

[robogobo]

Anyone who finds the mini lacking can go MBP. But the truth is that most people who want a mini will be just fine with the dual core. Or they could just go out quick and find an old stock 2012 quad.

 

[Supermule]

I know I sound leftwinged; there is no econess/sustainability in the way apple are doing things at the moment.

Computers should be upgradeable.

 

[RickInHouston]

If you are a professional user, get a Mac Pro.

... That had a lower screen resolution an iMac with lag...

Got it!

 

[MentalFloss]

Did you win a bet by getting unapologetically into a post 3 times?

I just think it's funny how extremely unapologetic Apple can sometimes be.

It is a little insane, but the important thing about the mini is the price point. And they've got it back down to the magic $499 mark from $699 in 2011/12.

Yes, but that can be achieved without sacrificing the higher-end models.

I fully expect the next one to be a complete new fanless design, with broadwell custom ATI graphics and probably manufactured in the USA.

Quite possible. But then I think there will be no more quad cores. My i7 quad core Mac Mini's fans get quite busy when I encode video, and as much as I trust Broadwell's performance, I doubt that there will be a way to put the same performance into a fanless design. I could understand the move - it would probably be a Mac that is not so much bigger than an Apple TV. But it would imply completely sacrificing the higher performance levels.

I guess next time I buy a new Mac, I will seriously consider a Mac Pro, even though that means Apple will "win" by getting more money out of me than necessary. But I just refuse to buy a Mac with a display that I don't need. The higher-end iMac Retina configurations are actually more expensive than the lower-end Mac Pro.

 

[fa8362]

you could just buy a 15 inch MBP(quad core and iris pro graphics) and hook it up to a monitor of your choice.

Or not, if you don't want to pay extra for a laptop.

----------

Anyone who finds the mini lacking can go MBP. But the truth is that most people who want a mini will be just fine with the dual core. Or they could just go out quick and find an old stock 2012 quad.

Laptops are poor value for people who don't need or want them.

 

[subsonix]

The only reason why Apple would do this, which comes to mind, would maybe be for heat issues. ??

It uses a different socket with Haswell.

This trade-off didn't exist with Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge processors because both of its dual-core and quad-core processors used the same socket. Another option, according to Poole, is that Apple could have went quad-core across its new Mac mini line, but it would have made it difficult for Apple to hit the $499 price point.

 

[fa8362]

The only reason why Apple would do this, which comes to mind, would maybe be for heat issues. ??

Arrogance and greed seem more likely.

 

[Macs4u]

This is just greed! They cripple the Mac Mini line so anybody that does even a whiff of power stuff and wants a desktop has no choice but to buy an iMac or a Mac Pro. Both machines a hell of a lot more money . Apples arrogance, ever inflated prices and desire to take any choice away from you is the sole reason I left Apple last month and went Android for my mobile stuff and Windows 8.1 for my power stuff. I'm not the only one who has noticed a shift in the attitude by workers in the Apple Store too. My neighbour, who is a long term Apple user has said that he is seriously thinking of selling up and moving away as the service has lost the spark. My nexus 5 for instance runs like lightening compared to my 5s and the rest of iOS 8 that I have used just feels really bloated. The nexus 5 is nearly half the cost! Apple is on a decline. They claim they want to make the best products which is just a complete LIE! They want to make the most PROFITABLE products. Why cripple a Mac mini?? Only 1 reason and that is increased profit margin.

 

[Espeonia]

This is why I hackintosh.

 

[BoulderAdonis]

If OS x could run on non-apple hardware, I think most folks here who are complaining would be long gone. But it doesn't. Hackintoshs are a big pain whenever any update from apple comes out, so it's not really an option if you like to keep your hair, versus pulling it out in frustration.

So the "just leave" attitude is BS, since most are heavily invested in the apple ecosystem.

Is it BS?? How many people in these forums say, "this is a down grade - I'm leaving", "if it has a protruding camera - I'm leaving".

I have 2 maxed out 15" rMBPs, a 13" rMBP, thunderbolt displays, Mac minis. Would like to buy newer/up-to-date Mac minis. Don't like the "computer in a display" - unless it's portable. Software consultant at one of the largest online eCommerce giants in the world - yes, it's a jungle out there.

I think I'm heavily enough invested, and understand the ecosystem just fine.

I run a heterogeneous environment w/ Windows/Mac/Linux. Best tool for the job - I prefer to *code* on OS X. Unix under the hood (all the benefits of Linux, plus a gorgeous UI) - and it integrates with all my other personal devices.

I'll probably sit this upgrade out till Intel releases the quad core ULV processors. But, if it *truly* becomes a business need - I will end up buying one.

Apparently it still has more value than the other options if "the just leave attitude is BS".

----------

Or not, if you don't want to pay extra for a laptop.

----------



Laptops are poor value for people who don't need or want them.

Right - because the ability to take your work with you - and work from anywhere in the world - has poor value. And, the ability to "recycle" the poor value for 50-75% of the purchase price 2-3 years later also has, "poor value".

 

[morgmorg]

Somehow I just don't get it.
Everybody has a mobile phone called iPhone6. It costs 700+ Eur, yet people are complaining about mac mini performance !?!

A Mac Pro is a steal comparing an iPhone 6 with a Mac Pro price =~ 1 : 4 ( 700+ vs 3000 eur)

 

[Tech198]

Maybe if products were manufactured in USA there would be no delays.

 

[wigby]

Apple's engineering and design choices have been so bad since 2012 that I believe a manchurian candidate is running the company.

Yeah that new Mac Pro and 5k iMac are real shining examples of failure.

/s